Attribute Implications and Reverberations of the Japanese Foreign Policy for Technology and Innovation Business in Thailand

Yaninee Songkajorn, Somnuk Aujirapongpan, Watcharawat Promma, Kitikorn Dowpiset, Jaturon Jutidharabongse


Economic growth can be defined by real gross domestic value and international imports and exports supported by technology and innovation. Currently, there are concerns about the level of international technological policy investment, despite having the capability to be macroeconomically and business-valuable. The main objective of this research is to study the attributions in relationships and associations between the policy implications of technological business (PITB) and the effort of technology and innovation acceptance capacity (TIAC), which influence capacity development and foresight to ensure effective Japanese foreign policies. This research has been fully justified through business policy receiving technology and innovation, the potential for technology and innovation adoption (PTIA) and innovation for firm performance (IFP) of Japanese joint venture companies in Thailand was examined. Fifty-seven companies were subjected to the structural equation model testing method. Data collection was conducted by the questionnaire and an in-depth interview with validity and reliability checked under 4 main latent variables: PITB, TIAC, PTIA, and IFP. All processing was performed with the ADANCO 2.2.1 program. The research found that PITB had a positive correlation and directly influenced PTIA and IFP unless it had an inverse correlation to TIAC and the relationship between TIAC and PTIA. It can serve as a guide for how to correctly carry out the principle of creating a new Japan's foreign policy in the future.


Doi: 10.28991/ESJ-2022-06-03-09

Full Text: PDF


Technological Business; Innovation Adoption; Acceptance Capacity; Innovation Performance.


Lee, J. W., & Xuan, Y. (2019). Effects of technology and innovation management and total factor productivity on the economic growth of China. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 6(2), 63–73. doi:10.13106/jafeb.2019.vol6.no2.63.

NSTDA (2018). Development of Science and Technology Research and Innovation. Strategy for the Development of Science, Technology, Research and Innovation in the 12th Development Plan. National Science and Technology Development Agency, Thailand.

Maesincee, S. (2018). Thailand’s Transformation through science technology innovation. Minister of Science and technology. Available online: (accessed on January 2022).

Dnishev, F., & Alzhanova, F. (2016). Globalization of Technological Development and Opportunities for National Innovation Systems of Developing Countries. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 3(4), 67–79. doi:10.13106/jafeb.2016.vol3.no4.67.

Ambashi, M. (2018). Innovation Policy in ASEAN. Jakarta: Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA). Available online: (accessed on January 2022).

JETRO. (2018). JETRO Global Trade and Investment Report 2018: Global Economy Connected via Digitalization Key Points. Available online: (accessed on January 2022).

Trinidad, D. D. (2018). What Does Strategic Partnerships with ASEAN Mean for Japan’s Foreign Aid? Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, 5(3), 267–294. doi:10.1177/2347797018798996.

Anthony Jnr, B., Abbas Petersen, S., Helfert, M., & Guo, H. (2021). Digital transformation with enterprise architecture for smarter cities: a qualitative research approach. Digital Policy, Regulation and Governance, 23(4), 355–376. doi:10.1108/DPRG-04-2020-0044.

Behne, A., Heinrich Beinke, J., & Teuteberg, F. (2021). A Framework for Cross-Industry Innovation: Transferring Technologies between Industries. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 18(3), 1–27. doi:10.1142/S0219877021500115.

Abdul Wahab, S., Abdullah, H., Uli, J., & Che Rose, R. (2010). Inter-Firm Technology Transfer and Performance in International Joint Venture Firms. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(4), 94–103. doi:10.5539/ijbm.v5n4p93.

Meier, G. M. (1964). International Trade and Development. Harper & Row, New York, United States.

Siu, K. W. M., Xiao, J. X., & Wong, Y. L. (2019). Policy, implementation and management of the inclusive design of open space for visually impaired persons. Facilities, 37(5–6), 330–351. doi:10.1108/F-01-2018-0021.

Beverelli, C., Keck, A., Larch, M., & Yotov, Y. (2018). Institutions, Trade and Development: A Quantitative Analysis. CESifo Working Paper Series No. 6920. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3167749.

MOFA (2020). Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA), ASEAN-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement. Available online: (accessed on January 2022).

Bridgman, P., & Davis, G. (2003). What Use is a Policy Cycle? Plenty, if the aim is clear. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 62(3), 98–102. doi:10.1046/j.1467-8500.2003.00342.x.

Corfee-Morlot, J., Cochran, I., Hallegatte, S., & Teasdale, P. J. (2011). Multilevel risk governance and urban adaptation policy. Climatic Change, 104(1), 169–197. doi:10.1007/s10584-010-9980-9.

Olson, M. (1965). Some Social and Political Implications of Economic Development. World Politics, 17(3), 525–554. doi:10.2307/2009293.

Sabir, S., & Qamar, M. (2019). Fiscal policy, institutions and inclusive growth: evidence from the developing Asian countries. International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 46 No. 6, pp. 822-837. doi:10.1108/IJSE-08-2018-0419.

Ince, H., Imamoglu, S. Z., & Turkcan, H. (2016). The Effect of Technological Innovation Capabilities and Absorptive Capacity on Firm Innovativeness: A Conceptual Framework. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 235, 764–770. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.11.078.

Rakthai, T., Aujirapongpan, S., & Suanpong, K. (2019). Innovative capacity and the performance of businesses incubated in university incubator units: Empirical study from universities in Thailand. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 5(2), 33–52. doi:10.3390/JOITMC5020033.

Gudz, O., & Prokopenko, N. (2018). The Increase of Enterprises’ Innovative Development Based on the Network Approach. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 4(1), 99–105. doi:10.30525/2256-0742/2018-4-1-99-105.

Sonenshein, S. (2006). Crafting social issues at work. Academy of Management Journal, 49(6), 1158–1172. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2006.23478243.

Maitlis, S., & Christianson, M. (2014). Sensemaking in Organizations: Taking Stock and Moving Forward. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 57–125. doi:10.5465/19416520.2014.873177.

Castellacci, F., & Natera, J. M. (2013). The dynamics of national innovation systems: A panel cointegration analysis of the coevolution between innovative capability and absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 42(3), 579–594. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2012.10.006.

Songkajorn, Y., Aujirapongpan, S., Deelers, S., Rakthai, T., & Jutidharabongse, J. (2020). Innovation Capability Indicators for Entrepreneurs Developed the Business from Thai University Incubator. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 55(6), 1–12. doi:10.35741/issn.0258-2724.55.6.26.

Hsiao, Y. C., & Hsu, Z. X. (2018). Firm-specific advantages-product innovation capability complementarities and innovation success: A core competency approach. Technology in Society, 55, 78–84. doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.06.009.

Damanpour, F., & Schneider, M. (2009). Characteristics of innovation and innovation adoption in public organizations: Assessing the role of managers. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(3), 495–522. doi:10.1093/jopart/mun021.

Suvedi, M., & Kaplowitz, M. (2016). What Every Extension Worker Should Know, Core Competency Handbook. The U.S. Government’s global hunger & food Security Initiative, Michigan State University, Michigan, United States. Available online: (accessed on January 2022).

Kandampully, J. (2002). Innovation as the core competency of a service organisation: The role of technology, knowledge and networks. European Journal of Innovation Management, 5(1), 18–26. doi:10.1108/14601060210415144.

Swamidass, P. M. (2003). Modeling the adoption rates of manufacturing technology innovations by small US manufacturers: A longitudinal investigation. Research Policy, 32(3), 351–366. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00019-7.

Raymond, L. (2005). Operations management and advanced manufacturing technologies in SMEs: A contingency approach. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 16(8), 936–955. doi:10.1108/17410380510627898.

Krar, S. F., & Gill, A. (2003). Exploring Advanced Manufacturing Technologies. Industrial Press, South Norwalk, United States.

Damanpour, F., & Daniel Wischnevsky, J. (2006). Research on innovation in organizations: Distinguishing innovation-generating from innovation-adopting organizations. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 23(4), 269–291. doi:10.1016/j.jengtecman.2006.08.002.

Wisdom, J. P., Chor, K. H. B., Hoagwood, K. E., & Horwitz, S. M. (2014). Innovation adoption: A review of theories and constructs. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 41(4), 480–502. doi:10.1007/s10488-013-0486-4.

Protasiewicz, A. (2020). Innovativeness of enterprises in Poland and their capacity to absorb innovation. Optimum. Economic Studies, 2(2(100)), 81–92. doi:10.15290/oes.2020.02.100.06.

Niedzielski, P., & Rychlik, K. (2007). Innovations in the Manufacturing and Service Sector - Different or Similar? [Innovations in Service sector and industry - differences and similarities]. Scientific Journals of the University of Szczecin 453, No. 8. 177–186. Available online: (accessed on January 2022).

Aujirapongpan, S., Songkajorn, Y., Ritkaew, S., & Deelers, S. (2020). Japan’s digital advance policy towards performance in multilateral asean’s innovation business. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 8(1), 1081–1094. doi:10.9770/jesi.2020.8.1(72).

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The Balanced Scorecard-Measures that Drive Performance. Harvard Business Review 70(1), 71–79. Available online: (accessed on January 2022).

Kalay, F., & Gary, L. Y. N. N. (2015). The impact of strategic innovation management practices on firm innovation performance. Research Journal of Business and Management, 2(3), 412-429. doi:10.17261/Pressacademia.2015312989.

Oke, A., Walumbwa, F. O., & Myers, A. (2012). Innovation Strategy, Human Resource Policy, and Firms’ Revenue Growth: The Roles of Environmental Uncertainty and Innovation Performance. Decision Sciences, 43(2), 273–302. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.2011.00350.x.

Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(3), 414–433. doi:10.1007/s11747-011-0261-6.

Dijkstra, T. K., & Henseler, J. (2015). Consistent partial least squares path modeling. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 39(2), 297–316. doi:10.25300/MISQ/2015/39.2.02.

Werts, C. E., Rock, D. R., Linn, R. L., & Jöreskog, K. G. (1978). A General Method of Estimating the Reliability of a Composite. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 38(4), 933–938. doi:10.1177/001316447803800412.

Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334. doi:10.1007/BF02310555.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. doi:10.2307/3151312.

Henseler, J. (2020). ADANCO 2.2.1-User Manual. Composite Modeling GmbH & Co., Kleve, Germany.

Kock, N., & Hadaya, P. (2018). Minimum sample size estimation in PLS-SEM: The inverse square root and gamma-exponential methods. Information Systems Journal, 28(1), 227–261. doi:10.1111/isj.12131.

Afeltra, G., Alerasoul, S. A., & Strozzi, F. (2021). The evolution of sustainable innovation: from the past to the future. European Journal of Innovation Management, 1460–1060. doi:10.1108/EJIM-02-2021-0113.

Hosoda, M. (2021). Telework amidst the COVID-19 pandemic: effects on work style reform in Japan. Corporate Governance (Bingley), 21(6), 1059–1071. doi:10.1108/CG-09-2020-0390.

Thai, K. Q., & Noguchi, M. (2021). Investigating the technical efficiency of Japanese national universities following corporatization: a two-stage data envelopment analysis approach. International Journal of Educational Management, 35(6), 1297–1311. doi:10.1108/IJEM-10-2020-0456.

Florkowski, G. W. (2020). HR technology goal realization: predictors and consequences. Personnel Review, 50(5), 1372–1396. doi:10.1108/PR-10-2019-0557.

Full Text: PDF

DOI: 10.28991/ESJ-2022-06-03-09


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2022 Yaninee Songkajorn, Somnuk Aujirapongpan, Watcharawat Promma, Kitikorn Dowpiset, Jaturon Jutidharabongse