【作者】 孙毅；

【导师】 孙慧；

【作者基本信息】 新疆大学 ， 工商管理， 2015， 硕士

【摘要】 在经济全球化的大背景下,世界各国企业之间的竞争日趋激烈,创新活动在其中表现出至关重要的作用,换句话说,企业的生存与发展,就在于它源源不断的改革创新能力。本文在回顾国内外学者对区域创新能力和企业创新能力相关研究的基础上,着眼于新疆15个地州市规模以上工业企业,以2009年到2013年新疆规模以上工业企业的创新活动数据为样本,按照系统性、科学性、可操作性和导向性的原则,建立以创新环境、创新投入、创新产出和创新绩效四个维度为主要研究目标的共三级39个指标的《新疆工业企业创新能力评价指标体系》,其中创新环境包括基础设施、经济环境和政府重视程度三个方面,创新投入包括R&D投入和技术获取两个方面,创新产出包括项目产出、科研产出和专利产出三个方面,创新绩效包括专利授权和产品效益两个方面,进而运用模糊综合评价法,对新疆15个地州市企业的创新能力水平进行对比评价和优劣势分析,并给出排序,识别制约地州市企业创新能力发展的主要因素,从而为地州市企业创新能力的发展提供很重要的依据,为提高新疆15个地州市企业创新能力提供具有针对性的政策建议。通过实证分析,我们得出2013年新疆工业企业创新能力综合得分为0.701分(比2009增长了一倍),创新能力评分等级由较差逐步改善为较好,创新环境由较差到中等,创新投入由较差到较好,创新产出由较差到好,创新绩效由中等到较好,说明新疆规模以上工业企业在这5年间创新环境和创新投入稳步提升,创新产出和创新绩效显著提高,创新能力得到明显改善;我们从2009-2013年各地州市的模糊综合评价得分、排序结合来看,创新能力综合水平从高到低依次是:乌鲁木齐(0.619)、克拉玛依(0.452)、昌吉(0.362)、直辖县级市(0.296)、巴州(0.249)、阿克苏(0.218)、伊犁(0.168)、吐鲁番(0.141)、喀什(0.127)、博州(0.104)、哈密(0.089)、和田(0.065)、塔城(0.077)阿勒泰(0.059)和克州(0.033);按照“五等分法”原则,得出地州市得分等级情况如下:乌鲁木齐为较好,克拉玛依为中等,昌吉、直辖县级市、巴州、阿克苏为较差,其他9个地州市伊犁、吐鲁番、喀什、博州、哈密、和田、塔城、阿勒泰和克州为差,评分等级表按得分降序排列呈现“金字塔”形式排列;通过界定“前三后三”标准,进而在衡量新疆工业企业创新发展的十个子要素中识别各地州市企业创新能力的优劣势。我们可以看出各地州市企业创新能力水平存在较大差异,说明新疆15个地州市工业企业创新能力发展处于一种严重的不平衡,经济较发达地区,如乌鲁木齐和克拉玛依创新能力水平较高,经济发展落后地区的创新能力水平则有明显的不足,如南疆克州的工业企业创新能力水平较差,所得结果整体上与实际情况相吻合。新疆各地州市企业应从创新经济环境和政府重视程度、科技活动的人财物投入、创新产出和技术成果转移、产业结构调整和国际竞争力等方面入手,从而全面提升新疆企业整体创新能力水平。更多还原

【Abstract】 Under the background of economic globalization, the competition between enterprises around the world is becoming increasingly fierce, innovative activities in which exhibits a crucial role, in other words, the survival and development of enterprises, reform and innovation lies in its ability to a steady stream of.This paper reviews research scholars on regional innovation capability and innovation on the basis of ability, focusing on more than 15 prefectures in Xinjiang-scale industrial enterprises in 2009 to 2013 above-scale industrial enterprises in Xinjiang innovation activity data for samples in accordance with the principle of systematic, scientific, operability and oriented to establish an innovative environment, innovation, and innovation output and innovation performance in four dimensions as the main goal of a total of three 39 indicators of "Xinjiang 15 prefectures enterprise innovation ability evaluation index system", which includes infrastructure, innovative environment, the economic environment and the degree of emphasis on three aspects of government, innovation and investment, including investment in R&D and technology acquisition two aspects, innovation outputs include project outputs, research and production and patent output of the three aspects, including patents and innovation performance benefits of both products, and thus the use of fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method, the level of innovation ability of enterprises in Xinjiang 15 prefectures were compared to evaluate and analyze the advantages and disadvantages, and to a sort, identify the main factors restricting prefectures innovation capacity development, thus providing a very important basis for the development of enterprise innovation ability prefectures, providing policy recommendations targeted to improve enterprise innovation.Through empirical analysis, we arrive at 2013 industrial enterprises innovation ability composite score of 0.701 points(more than doubling 2009), innovation capacity rating scale from poor to gradually improve as well, innovative environmental rating from poor to moderate, innovation and investment by the poor to better innovation output from poor to good, from poor to better innovation performance, indicating industrial enterprises above designated size in the past five years, Xinjiang between innovation environment and innovation inputs steadily, innovation output and innovation significantly improve performance, innovation capacity has been significantly improved; we score from fuzzy comprehensive evaluation 2009-2013 all prefectures, sorting combined, the overall level of innovation capability in descending order are: Urumqi(0.619), Karamay(0.452) Changji(0.362), directly under the county-level cities(0.296), Bavaria(0.249), Akzo(0.218), Yili(0.168), Turpan(0.141), Kashi(0.127), Bole(0.104), Hamilton(0.089) Wada(0.065), Tacheng(0.077) Altay(0.059) and g state(0.033); score rating as follows: Urumqi is better for medium Karamay, Changji, directly under the county-level city, Bavaria, Aksu for poor the other nine prefectures Ili, Turpan, Kashgar, Bozhou, Hami, Wada, Tacheng, Altay and g state is poor; and then all over the city to identify innovation capability to measure innovation in the development of industrial enterprises in the ten sub-elements The advantages and disadvantages. We can see that there is a big difference in the level of innovation ability of enterprises around the city, rating scale was "inverted pyramid" form, indicating that 15 prefectures in Xinjiang industrial innovation capacity development in a serious imbalance in the more economically developed areas, such as Urumqi and Karamay high level of innovation capability, innovation capability level of economic development of backward areas, there are obvious shortcomings, the overall results are consistent with the actual situation. Xinjiang innovation around the city enterprises should pay attention to the extent of the economic environment and the government, scientific and technological activities of human, financial investment, innovation output and technological achievements transfer, industrial structure adjustment and other aspects of international competitiveness, and thus to enhance the level of overall innovation capability of enterprises in Xinjiang.更多还原