36% of enterprises were innovation active
According to the survey results, 36% of enterprises with ten or more employees were considered as innovation active during the period 2016-2018. 58.2% of large enterprises which refers those having more than 250 employee introduced new or improved products (goods or services)/business processes. The ratio was 33.9% for enterprises with 10-49 employees and 43.3% for 50-249 size groups. While the proportion of innovation active enterprises in industry was 39%, it was 32.4% for service sector.
60.1% of product innovators offered products to market before competitors
One-fifth of the enterprises were classified as product innovative. Among product innovators, enterprises with at least one good innovation were recorded as 82% and as 69.1% for the enterprises with at least one service innovation. When considering the new or improved products introduced to the market, 82.8% of product innovations were new to the enterprise and 60.1% of them were new to the market.
Enterprises mostly applied innovation in production methods
29% of enterprises were business process innovative also defined as basic business functions. Among the business process innovations, the methods for producing goods or providing services were settled in first rank by 79.6%. The following methods were accounting or other administrative operations as 65.4% and information processing or communication as 65%.
Proportion of enterprises engaged in innovation activities, 2016-2018
One third of innovative active enterprises received public financial support
34.6% of innovative active enterprises received public financial support. 94.1% of these enterprises were financed by central government (Ministry of Industry and Technology, TUBITAK, KOSGEB, etc.) and 11% by local or regional authorities (municipality, governorship, etc.). The rate receiving support from EU Horizon 2020 Programme for Research and Innovation was 3.7% and it was 5.6% from other EU institutions for related enterprises.
28.4% of enterprises co-operated with other enterprises or organisations
28.4% of innovation active enterprises co-operated with other enterprises or organisations. While 61.5% of these enterprises co-operated on R&D or other innovation activities, the ratio was 68.8% for the enterprises co-operated on any other business activities.
59.9% of co-operating enterprise in innovation active enterprise co-operated with the partners in Turkey, 25.5% in European countries and 21.3% in other countries.
Established customer groups and high quality stood out in strategies
According to the importance of strategies for innovation active enterprises, focusing on established customer groups took the first place with 74.6%. This strategy was followed by focusing on high quality with 74.2% and focusing on reaching new customer groups with 66.8%.
Four out of every ten innovation active enterprises registered trademarks
Intellectual property (IP) related activities include the methods for effective protection of competitiveness acquired by innovation and its components are questioned in the survey. It is observed that 39.9% of these enterprises registered a trademark. This category was followed by applying for a patent as 24.7%, using trade secrets as 19.7%, utility model application as 13.7%, claiming a copyright as 10.4% and registering an industrial design right as 9.5% respectively.
The most hampering factor was high costs
Not innovation active enterprises reported that the most hampering factors for decision to start innovation activities, or its execution of innovation activities was high costs as 52.7%. This factor was followed by too much competition in the market as 32.9% and the lack of internal finance for innovation as 29.0%.
__________________________________________________________________________________
EXPLANATIONS
As a result of the revision of Oslo Manual, international reference guide for innovation statistics, methodological changes have occurred. It is now more important for the decision-makers to see how an enterprise can be an innovative rather than whether it is an innovator or not. Along with the change in the definition and types of innovation, there is substantially no chance to make comparisons with the previous data sets.
