Impact of Innovative Capital on the Global Performance of the European Union: Implications on Sustainability Assessment

Introduction

The concept of performance, without having a unanimously accepted definition, being in a permanent process of evolution, represents a relative form of measurement. Performance can be determined and analyzed only by comparisons with other quantities, without being defined in itself as a well-defined result, thus associated with an absolute quantity. Being the result of a comparison, performance ultimately shows the entity's ability to progress and allows verification of achievement of objectives. If at the microeconomic level the performance of a company involves the complex combination of productivity and profitability, efficiency, effectiveness and economy having decisive roles, at the macroeconomic level performance encompasses the interdependent effects of complex social, economic and political factors, research, development and innovation having an essential and multiplier contribution. Despite the lack of consensus in defining performance and the elements that could measure it, organizations are making significant efforts to achieve performance, with the goal of continuously improving it. The global promotion of social objectives, the defense of public interest, have multiple consequences in economic, political and social terms, based on the combination of economic elements with moral ones, pragmatic approaches with ethical ones and integrity. The studies reveal the role and importance of intellectual capital along with research and development and the efficiency of resource use as impact factors of these global approaches (Popescu, C.R.G. & Banța, V.C., 2019). Lebas, M. J. and Euske, K., (2006) study states from the very beginning that “step by step the process that leads to performance, showing that this is a construction of a social nature” (Lebas, M. J. & Euske, K., 2006). The concept of performance is considered “specific to a set of decision makers”, which can be argued as important to be convergent “both inside and outside the company” to achieve this status, showing the need to use a “causal model” to allow the subsequent identification and management of the “process by which performance will be created (future results)”.

The new economy, in a globalized society, in a continuous process of evolution, imposes a technologization and a computerization of the entire activity, metamorphosing the knowledge into a key resource, whose value represents the main engine of competitiveness. Reality shows that the strongest and most intelligent companies cannot necessarily remain on the market, nor can those whose ability to adapt, reorient and reconfigure keep pace with change (Gruening, G., 2001). Those who have an overview of the entire field in which they operate, can always aim not only to surpass their own achievements but also those of their competitors, keeping abreast of news and market requirements, especially if they benefit from an innovative spirit that they dare to implement, having that creative power that they thus manage to capitalize on. The influence of innovation and lifelong learning sustained and amplified by the rapidity of technological change, force organizations to create and diversify, in an increasingly short time, a multitude of innovative capabilities to obtain and retain competitive advantage.