Comments

Post Reply
Jennifer Korie
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 5:12 pm
Institutional affiliation*: University of Maroua
Contact:

Comments

Post by Jennifer Korie » Thu May 30, 2019 5:37 pm

Questions?
-Measures of diversity includes gender, race, age and equally sexual orientation, handicap, ... Why do you choose to focus only on the 3 first in your work? Maybe you need to clarify your decision.
- “To be completed” appears 5 times in your paper (Page 33, 36 38, 40 and 41) all this regarding the part Results of Innovation Outputs’ Determinants, so how do you manage to conclude without some expected missing information’s “to be completed”?
-You don’t address any policy recommendation drawn from your results in your work.


Econometric strategy.
-A sequential approach was chosen to go through the various stages, but a special consideration was not giving to standard errors terms that may be impacted as well as significance test. We suggest t bootstrap standard errors as an alternative to check the robustness of the result.
-Innovation can be transfer to or copy by firms in the same field that are not far from each other consider clustering if data had specific information on firms location
-As authors have panel data, they can rely on lagged variables rather than using estimate. For example, it makes senses to use lagged variable for Research and Development expenses. This strategy when possible can also help if possible for instruments
-Another concern are innovation measures. 4 types of innovations are considered but are they all relevant in the manufactured sector? We think study will gain if it prioritizes the type of innovation that is relevant for that sector.


Authors
-Talke, K., S. Salomo, and K. Rost, 2010, “How Top Management Team Diversity Affects Innovativeness and Performance via the Strategic Choice to Focus on Innovation Fields,” Research Policy 39, 907–918
-Richard, O.C., 2000, “Racial Diversity, Business Strategy, and Firm Performance: A Resource Based View,” Academy of Management Journal 43, 164–177.
-Horwitz, S.K. and I.B. Horwitz, 2007, “The Effects of Team Diversity on Team Outcomes: A Meta-Analytic Review of Team Demography,” Journal of Management 33, 987–1015
-Bantel, K.A., and S.E. Jackson, 1989, “Top Management and Innovation in Banking: Does the Composition of the Top Team Make a Difference?” Strategic Management Journal 10,107–124.

Other
(Page 11) “Our hypothesis is that exchange of ideas between different workers might be able to boost innovation outputs, where creativity is vital.”
(Page 41) “we tested the hypothesis to whether workforce diversity generates positive (negative) synergies between groups and increases (decreases) firm capabilities to innovate, which could lead to productivity gains (loss).”
If not mistaking both hypotheses are passing the same information but why have you decided in your conclusion (page 41) to add the opposite in bracket of what you wanted to test initially. It maybe not necessary to precise it here. You detail it later.

Fanaferreira
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 7:52 am
Institutional affiliation*: Ipea
Contact:

Re: Comments

Post by Fanaferreira » Fri May 31, 2019 8:36 am

Thank you very much for you comments. I will read and any doubts I will contact you.

Post Reply

Return to “PMMA-20201 - Gender and Age Diversity to Foster Innovation and Productivity Growth”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests