The objective of this article is to outline various drawbacks of the studies on technical efficiency of pro-innovation activities at a national level. A better awareness of existing constraints may assist the readers and reviewers of the relative reports in a more critical assessment of the presented results and help in planning the research. This article outlines several methodological problems faced with conducting research on the technical efficiency of innovations. On the basis of the review of the subject-related literature, as well as press releases, numerous restraints prevailing in the currently used research approaches are presented. Some of these precincts are evidenced in the used methods: other may be rooted in the non-scientifically related intentions of the authors. Frequently, observations may drive the audience to the incorrect conclusions and opinions. The awareness of the consequences of these limitations may serve as a warning about the reliability of the results, their applicability for crafting policies, and country-to-country comparisons. However, various limitations originate from the very nature of the theme. Several propositions are specified about items to be kept in mind in order to minimize the negative impact caused by existing drawbacks. These may serve as a guide to formulate research questions and hypotheses for verification in further studies. While each of the propositions stated independently may be labeled obvious, their simultaneous review many contribute to the streamlining further research and in the improvement of the quality of suggestions arrived at. The conclusions from the article may also pinpoint to these methodological issues that cause some of the publications on the subject to be of questionable value.
 Borrás, S., Edquist, Ch., 2016. Conceptual Underpinnings for Innovation Policy Design: Indicators and Instruments in Context. Unpublished paper prepared for the OECD Blue Sky Conference III, September 19-21 2016, Ghent, Belgium.
 Borrás, S., Edquist, Ch., 2013. The Choice of Innovation Policy Instruments. CIRCLE - Center for Innovation, Research and Competences in the Learning Economy. Lund: Lund University.
 Caballero, J.R., 2014. Measuring Innovation Efficiency in Europe. A Färe-Primont TFP Index Approach. Barcelona: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Department D’Economia Aplicada.
 Dahlman, C.J., 1994. Technology Strategy in East Asian Developing Countries. Journal of Asian Economics, 5(4), pp.541-572.
 Dosi, G., Freeman, C., Nelson, R., Silverberg G. and Soete L., 1988. Technological Change and Economic Theory. London: Pinter Publishers.
 Edquist, Ch., 2016. The Swedish National Council: Innovation Policy Governance to Replace Linearity with Holism. Papers in Innovation Studies, Paper No. 2016/24, CIRCLE, Lund University, Lund.
 EIS, 2005 to 2018. European Innovation Scoreboard 2017 – Comparative Analysis of Innovation Performance. Brussels: European Commission, European Trend Chart on Innovation.
 EISa, 2018. European Innovation Scoreboard 2018. Discussion Paper. Workshop on the European Innovation Scoreboard: Perspectives for 2020 and Beyond. November, European Commission, Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, Brussels.
 EISb, 2018. European Innovation Scoreboard 2018. Exploratory Report B: Toward the Incorporation of Big Data in the European Innovation Scoreboard, 19 June, European Commission, Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, Brussels.
 EISc, 2018. European Innovation Scoreboard. Workshop on the European Innovation Scoreboard: Perspectives for 2020 and Beyond. Key Takeaways. November, Brussels: European Commission.
 EISd, 2018. European Innovation Scoreboard 2018. Exploratory Report C: Supplementary Analyses and Contextualization of Innovation Performance Data. Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs. June, Brussels: European Commission.
 EU, 2014. Research and innovation: Pushing Boundaries and Improving the Quality of Life. Directorate-General for Communication. Brussels: European Commission.
 Fagerberg, J., 1994. Technology and International Differences in Growth Rate. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 32(3), pp.183-200.
 FM (Frascati Manual), 2015. Guidelines for Collecting and Reporting Data on Research and Experimental Development. In series: The Measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities. Paris: OECD.
 Freudenberg, M., 2003. Composite Indicators of Country Performance: A Critical Assessment. STI Working paper2003/16, Industry Issues, OECD JT00153477.
 Gault, F., 2013. Handbook of Innovation Indicators and Measurement. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
 Katz, S., 2006. Indicators for Complex Innovation Systems. Research Policy, 35(7), pp.893-909.
 Kravchenko, N.A., 2011.The Problem of Measuring and Assessing National Innovation Systems. Problems of Economic Transition, 53(9), pp.61-73.
 Lundvall, B., 2007. National Innovation Systems - Analytical Concept and Development Tool”. Industry and Innovation, 14(1), pp.95-119.
 Lundvall, B.A (ed), 2007. National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning, Pinter Publishers, London.
 Metcalfe, S., 1995. The Economic Foundations of Technology Policy: Equilibrium and Evolutionary Perspectives. In: P. Stoneman (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation and Technological Change. Oxford (UK)/Cambridge (US): Blackwell Publishers.
 Murillo-Zamorano, L.R., 2004. Economic Efficiency and Frontier Techniques. Journal of Economic Surveys, 18(1), pp.33-77.
 Nasierowski, W., 2010. About Technical Efficiency of Efforts to Enhance Innovativeness in European Union. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 7(4), pp.389-404.
 Nasierowski, W., 2009. A Conceptual Framework for Formalization of National Innovation Systems. Foundations of Management, 1(2), pp.159-166.
 Nasierowski, W., 2016. Composite Indexes of Economic and Social Performance: Do they Provide Valuable Information. Foundations of Management, 8(1), pp.167-174.
 Nasierowski, W. and Arcelus F., 2012. What is Innovativeness: Literature Review. Foundations of Management, 4(1), pp.63-74.
 Nasierowski, W. and Arcelus F., 2003. On the efficiency of National Innovation Systems. Socio Economic Planning Sciences, 37, pp.215-234.
 Nowak, S., 1965. Metody badań socjologicznych (Methods of Sociological Research). Warszawa: PWN.
 OECD, 2008. Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide. Paris: JRC European Commission.
 OECD, 2010. Measuring innovation: A new perspective. Paris: OECD Publications.
 OECD, 1997. National Innovation Systems. Paris: OECD Publications.
 OECD, 1999. Managing National Innovation Systems. Paris: OECD Publications.
 OM (Oslo Manual), 2005. Guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data, 3rd edition Paris: OECD Publications.
 Owen, R., Macnaghten, P. and Stilgoe, J., 2012. Responsible Research and Innovation: from Science in Society to Science for Society, with Society. Science and Public Policy, 39(6), pp.751-760.
 Patel, P., Pavitt, K., 1994. The Nature and Economic Importance of National Innovation Systems. STI Review, No. 14. Paris - OECD Publications.
 Schibany, A., Streicher, G., 2008. The European Innovation Scoreboard: Drowning by Numbers? Science and Public Policy, 35(10), pp.717-732.
 Sharif, N., 2006. Emergence and Development of the National Innovation System Concept. Research Policy, 35, pp.745-766.
 WCY, 2017. World Competitiveness Yearbook. Lausanne.