Page 241 - Hojnik, Jana. 2017. In Persuit of Eco-innovation. Drivers and Consequences of Eco-innovation at Firm Level. Koper: University of Primorska Press
P. 241
Eco-innovation models 241
instrument) and significant. Therefore, the findings revealed that Hy-
potheses 1a and 1b are both supported.
Strong support was found for Hypothesis 2, which postulated a pos-
itive and significant relationship between customer demand and prod-
uct eco-innovation. The standardized coefficient was high (0.29) and sig-
nificant.
The relationship between managerial environmental concern and
product eco-innovation was found to be positive and significant, while
the standardized coefficient was small (0.01). Thus, Hypothesis 3 is sup-
ported.
Hypothesis 4 postulated a positive and significant relationship be-
tween expected benefits and product eco-innovation. The association
between expected benefits and product eco-innovation was found to be
positive and significant (standardized coefficient 0.12).
Hypothesis 5a (the relationship between competitive intensity and
product eco-innovation) was not tested, since the factor competitive in-
tensity explains only 36.733% of variance and was therefore excluded from
further analyses. However, Hypothesis 5b examined the relationship be-
tween competitive pressure and product eco-innovation, which was ex-
pected to be positive and significant. The standardized coefficient for this
relationship is highly positive, significant and substantial (0.44), indicat-
ing strong support for Hypothesis 5b.
When testing our hypotheses, as indicated in Figure 26, and focus-
ing on consequences of product eco-innovation, we have to add that Hy-
pothesis 6 was tested separately, as it was divided into two dimensions –
company growth and company profitability – in order to obtain greater
insight regarding how product eco-innovation affects company growth
and company profitability. Hypothesis 6 predicted a positive and signif-
icant association between product eco-innovation and company perfor-
mance. In more detail, Hypothesis 6a postulates a positive and signifi-
cant relationship between product eco-innovation and company growth,
while Hypothesis 6b posits a positive and significant association between
product eco-innovation and company profitability. When testing the re-
lationships between product eco-innovation and indicators of company
performance (company growth and company profitability), statistically
significant influences were detected, but the direction was the opposite of
the predicted direction. We can see (Figure 26) that product eco-innova-
tion was found to be quite substantially (standardized coefficient -0.14)
related to company growth, but again in the opposite direction (i.e., neg-
atively). Therefore, Hypothesis 6a is not supported. Similarly, the stand-
instrument) and significant. Therefore, the findings revealed that Hy-
potheses 1a and 1b are both supported.
Strong support was found for Hypothesis 2, which postulated a pos-
itive and significant relationship between customer demand and prod-
uct eco-innovation. The standardized coefficient was high (0.29) and sig-
nificant.
The relationship between managerial environmental concern and
product eco-innovation was found to be positive and significant, while
the standardized coefficient was small (0.01). Thus, Hypothesis 3 is sup-
ported.
Hypothesis 4 postulated a positive and significant relationship be-
tween expected benefits and product eco-innovation. The association
between expected benefits and product eco-innovation was found to be
positive and significant (standardized coefficient 0.12).
Hypothesis 5a (the relationship between competitive intensity and
product eco-innovation) was not tested, since the factor competitive in-
tensity explains only 36.733% of variance and was therefore excluded from
further analyses. However, Hypothesis 5b examined the relationship be-
tween competitive pressure and product eco-innovation, which was ex-
pected to be positive and significant. The standardized coefficient for this
relationship is highly positive, significant and substantial (0.44), indicat-
ing strong support for Hypothesis 5b.
When testing our hypotheses, as indicated in Figure 26, and focus-
ing on consequences of product eco-innovation, we have to add that Hy-
pothesis 6 was tested separately, as it was divided into two dimensions –
company growth and company profitability – in order to obtain greater
insight regarding how product eco-innovation affects company growth
and company profitability. Hypothesis 6 predicted a positive and signif-
icant association between product eco-innovation and company perfor-
mance. In more detail, Hypothesis 6a postulates a positive and signifi-
cant relationship between product eco-innovation and company growth,
while Hypothesis 6b posits a positive and significant association between
product eco-innovation and company profitability. When testing the re-
lationships between product eco-innovation and indicators of company
performance (company growth and company profitability), statistically
significant influences were detected, but the direction was the opposite of
the predicted direction. We can see (Figure 26) that product eco-innova-
tion was found to be quite substantially (standardized coefficient -0.14)
related to company growth, but again in the opposite direction (i.e., neg-
atively). Therefore, Hypothesis 6a is not supported. Similarly, the stand-
