تحلیل تاثیر توانمندی های نوآوری فناورانه بر تجاری سازی فناوری و عملکرد شرکت های دانش بنیان استان اصفهان

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد دانشگاه اصفهان

2 عضو هیات علمی دانشگاه اصفهان

چکیده

ه‍دف از‌ ای‍ن‌ پ‍ژوه‍ش، ب‍ررس‍ی‌ تأثیر توانمندی‌ های نوآوری فناورانه ب‍ر تجاری‌ سازی فناوری و ع‍م‍ل‍ک‍رد ش‍رک‍ت ‌ه‍ای‌ دان‍ش‌ ب‍ن‍ی‍ان‌ و در م‍رح‍ل‍ۀ‌ ب‍ع‍د، ب‍ررس‍ی‌ تأثیر ع‍ام‍ل‌ ت‍ق‍وی‍ت‌ ک‍ن‍ن‍ده‌ و ت‍ع‍دی‍ل‌گ‍ر ن‍اپ‍ای‍داری‌ ه‍ای‌ م‍ح‍ی‍طی‌ است. ج‍ام‍ع‍ۀ‌ آم‍اری‌ ای‍ن‌ پ‍ژوه‍ش شامل 88 نفر از مدیران ش‍رک‍ت‌های دان‍ش‌‌ب‍ن‍ی‍ان‌ م‍س‍ت‍ق‍ر در ش‍ه‍رک‌ ع‍ل‍م‍ی‌ و ت‍ح‍ق‍ی‍ق‍ات‍ی‌ اص‍ف‍ه‍ان‌ می‌ باشد. داده‌ه‍ای‌ ای‍ن‌ پژوهش، ب‍ه ‌وس‍ی‍ل‍ۀ‌ پ‍رس‍ش‍ن‍ام‍ه‌‌ ج‍م‍ع‌‌آوری‌ ش‍ده‌‌اند. ن‍ت‍ای‍ج‌ ای‍ن‌ پ‍ژوه‍ش‌ ت‍وص‍ی‍ف‍ی‌-ه‍م‍ب‍س‍ت‍گ‍ی‌ و ک‍مّ‍ی است ک‍ه‌ ب‍ه ‌‌ص‍ورت‌ م‍دل‌‌س‍ازی‌ م‍ع‍ادلات‌‌س‍ازی‌ و ب‍ه‌ روش‌ ح‍داق‍ل‌ م‍رب‍ع‍ات‌ ج‍زئ‍ی‌ (ب‍ه ‌وس‍ی‍ل‍ۀ‌ ن‍رم ‌‌اف‍زار smart PLS  و SPSS ) اس‍ت‍خ‍راج‌ ش‍ده‌ اس‍ت. یافته ‌ها‌ ن‍ش‍ان‌ م‍ی ‌د‌‌هن‍د ک‍ه‌ تأثیر پنج توانمندی یادگیری، تحقیق و توسعه، برنامه ریزی راهبردی، سازمانی و تولید  ب‍ر تجاری‌ سازی در ای‍ن‌ ش‍رک‍ت ‌ه‍ا ق‍اب‍ل‌ ت‍أی‍ی‍د اس‍ت‌، در ح‍ال‍ی‌که ای‍ن‌ ش‍رای‍ط ب‍رای‌ توانمندی بازاریابی و تخصیص منابع وج‍ود ن‍دارد. ه‍م‍چ‍ن‍ی‍ن‌ ن‍ت‍ای‍ج‌ ب‍ر تأثیر م‍ث‍ب‍ت‌ و ق‍اب‍ل‌ م‍لاح‍ظۀ‌ تجاری ‌سازی فناوری ب‍ر عملکرد شرکت اش‍اره‌ دارد. از میان عوامل تأثیرگذار ناپایداری‌ های محیطی، تأثیر‌ دو متغیر ت‍ع‍دی‍ل‌گ‍ری‌ ن‍اپ‍ای‍داری‌ بازار در م‍س‍ی‍ر ب‍ی‍ن‌ تجاری‌ سازی فناوری و ع‍م‍ل‍ک‍رد شرکت ت‍أی‍ی‍د ن‍م‍ی ‌ش‍وند، اما تأثیر تعدیل‌گری ناپایداری فناوری مورد پذیرش است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Analyzing the Impact of Technological Innovation Capabilities on Technology Commercialization and Performance Knowledge-Based Companies in Isfahan

نویسندگان [English]

  • maryam pakniyat 1
  • Reza Ansari 2
  • Arash Shahin 2
1 Master of Technology Management, University of Isfahan
2 Faculty member, University of Isfahan
چکیده [English]

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of technological innovation capabilities on technology commercialization and knowledge-based companies' performance and then examining the effect of environmental Turbulence moderator.The study population is Contains of 88 managers and experts in knowledge-based companies in Isfahan Science and Technology Park.The data have been collected by questionnaire. This study is descriptive _ correlation and quantitative؛ whitch it's results is extracted in the shape of Structural Equation Modeling and partial least squares method by smart PLS and SPSS software ,that shows the impact of five capabilities: learning, research and development, strategic planning, organizational and production on commercialization in these companies؛whitch is confirmed. Whereas this conditions for marketing and resource allocation capabilities do not exist. The results point to a positive and significant impact of technology commercialization on firm performance. Moderated the effect of market Turbulence on the route between technology commercialization and company performance can not be confirmed. However, the impact of technology Turbulence moderator is accepted.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Technological innovation capability
  • Technology commercialization
  • Company performance
  • Knowledge-based companies
  • environmental Turbulence

Adler, P. S., & Shenbar, A. 1990. Adapting your technological base: the organizational challenge. Sloan Management Review, 32(1), pp. 25-37.

Alegre, J., Pla-Barber, J., Chiva, R., & Villar, C. 2012. Organisational learning capability, product innovation performance and export intensity. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 24(5), pp. 511-526.

Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. 1990. Beyond boundary spanning: Managing external dependence in product development teams. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 1(2), pp. 119-135.

Andersen, T. J., & Foss, N. J. 2005. Strategic opportunity and economic performance in multinational enterprises: The role and effects of information and communication technology. Journal of International Management, 11(2), pp. 293-310.

Barclay, D., Higgins, C., & Thompson, R. 1995. The partial least squares (PLS) approach to causal modeling: Personal computer adoption and use as an illustration. Technology studies, 2(2), pp. 285-309.

Barton, J. H. 1984. Coping with technological protectionism. Harvard Business Review, 62(6), pp. 91-97.

Bayus, B. L. 1994. Are product life cycles really getting shorter? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 11(4), pp. 300-308.

Bonoma, T. V. 1988. Marketing performance assessment: Harvard Business School Press.

Bourgeois III, L. J., & Eisenhardt, K. M. 1988. Strategic decision processes in high velocity environments: Four cases in the microcomputer industry. Management science, 34(7), pp. 816-835.

Burgelman, R., & Maidique, M. A. MA & Wheelwright SC, 2004. Strategic Management of Technology and Innovation: McGraw-Hill Companies, New York.

Calantone, R., Garcia, R., & Dröge, C. 2003. The effects of environmental turbulence on new product development strategy planning. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 20(2), pp. 90-103.

Carmeli, A., & Tishler, A. 2004. The relationships between intangible organizational elements and organizational performance. Strategic Management Journal, 25(13), pp. 1257-1278.

Chakravarthy, B. 1997. A new strategy framework for coping with turbulence. MIT Sloan Management Review, 38(2), pp. 69.

Chen, C.-J. 2009. Technology commercialization, incubator and venture capital, and new venture performance. Journal of Business research, 62(1), pp. 93-103.

Chiesa, V., Gilardoni, E., & Manzini, R. 2005. The valuation of technology in buy-cooperate-sell decisions. European Journal of Innovation Management, 8(1), pp.  5-30.

Cho, J., & Lee, J. 2013. Development of a new technology product evaluation model for assessing commercialization opportunities using Delphi method and fuzzy AHP approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(13), pp. 5314-5330.

Christensen, J. F. 1995. Asset profiles for technological innovation. Research policy, 24(5), pp.  727-745.

Conceição, P., Hamill, D., & Pinheiro, P. 2002. Innovative science and technology commercialization strategies at 3M: a case study. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 19(1), pp.  25-38.

Coombs, J. E., & Bierly, P. E. 2006. Measuring technological capability and performance. R&D Management, 36(4), pp. 421-438.

Cui, A. S., Griffith, D. A., Cavusgil, S. T., & Dabic, M. 2006. The influence of market and cultural environmental factors on technology transfer between foreign MNCs and local subsidiaries: A Croatian illustration. Journal of World Business, 41(2), pp. 100-111.

Davidson, W. H. 1987. Structure and Performance in International Technology Transfer: Journal of Management Studies.2(4), pp. 505.

Dierickx, I., & Cool, K. 1989. Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management science, 35(12), pp. 1504-1511.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, pp. 39-50.

Glazer, R., & Weiss, A. M. 1993. Marketing in turbulent environments: Decision processes and the time-sensitivity of information. Journal of Marketing Research, pp. 509-521.

Guan, J. 2002. Comparison study of industrial innovation between China and some European countries. Production and Inventory Management Journal, 43(3/4), pp. 30.

Guan, J., & Ma, N. 2003. Innovative capability and export performance of Chinese firms. Technovation, 23(9), pp. 737-747.

Hansen, G. S., & Wernerfelt, B. 1989. Determinants of firm performance: The relative importance of economic and organizational factors. Strategic Management Journal, 10(5), pp. 399-411.

Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Kim, H. 1997. International diversification: Effects on innovation and firm performance in product-diversified firms. Academy of Management journal, 40(4), pp.  767-798.

Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson, R. E., & Nixon, R. D. 1993. A mid-range theory of interfunctional integration, its antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 10(1-2), pp. 161-185.

Hsu, D. W., Shen, Y.-C., Yuan, B. J., & Chou, C. J. 2015. Toward successful commercialization of university technology: Performance drivers of university technology transfer in Taiwan. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 92, pp. 25-39.

Hung, K.-P., & Chou, C. 2013. The impact of open innovation on firm performance: The moderating effects of internal R&D and environmental turbulence. Technovation, 33(10), pp.  368-380.

Hyder, A. S., & Abraha, D. 2004. Product and skills development in small-and medium-sized high-tech firms through international strategic alliances. Singapore Management Review, 26(2), pp. 1.

Jaworski, B. J., & Kohli, A. K. 1993. Market orientation: antecedents and consequences. The Journal of marketing, pp. 53-70.

Karlsson, M. 2004. Commercialization of Research Results in the United States–an Overview of Federal and Academic Technology Transfer.

Khalil, T. M. 2000. Management of technology: The key to competitiveness and wealth creation: McGraw-Hill Science, Engineering & Mathematics.

Kohtamäki, M., Partanen, J., Parida, V., & Wincent, J. 2013. Non-linear relationship between industrial service offering and sales growth: The moderating role of network capabilities. Industrial Marketing Management, 42(8), pp. 1374-1385.

Kollmer, H., & Dowling, M. 2004. Licensing as a commercialisation strategy for new technology-based firms. Research policy, 33(8), pp. 1141-1151.

Kumar, V., & Jain, P. 2003. Commercialization of new technologies in India: an empirical study of perceptions of technology institutions. Technovation, 23(2), pp. 113-120.

Lawson, B., & Samson, D. 2001. Developing innovation capability in organisations: a dynamic capabilities approach. International journal of innovation management, 5(03), pp.  377-400.

Lee, H., Kim, J., & Kim, J. 2007. Determinants of success for application service provider: An empirical test in small businesses. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65(9), pp. 796-815.

Leitner, K. H. 2005. Managing and reporting intangible assets in research technology organisations. R&D Management, 35(2), pp. 125-136.

Li, Y., Guo, H., Liu, Y., & Li, M. 2008. Incentive mechanisms, entrepreneurial orientation, and technology commercialization: Evidence from China›s transitional economy. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(1), pp. 63-78.

Lichtenthaler, U., Lichtenthaler, E., & Frishammar, J. 2009. RETRACTED: Technology commercialization intelligence: Organizational antecedents and performance consequences. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(3), pp. 301-315.

Lin, B.-W., Lee, Y., & Hung, S.-C. 2006. R&D intensity and commercialization orientation effects on financial performance. Journal of Business research, 59(6), pp. 679-685.

Lin, Y., Wang, Y., & Kung, L. 2015. Influences of cross-functional collaboration and knowledge creation on technology commercialization: Evidence from high-tech industries. Industrial Marketing Management, 49, pp. 128-138.

Liu, H., & Jiang, Y. 2001. Technology transfer from higher education institutions to industry in China: nature and implications. Technovation, 21(3), pp. 175-188.

Lockett, A., & Wright, M. 2005. Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies. Research policy, 34(7), pp. 1043-1057.

Makadok, R. 2001. Toward a synthesis of the resource-based and dynamic-capability views of rent creation. Strategic Management Journal, 22(5), pp. 387-401.

Mitchell, W., & Singh, K. 1996. Survival of businesses using collaborative relationships to commercialize complex goods. Strategic Management Journal, pp. 169-195.

Nevens, T. M. 1990. Commercializing technology: what the best companies do. Planning review, 18(6), pp. 20-24.

O›shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. 2005. Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of US universities. Research policy, 34(7), pp. 994-1009.

O›Sullivan, D., & Abela, A. V. 2007. Marketing performance measurement ability and firm performance. Journal of Marketing, 71(2), pp. 79-93.

Ortega, M. J. R. 2010. Competitive strategies and firm performance: Technological capabilities› moderating roles. Journal of Business research, 63(12), pp. 1273-1281.

Pansiri, J. 2008. The effects of characteristics of partners on strategic alliance performance in the SME dominated travel sector. Tourism Management, 29(1), pp. 101-115.

Park, T., & Rhee, J. 2013. Network types and performance in SMEs: the mediating effects of technology commercialization. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 21(2), pp. 290-304.

Park, T., & Ryu, D. 2015. Drivers of technology commercialization and performance in SMEs: The moderating effect of environmental dynamism. Management Decision, 53(2), pp. 338-353.

Peel, M. J., & Bridge, J. 1998. How planning and capital budgeting improve SME performance. Long range planning, 31(6), pp.  848-856.

Pelham, A. M., & Wilson, D. T. 1995. A longitudinal study of the impact of market structure, firm structure, strategy, and market orientation culture on dimensions of small-firm performance. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 24(1), pp. 27-43.

Penan, H. 1996. R & D strategy in a techno-economic network: Alzheimer›s disease therapeutic strategies. Research policy, 25(3), pp. 337-358.

Reamer, A., Icerman, L., & Youtie, J. L. 2003. Technology transfer and commercialization: their role in economic development: United States Economic Development Administration.

Ruiz-Mercader, J., MeroñO-Cerdan, A. L., & Sabater-SáNchez, R. 2006. Information technology and learning: Their relationship and impact on organisational performance in small businesses. International Journal of Information Management, 26(1), pp. 16-29.

Schilling, M. A., & Hill, C. W. 1998. Managing the new product development process: Strategic imperatives. The Academy of Management Executive, 12(3), pp. 67-81.

Song, X. M., Benedetto, C. A., & Song, L. Z. 2000. Pioneering advantage in new service development: a multi-country study of managerial perceptions. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 17(5), pp. 378-392.

Stevens, G., Burley, J., & Divine, R. 1999. Creativity business discipline= higher profits faster from new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 16(5), pp. 455-468.

Sundaramurthy, C., Rhoades, D. L., & Rechner, P. L. 2005. A meta-analysis of the effects of executive and institutional ownership on firm performance. Journal of Managerial Issues, pp. 494-510.

Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, pp. 509-533.

Walter, A., Auer, M., & Ritter, T. 2006. The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance. Journal of business venturing, 21(4), pp. 541-567.

Wang, T.-C., & Lin, Y.-L. 2009. Accurately predicting the success of B2B e-commerce in small and medium enterprises. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2), pp. 2750-2758.

Yam, R. C., Guan, J. C., Pun, K. F., & Tang, E. P. 2004. An audit of technological innovation capabilities in Chinese firms: some empirical findings in Beijing, China. Research policy, 33(8), pp. 1123-1140.

Yam, R. C., Lo, W., Tang, E. P., & Lau, A. K. 2011. Analysis of sources of innovation, technological innovation capabilities, and performance: An empirical study of Hong Kong manufacturing industries. Research policy, 40(3), pp. 391-402.

Zahra, S. A., & Bogner, W. C. 2000. Technology strategy and software new ventures› performance: Exploring the moderating effect of the competitive environment. Journal of business venturing, 15(2), pp. 135-173.

Zahra, S. A., & Nielsen, A. P. 2002. Sources of capabilities, integration and technology commercialization. Strategic Management Journal, 23(5), pp. 377-398.

Zaidi, M. F. A., & Othman, S. N. 2015. Organisational capabilities, environmental turbulence, and NPD performance: a study on Malaysian manufacturing firms. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172, pp. 286-293.

آقاجانی، ح. و یزدان پناه، ا.، 1390. عوامل موثر بر انتقال فناوری از دانشگاه به صنعت در دانشگاه‌ها. اولین کنفرانس بین المللی و پنجمین کنفرانس ملی مدیریت فناوری، تهران.

الهیاری فرد، ن. و عباسی، ر.، 1390. بررسی الگوی مناسب ساختار سازمانی شرکت‌های دانش بنیان. فصلنامه تخصصی پارک‌ها و مراکز رشد، سال هشتم، شماره 29، صص. 45-54.

بغدادی، م. و شاوردی، م.، 1390. تیم نوآوری، راهکاری برای تجاری‌سازی موفق ایده‌های نوآورانه. اولین کنفرانس بین المللی و پنجمین کنفرانس ملی مدیریت فناوری تهران.

پورعزت، ع. ا. و حیدری، ا.، 1390. شناسایی و دسته بندی چالش‌ها و موانع تجاری‌سازی دانش با استفاده از روش کیو. فصلنامه سیاست علم و فناوری، شماره 4، صص. 49-62.

تقوی فرد، م. ت.، مسرت، ن. و صنیعی منفرد، م.، 1390. مدل پیش‌بینی رفتار خرید مجدد مشتریان. مجله مدیریت بازرگانی، شماره 10، صص . 55-74.

جاهد، ح. و آراسته، ح.، 1392. عوامل برون سازمانی موثر در تجاری‌سازی نتایج پژوهشی. پژوهش و برنامه‌ریزی در آموزش عالی، صص. شماره 67، صص. 45-68.

صلواتی سرچشمه، ب. و مداح، م.، 1387. کاربرد مدل ARC در گزارش دهی سرمایه‌های دانشی و موسسات دانش بنیان. فصلنامه رشد و فناوری، شماره 15 صص. 41-47.

غلام زاده ، ر. و مهدی، ف.، 1390. مسیر راهبردی شرکت‌های مواد غذایی و سبک ورود به بازار. تحقیقات بازاریابی مدرن، شماره 3، صص. 47-62.

قانون حمایت از شرکت‌های دانش بنیان، 1389. تهران.

محسنین، ش. و اسفیدانی، م.، 1393. معادلات ساختاری مبتنی بر رویکرد حداقل مربعات جزئی به کمک نرم‌افزار smart pls. تهران: چاپ اول، انتشارات کتاب مهربان.

محمدی، م.، 1393. شناسایی و رتبه بندی عوامل محیطی تاثیرگذار در تجاری‌سازی فناوری نانو در صنعت غذایی ایران. فصلنامه توسعه تکنولوژی صنعتی، شماره 23، صص. 11-20.

مهدی زاده، م.، حیدری قره بلاغ، ه. و میرزایی، ی.، 1389. شناسایی عوامل موثر بر انتقال فناوری. فصلنامه رشد و فناوری، سال هفتم، شماره 25، صص. 3-10.