Vol. 14 No. 4 (2019)

Articles

Controlling as a tool for SME management with an emphasis on innovations in the context of Industry 4.0

Published 31-12-2019

Premysl Pisar
University of Finance and Administration

Diana Bilkova
University of Economics

Abstract

Research background: Small and medium-sized businesses are significant economic power and employer in the European Union. The modern globalized world, new technologies, and advanced connectivity bring SMEs a wide range of opportunities, but also threats. Increasing the stability and competitiveness of SMEs is one of the main goals of national governments and the EU. The research is based on personal research in SMEs, its experiences and backward testing of reached results.

Purpose of the article: The aim of the paper is to analyze the possibilities the potential of using controlling as a managing tool of SMEs for increased competitiveness in the context of Industry 4.0  with an emphasis on innovations.

Methods: The study is based on a detailed analysis of 341 SMEs from the Czech Republic obtained in the years 2017?2019. The data were analyzed using statistical methods such Pearson correlation, stepwise regression for the purpose of determining the relationship between the controlling management system of a company, its innovation potential, level of process maturity, number of employees, internal audit, financial stability and strategic plan. Statistical analysis confirmed the close relationship of the analyzed variables and backwards experimental testing of the statistical analysis conclusions defined critical factors in the area of people in an organization, usage of advanced information systems and Industry 4.0 technologies implementation.

Findings & Value added: Those important areas were determined as essential for the successful development of SMEs, as well as the most significant threats in the Industry 4.0 environment. The information obtained is useful in practice and can be applied to a more in-depth analysis of the issues.  The research findings are showing possible opportunities and treads for SMEs long term stability and development as well as ways to increase enterprise performance based on controlling management system.

Keywords

industry 4.0, controlling, SME, innovation, audit

PDF

References

  1. Agostini, L., Nosella, A., & Filippini, R. (2017). Does intellectual capital allow improving innovation performance? A quantitative analysis in the SME context. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 18(2). doi:10.1108/JIC-05-2016-0056. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-05-2016-0056
    View in Google Scholar
  2. Antoniuk, L., Gernego, I., & Sybirianska, Y. (2017). Barriers and opportunities for hi-tech innovative small and medium enterprises development in the 4th industrial revolution era. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 15(4). doi:10.21511/ppm.15(4).2017.09. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.15(4).2017.09
    View in Google Scholar
  3. Babikova, K., & Bucek, J. (2019). A model replication with an extension of students’ perception of prospective employer attractiveness. Journal of Competitiveness, 11(2). doi: 10.7441/joc.2019.02.01. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2019.02.01
    View in Google Scholar
  4. Bae, Y., & Chang, H. (2012). Efficiency and effectiveness between open and closed innovation: empirical evidence in South Korean manufacturers. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 24(10). doi: 10.1080/09537325. 2012.724164. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2012.724164
    View in Google Scholar
  5. Bartok, O. (2018). The use of CSR in e-commerce as a way to compete. Journal of Competitiveness, 10(4). doi: 10.7441/joc.2018.04.01. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2018.04.01
    View in Google Scholar
  6. Belas, J., Dvorský, J., Kubálek, J., & Smrčka, L. (2018). Important factors of financial risk in the SME segment. Journal of International Studies, 11(1). doi: 10.14254/2071-8330.2018/11-1/6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-8330.2018/11-1/6
    View in Google Scholar
  7. Cao, Y., Myers, L. A., Tsang, A., &Yang, Y. G. (2017). Management forecasts and the cost of equity capital: international evidence. Review of Accounting Studies, 22(2). doi: 10.1007/s11142-017-9391-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-017-9391-5
    View in Google Scholar
  8. Darlington, R. B., & Hayes, A. F. (2017). Regression analysis and linear models: concepts, applications, and implementation. New York: The Guilford Press.
    View in Google Scholar
  9. de Salas, K., Lewis, I. J., & Huxley, C. (2017). Using the critical process targeting method to improve SMEs’ process understanding. Business Process Management Journal, 23(2). doi: 10.1108/BPMJ-06-2014-0052. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-06-2014-0052
    View in Google Scholar
  10. Digital Czech Republic (2017). How we grow. Praha: McKinsey & Company Retrieved form https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/mckinsey-digital/our-insights/digital-czech-republic-how-we-grow (15.06.2019).
    View in Google Scholar
  11. Draheim, D. (2010). Business process technology: A unified view on business processes, workflows and enterprise applications. Berlin: Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01588-5
    View in Google Scholar
  12. Fetisová, E. (2012). Actual problems of small medium enterprise finance. Bratislava: Ekonóm.
    View in Google Scholar
  13. Goffin, K., & Rick M. (2017). Innovation management: effective strategy and implementation. London: Palgrave.
    View in Google Scholar
  14. Goller, I., & Bessant J. (2017). Creativity for innovation management. New York: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315630588
    View in Google Scholar
  15. Henttonen, K., & Lehtimäki, H. (2017). Open innovation in SMEs. European Journal of Innovation Management, 20(2). doi: 10.1108/EJIM-06-2015-0047. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-06-2015-0047
    View in Google Scholar
  16. Ivanová, E., & Čepel, M. (2018). The impact of innovation performance on the competitivenes of the Visegrad 4 countries. Journal of Competitiveness, 10(1). doi: 10.7441/joc.2018.01.04. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2018.01.04
    View in Google Scholar
  17. Jespersen, K., Rigamonti,D., Jensen, M. B., & Bysted, R. (2018). Analysis of SMEs partner proximity preferences for process innovation. Small Business Economics, 51(4). doi: 10.1007/s11187-017-9969-0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9969-0
    View in Google Scholar
  18. Jo, W. S., Alfnes, E., Strandhagen, J. O., & Logan, R. V. (2017). The fit of industry 4.0 applications in manufacturing logistics: a multiple case study. Advances in Manufacturing, 5(4). doi: 10.1007/s40436-017-0200-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40436-017-0200-y
    View in Google Scholar
  19. Kamps, T. (2013). Systematic chasing for economic success: an innovation management approach. Hamburg: Anchor.
    View in Google Scholar
  20. Karjalainen, J., Niskanen, M., & Niskanen, J. (2018). The effect of audit partner gender on modified audit opinions. International Journal of Auditing, 22(3). doi: 10.1111/ijau.12130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12130
    View in Google Scholar
  21. Khudhair, D., Al-Zubaidi, F., & Raji, A. (2019). The effect of board characteristics and audit committee characteristics on audit quality. Management Science Letters. 9(2). doi: 10.5267/j.msl.2018.11.012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2018.11.012
    View in Google Scholar
  22. Kupec, V. (2018). Digital possibilities of internal audit. Acta VŠFS, 11(1).
    View in Google Scholar
  23. Laval, V. (2018). How to increase the value-added of controlling. Berlin: Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110580600
    View in Google Scholar
  24. Li, P., & Huang, K. (2019). The antecedents of innovation performance: the moderating role of top management team diversity. Baltic Journal of Management, 14(7). doi:10.1108/BJM-07-2017-0202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/BJM-07-2017-0202
    View in Google Scholar
  25. Mahdavi, G., & Abbas, A. D. (2017). Factors affecting the audit process and social theories. Corporate Governance, 17(4). doi:10.1108/CG-04-2016-0079. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-04-2016-0079
    View in Google Scholar
  26. Marjański, A., & Sułkowski, Ł. (2019). The evolution of family entrepreneurship in Poland: main findings based on surveys and interviews from 2009-2018. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 7(1). doi: 10.15678/EBER. 2019.070106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2019.070106
    View in Google Scholar
  27. Moeller, R. R. (2011). COSO enterprise risk management: establishing effective governance, risk, and compliance. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118269145
    View in Google Scholar
  28. Müller, J. M., & Däschle, S. (2018). Business model innovation of industry 4.0 solution providers towards customer process innovation. Processes, 6(12). doi: 10.3390/pr6120260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/pr6120260
    View in Google Scholar
  29. Petrů, N., Havlíček, K., & Tomášková, A. (2018). Comparison of marketing vitality of family and non-family companies doing business in Czech republic. Economics & Sociology, 11(2). doi: 10.14254/2071-789X.2018/11-2/10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2018/11-2/10
    View in Google Scholar
  30. Písař, P., & Havlíček, K. (2018). Advanced controlling and information systems methods as a tool for cohesion and competitiveness of the European Union. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on European integration 2018. Ostrava: Technical University of Ostrava.
    View in Google Scholar
  31. Řepa, V. (2012). Podnikové procesy – procesnířízení a modelování. Praha: Grada.
    View in Google Scholar
  32. Říhová, L., Písař, P., & Havlíček, K. (2019). Innovation potential of cross-generational creative teams in the EU. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 17(4). doi:10.21511/ppm.17(4).2019.04. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.17(4).2019.04
    View in Google Scholar
  33. Safar, L., Sopko, J., Bednar, S., & Poklemba, R. (2018). Concept of SME business model for industry 4.0 environment. TEM Journal. 7(3). doi:10.18421/TEM73-20.
    View in Google Scholar
  34. Svensson, E., & Edström, M. (2016). Market-driven challenges to freedom of expression and the interaction between the state, the market, and the media. Nordicom Review, 37(2). doi:10.1515/nor-2016-0013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/nor-2016-0013
    View in Google Scholar
  35. Vitezić, N., & Vitezić, V. (2015). A conceptual model of linkage between innovation management and controlling in the sustainable environment. Journal of Applied Business Research. 31(1). doi: 10.19030/jabr.v31i1.8999. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19030/jabr.v31i1.8999
    View in Google Scholar
  36. Vláda České republiky. (2019). Inovační strategie Českére publiky 2019–2030. retrieved form https://www.vlada.cz/assets/media-centrum/aktualne/III_In ovacni-strategie-CR_Country-for-Future_2019-01-29_cistopis_white.pdf (04.05.2019)
    View in Google Scholar
  37. Weske, M. (2012). Business process management: concepts, languages, architectures. Berlin: Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28616-2
    View in Google Scholar
  38. Zacharias, N. (2011). An integrative approach to innovation management: Patterns of companies. Wiesbaden: Gabler. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8349-7042-8
    View in Google Scholar

Similar Articles

1-10 of 353

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.