Figure 4-14 



Distribution of major U.S. innovations, by size of company, 1953-73 



[Percent of Innovations) 

 45- 



30 — 



25- 



20- 



5 - 



I 1953 59 



1960-66 



1 1967-73 



I 



1-99 



SOURCE: Gellman Research Associates, inc. 



100-999 



10004999 5000-9999 



Company size (number of employees) 



10000-1- 



definition, the small firm — rather than the large 

 one — was the site of the greatest number of 

 major innovations during the 1953-59 and 1960- 

 66 periods, but not in the 1967-73 period. 



The matter of firm size and innovation can be 

 viewed also with respect to the sales volume 

 associated with companies of different size. 

 When this aspect is considered, the smallest 

 companies are found to produce proportionally 

 more innovations per unit sales than larger 

 companies (figure 4-15). Small firms, further- 

 more, have maintained a relatively higher level 

 of innovative output per unit sales than larger 

 companies in each of the time periods for which 

 sales data are available. ■'-^ (The decline in the 



'^ Data on sales and receipts of manufacturing industries, 

 in terms of company size, are available only for the years 

 1958, 19o3 and 1967 and are taken from Enterpme Slatislics. 

 Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1968 and 

 1972. 



number of innovations per unit sales, observed 

 in each company size category, results from a 

 combination of increasing company sales and a 

 relatively constant number of innovations.) 



These indicators shed some additional light on 

 the question of the relationship between firm 

 size and technological innovation. The in- 

 dicators, however, are dependent on the partic- 

 ular set of innovations selected for study. 

 Furthermore, all industries are treated as if they 

 were alike, even though differences among them 

 with respect to innovativeness may exceed the 

 differences between small and large firms. 

 Finally, the indicators offer no insights regard- 

 ing the attributes, causal factors, and dynamics 

 which determine the relative innovativeness of 

 various size companies. For these and other 

 reasons, interpretations of indicators presented 

 here should be limited and tentative. 



101 



