ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Formation of innovation networks with two hubs: A case study of mega-watt wind turbine network
Innovation networks are made up of individuals, firms, knowledge centers and industrial companies that work together to develop and commercialize a product or technology. The variety of activities ranging from R&D to production, commercialization and coordination among them is done by one to several hubs in the network. In networks that their mission is innovation in products with complexity in design or manufacturing, there is a need for both industrial and knowledge hubs. The lack of expert manpower, prior experience, and knowledge/industrial infrastructure simultaneously in one hub is one of the most important reasons for the need for a second hub in these networks. The purpose of this paper is to present theoretical framework of innovation networks with two hubs and clarify the formation, main members and connections. In this regard, different leadership styles in innovation networks and the need for two hubs are described, and a preliminary theoretical framework is presented. To validate theoretical framework, a case study was conducted on the Mega-Watt wind turbine network. Based on the results, the theoretical framework is revised, which could be the basis for further studies.
https://www.nowavari.ir/article_96988_84fa6eec20ac2d3c099e0fd4426188d4.pdf
2019-11-22
1
22
innovation networks with two hubs
Dual leadership in innovation networks
Knowledge sub-network
Industrial sub-network
wind turbine network
Majid
Haghighi
m.haghighi@ut.ac.ir
1
Tehran University
LEAD_AUTHOR
Mohammad reza
Arasti
arasti@sharif.edu
2
Sharif University of Technology
AUTHOR
Abbas
Bahri
abahri@nri.ac.irr
3
Niroo Research Institute (NRI)
AUTHOR
Amir ali
Saifoddin
saifoddin@ut.ac.irr
4
Tehran University
AUTHOR
Hadi
Nilforoushan
h_nilforoushan@sbu.ac.irr
5
Shahid Beheshti University
AUTHOR
Alireza
aslani
alireza.aslani@ut.ac.irr
6
Tehran University
AUTHOR
Agranoff, Robert, Michael McGuire. 2001. “Big questions in public network management research.” Journal of public administration research and theory, 11(3), pp.295–326.
1
Cassi, L., Corrocher, N., Malerba, F., & Vonortas, N. 2008. Research networks as infrastructure for knowledge diffusion in European regions. Econ. Innov. New Techn. 17(7-8), pp. 663–676.
2
Cheng, Yu-Ting, Andrew H Van de Ven. 1996. “Learning the innovation journey: Order out of chaos?” Organization science, 7(6), pp. 593–614.
3
Crosby, B. C., & Bryson, J. M. 2005. Leadership for the common good: Tackling public problems in a shared-power world. John Wiley & Sons.
4
Davis, J. P., & Eisenhardt, K. M. 2011. Rotating leadership and collaborative innovation recombination processes in symbiotic relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56(2), pp.159–201.
5
Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. 2006. Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), pp. 659–669.
6
Gobbo Jr, Jose Alcides, Annika Olsson. 2010. “The transformation between exploration and exploitation applied to inventors of packaging innovations.” Technovation 30 (5–6), pp. 322–331.
7
Haythornthwaite, C. 1996. Social network analysis: An approach and technique for the study of information exchange. Library & Information Science Research, 18(4), pp. 323–342.
8
He, Zi-Lin, Poh-Kam Wong. 2004. “Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis.” Organization science 15 (4): 481–494.
9
House, R. J., & Aditya, R. N. 1997. The social scientific study of leadership: Quo vadis? Journal of Management, 23(3), pp. 409–473.
10
Huggins, Robert, Andrew Johnston, Chris Stride. 2012. “Knowledge networks and universities: Locational and organisational aspects of knowledge transfer interactions.” Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 24 (7–8), pp. 475–502.
11
Hunter, Samuel T, Lily D Cushenbery, Bradley Jayne. 2017. “Why dual leaders will drive innovation: Resolving the exploration and exploitation dilemma with a conservation of resources solution.” Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(8), pp. 1183–1195.
12
Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia, Satu Nätti. 2017. “Orchestrator types, roles and capabilities–A framework for innovation networks.” Industrial Marketing Management.
13
Kudic, M. 2014. Innovation Networks in the German Laser Industry: Evolutionary Change, Strategic Positioning, and Firm Innovativeness. Economic Complexity and Evolution. Springer International Publishing.
14
Lavie, Dovev, Lori Rosenkopf. 2006. “Balancing exploration and exploitation in alliance formation.” Academy of Management Journal, 49 (4), pp. 797–818.
15
Malerba, F., N.S. Vonortas. 2009.Innovation Networks in Industries. Edward Elgar.
16
Meindl, J. R., & Shamir, B. 2007. Follower-centered Perspectives on Leadership: A Tribute to the Memory of James R. Meindl. IAP.
17
Méndez, M. J. 2009. A Closer Look Into Collective Leadership: Is Leadership Shared Or Distributed? PhD Thesis: New Mexico State University
18
Morrison, A. 2008. Gatekeepers of knowledge within industrial districts: Who they are, how they interact. Regional Studies, 42(6), pp. 817–835.
19
Müller-Seitz, G., & Sydow, J. 2012. Maneuvering between networks to lead–A longitudinal case study in the semiconductor industry. Long Range Planning, 45(2), pp. 105–135.
20
Nambisan, Satish, Mohanbir Sawhney. 2011. “Orchestration Processes in Network-Centric Innovation: Evidence from the Field.” The Academy of Management Perspectives, 25(3), pp.40–57.
21
O’Toole, James, Jay Galbraith, Edward E Lawler. 2002. “When two (or more) heads are better than one: The promise and pitfalls of shared leadership.” California Management Review, 44(4), pp. 65–83.
22
Powell, W. 2003. Neither market nor hierarchy. The Sociology of Organizations: Classic, Contemporary, and Critical Readings, Volume (315), pp. 104–117.
23
Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. 2008. Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(2), pp. 229–252.
24
Provan, K. G., Fish, A., & Sydow, J. 2007. Interorganizational networks at the network level: A review of the empirical literature on whole networks. Journal of Management, 33(3), pp.479–516.
25
Provan, Keith G, H Brinton Milward. 1999. “Do networks really work? A framework for evaluating public-sector organizational networks.” in academy of management proceedings, 1999:a1–a6. Academy of management briarcliff manor, NY 10510.
26
Rampersad, Giselle, Pascale Quester, Indrit Troshani. 2010. “Managing innovation networks: Exploratory evidence from ICT, biotechnology and nanotechnology networks.” Industrial Marketing Management, 39 (5), pp. 793–805.
27
Ring, P. S., Doz, Y. L., & Olk, P. M. 2005. Managing Formation Processes in R&D Consortia. California Management Review, 47(4).
28
Roijakkers, Nadine, Bart Leten, Wim Vanhaverbeke, Andre Clerix, Johan Van Helleputte. 2013. “Orchestrating Innovation Ecosystems_IMEC.” In Proceedings of the 35th DRUID Conference 2013, pp. 17–19.
29
Sinha, Kinsuk Mani. 2013. “Innovation Process: an Integrated Analysis of the Role played by Various Actors.” LUISS Guido Carli.
30
Spillane, J. P., & Diamond, J. B. 2007. Distributed leadership in practice.
31
Yammarino, Francis J, Eduardo Salas, Andra Serban, Kristie Shirreffs, Marissa L Shuffler. 2012. “Collectivistic leadership approaches: Putting the ‘we’ in leadership science and practice.” Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 5 (4), pp.382–402.
32
Yin, R.K. 2014. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Applied Social Research Methods. SAGE Publications.
33
Zander, L., & Butler, C. L. 2010. Leadership modes: Success strategies for multicultural teams. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 26(3), pp. 258–267.
34
افتاده، ج. 1395. تحلیل شبکههای اجتماعی، نشر ثانیه.
35
بحری، ع. 1396. گزارش خلاصه فعالیتهای صورت گرفته در پروژه طراحی و ساخت توربین بادی ملی 2 مگاواتی، مرکز توسعه فناوری توربینهای بادی، پژوهشگاه نیرو.
36
تید، ج. و بسنت، ج.، 1391. مدیریت نوآوری: یکپارچهسازی تغییرات تکنولوژیکی، بازار و سازمان، ترجمه، آراستی و همکاران، جلد اول، تهران: رسا.
37
حقیقی، م. آراستی، م. سیفالدین، ا. 1395. سبک رهبری دوگانه در شبکههای نوآوری: ارائه یک چارچوب نظری. چهاردهمین کنفرانس بینالمللی مدیریت.
38
صفدری رنجبر، ر. رحمان سرشت، ح. منطقی، م. قاضی نوری، س.، ۱۳۹۵. پیشرانهای کسب و ایجاد قابلیتهای فناورانه ساخت محصولات و سامانههای پیچیده در بنگاههای متاخر: مطالعه موردی شرکت توربوکمپرسور نفت (OTC). دوره 5، شماره 3، صص. 1-26.
39
طباطبائیان، ح. بامداد صوفی، ج. تقوا، م. اسدی فرد، ر.، 1390. گونهشناسی ساختارهای مدیریتی شبکههای رسمی همکاری علم و فناوری در ایران: مطالعه چندموردی. فصلنامه علمی-پژوهشی سیاست علم و فناوری. سال سوم. شماره 3. صص. 61-78.
40
محمدی، م. حمیدی، م. محمودی، ب. جوادی، س. ۱۳۹۳. شناسایی، تحلیل و دستهبندی عوامل مؤثر بر شکلگیری شبکههای نوآوری در شرکتهای دانشبنیان (مطالعه موردی پارک علم و فناوری دانشگاه تهران)، فصلنامه علمی-پژوهشی مدیریت نوآوری. دوره 3. شماره 4. صص. 1-24.
41
نیلفروشان، هـ. و آراستی، م. 1392. فرآیند شکست ضعیف شبکههای نوآوری مهندسیشده در مرحله راهاندازی: مطالعه موردی صنعت گاز ایران. فصلنامه علمی-پژوهشی سیاست علم و فناوری، سال ششم. شماره 2. صص 113-77.
42
هرسینی، ا. و حقیقی، م. 1387. گزارش وضعیت انرژی بادی در ایران. سازمان انرژیهای نو ایران (سانا). دفتر مهندسی.
43
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Meta synthesis of factors influencing strengthening the relationships among the members of S&T collaborative networks from the perspective of social capital theory
A major indicator of networks’ success is developing stable relationships and collaboration among the members. In fact, collaboration is the key to successful performance of members and the entire network. However, collaboration among the members of a network is a complex phenomenon requiring a comprehensive approach. A theory that can explain the relationships among the members of a network is Social Capital Theory. This research aims to develop a framework to analyze the relationships among the members of the formal collaborative networks of science and technology through the lens of Social Capital Theory. Using systematic review, 44 valid documents retrieved from WOS database, were selected, reviewed and codified using meta-synthesis approach. In the synthesis process, three main dimensions of relational, cognitive and structural and 24 sub-dimensions were revealed.
https://www.nowavari.ir/article_97005_c59adfec55a7096cecc308eb52a78d95.pdf
2019-11-22
23
52
Collaboration networks
Relationships among members
Social Capital
Science and Technology
Fatemeh
Saghafi
fsaghafi@ut.ac.ir
1
Associate Professor, Department of Industrial Management, Faculty of management, University of Tehran
LEAD_AUTHOR
ُSeyyedhamed
Mazarei
hamedmazarei@gmail.com
2
Tehran university
AUTHOR
Mohammad
Khansari
m.khansari@fnst.ut.ac.ir
3
Tehran university
AUTHOR
Hannane
Mohammadi Kangarani
kangarani@ut.ac.ir
4
Hormozgan University
AUTHOR
Reza
Asadifard
reza_asadifard@tsi.ir
5
Technology Studies Institute
AUTHOR
ABRAMS, L. C., CROSS, R., LESSER, E. & LEVIN, D. Z. 2003. Nurturing interpersonal trust in knowledge-sharing networks. Academy of Management Perspectives, Volume (17), pp. 64-77.
1
ADLER, P. S. & KWON, S.-W. 2002. Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of management review, Volume (27), pp. 17-40.
2
AHUJA, G. 2000. Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative science quarterly, Volume (45), pp. 425-455.
3
ANNEN, K. 2003. Social capital, inclusive networks, and economic performance. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Volume (50), pp. 449-463.
4
ARAGóN, C., ARANGUREN, M. J., ITURRIOZ, C. & WILSON, J. R. 2014. A social capital approach for network policy learning: the case of an established cluster initiative. European Urban and Regional Studies, Volume (21), pp. 128-145.
5
ARORA, A. & GAMBARDELLA, A. 1994. Evaluating technological information and utilizing it: Scientific knowledge, technological capability, and external linkages in biotechnology. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Volume (24), pp. 91-114.
6
ASHTON, W. 2008. Understanding the organization of industrial ecosystems: A social network approach. Journal of Industrial Ecology, Volume (12), pp. 34-51.
7
BARZEL, Y. 2002. A theory of the state: economic rights, legal rights, and the scope of the state, Cambridge University Press.
8
BELL, G. G. & ZAHEER, A. 2007. Geography, networks, and knowledge flow. Organization Science, Volume (18), pp. 955-972.
9
BOSCHMA, R. A. & TER WAL, A. L. 2007. Knowledge networks and innovative performance in an industrial district: the case of a footwear district in the South of Italy. Industry and Innovation, Volume (14), pp. 177-199.
10
BOURDIEU, P. 2011. The forms of capital. 1986. Cultural theory: An anthology, Volume (1), pp. 81-93.
11
BUCHEL, B. & RAUB, S. 2002. Building knowledge-creating value networks. European Management Journal, Volume (20), pp. 587-596.
12
BURT, R. S. 1992. Structural hole. Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA.
13
CANTU, C. 2010. Exploring the role of spatial relationships to transform knowledge in a business idea—Beyond a geographic proximity. Industrial Marketing Management, Volume (39), pp. 887-897.
14
CHANG, S.-H. 2017. The technology networks and development trends of university-industry collaborative patents. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Volume (118), pp. 107-113.
15
CHASSAGNON, V. 2014. Consummate cooperation in the network-firm: Theoretical insights and empirical findings. European Management Journal, Volume (32), pp. 260-274.
16
CHEN, H. & CHEN, T.-J. 2002. Asymmetric strategic alliances: A network view. Journal of Business Research, Volume (55), pp. 1007-1013.
17
CHEN, M. H., CHANG, Y. C. & HUNG, S. C. 2008. Social capital and creativity in R&D project teams. R&d Management, Volume (38), pp. 21-34.
18
COHEN, S. S. & FIELDS, G. 1999. Social capital and capital gains in Silicon Valley. California management review, Volume (41), pp. 108-130.
19
COLEMAN, J. S. 1988. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American journal of sociology, Volume (94), pp. 95-120.
20
COOK, J. & WALL, T. 1980. New work attitude measures of trust, organizational commitment and personal need non-fulfilment. Journal of occupational psychology, Volume (53), pp. 39-52.
21
DALY, H. & COBB, J. 1989. For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy toward Community, the Environment, and a Sustainable Future, Boston, Beacon Press.
22
DE SOUSA, A. G., BRAGA, M. J. & MEYER, L. F. 2015. Impact of cooperation on the R&D activities of Brazilian firms. Procedia Economics and Finance, Volume (24), pp. 172-181.
23
DHANARAJ, C. & PARKHE, A. 2006. Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of management review, Volume (31), pp. 659-669.
24
DíEZ-VIAL, I. & MONTORO-SáNCHEZ, Á. 2014. Social capital as a driver of local knowledge exchange: A social network analysis. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Volume (31), pp. 276-288.
25
DU CHATENIER, E., VERSTEGEN, J. A., BIEMANS, H. J., MULDER, M. & OMTA, O. 2009. The challenges of collaborative knowledge creation in open innovation teams. Human Resource Development Review, Volume (8), pp. 350-381.
26
EDELMAN, L. F., BRESNEN, M., NEWELL, S., SCARBROUGH, H. & SWAN, J. 2004. The benefits and pitfalls of social capital: Empirical evidence from two organizations in the United Kingdom. British Journal of Management, Volume (15), pp. 59-69.
27
EKLINDER-FRICK, J., ERIKSSON, L.-T. & HALLEN, L. 2011. Bridging and bonding forms of social capital in a regional strategic network. Industrial Marketing Management, Volume (40), pp. 994-1003.
28
FAERMAN, S. R., MCCAFFREY, D. P. & SLYKE, D. M. V. 2001. Understanding interorganizational cooperation: Public-private collaboration in regulating financial market innovation. Organization Science, Volume (12), pp. 372-388.
29
FILIERI, R., MCNALLY, R. C., O’DWYER, M. & O’MALLEY, L. 2014. Structural social capital evolution and knowledge transfer: Evidence from an Irish pharmaceutical network. Industrial Marketing Management, Volume (43), pp. 429-440.
30
FINFGELD, D. L. 2003. Metasynthesis: The state of the art—so far. Qualitative health research, Volume (13), pp. 893-904.
31
FISCHER, M. M. & VARGA, A. 2002. Technological innovation and interfirm cooperation. An exploratory analysis using survey data from manufacturing firms in the metropolitan region of Vienna.
32
FLORA, J. L., SHARP, J., FLORA, C. & NEWLON, B. 1997. Entrepreneurial social infrastructure and locally initiated economic development in the nonmetropolitan United States. The Sociological Quarterly, Volume (38), pp. 623-645.
33
GABBAY, S. M. & ZUCKERMAN, E. W. 1998. Social capital and opportunity in corporate R&D: The contingent effect of contact density on mobility expectations. Social Science Research, Volume (27), pp. 189-217.
34
GIULIANI, E. & BELL, M. 2005. The micro-determinants of meso-level learning and innovation: evidence from a Chilean wine cluster. Research policy, Volume (34), pp. 47-68.
35
GRANOVETTER, M. 1973. The Strength of Weak Ties. The American Journal of Sociology, Volume (78), pp. 1360-1380.
36
GRANOVETTER, M. 1985. Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American journal of sociology, Volume (91), pp. 481-510.
37
GRANOVETTER, M. 1992. Problems of Explanation in Economic Sociology. Network and Organizations: Structure, Form and Action. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
38
GULATI, R. 1995. Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choice in alliances. Academy of management journal, Volume (38), pp. 85-112.
39
GULATI, R. & GARGIULO, M. 1999. Where do interorganizational networks come from? American journal of sociology, Volume (104), pp. 1439-1493.
40
GULATI, R. & WESTPHAL, J. D. 1999. Cooperative or controlling? The effects of CEO-board relations and the content of interlocks on the formation of joint ventures. Administrative science quarterly, Volume (44), pp. 473-506.
41
HAGEDOORN, J., ROIJAKKERS, N. & VAN KRANENBURG, H. 2006. Inter-Firm R&D Networks: the Importance of Strategic Network Capabilities for High-Tech Partnership Formation 1. British Journal of Management, Volume (17), pp. 39-53.
42
HAN, J. H., LEE, J. D. & YOON, B. S. 2008. An empirical study on the network properties of innovation in clusters: The social capital aspect. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, Volume (16), pp. 47-66.
43
HARRISON, A. & RODRíGUEZ-CLARE, A. 2010. Trade, foreign investment, and industrial policy for developing countries. Handbook of development economics. Elsevier.
44
HE, J. & FALLAH, M. H. 2009. Is inventor network structure a predictor of cluster evolution? Technological forecasting and social change, Volume (76), pp. 91-106.
45
HITT, M. A. & DUANE, R. 2002. The essence of strategic leadership: Managing human and social capital. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, Volume (9), pp. 3-14.
46
INGRAM, P. & ROBERTS, P. W. 2000. Friendships among competitors in the Sydney hotel industry. American journal of sociology, Volume (106), pp. 387-423.
47
INKPEN, A. C. & TSANG, E. W. 2005. Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer. Academy of management review, Volume (30), pp. 146-165.
48
KANDORI, M. 1992. Social norms and community enforcement. The Review of Economic Studies, Volume (59), pp. 63-80.
49
KNACK, S. & KEEFER, P. 1997. Does social capital have an economic payoff? A cross-country investigation. The Quarterly journal of economics, Volume (112), pp. 1251-1288.
50
KNOKE, D. 2009. Playing well together: Creating corporate social capital in strategic alliance networks. American Behavioral Scientist, Volume (52), pp. 1690-1708.
51
KRACKHARDT, D. 2014. A preliminary look at accuracy in egonets. Contemporary Perspectives on Organizational Social Networks. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
52
LA ROCCA, A. & SNEHOTA, I. 2014. Relating in business networks: Innovation in practice. Industrial Marketing Management, Volume (43), pp. 441-447.
53
LANDIS, J. R. & KOCH, G. G. 1977. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. biometrics, pp. 159-174.
54
LAWSHE, C. H. 1975. A quantitative approach to content validity 1. Personnel psychology, Volume (28), pp. 563-575.
55
LEANA III, C. R. & VAN BUREN, H. J. 1999. Organizational social capital and employment practices. Academy of management review, Volume (24), pp. 538-555.
56
LEFEBVRE, V. M., SORENSON, D., HENCHION, M. & GELLYNCK, X. 2016. Social capital and knowledge sharing performance of learning networks. International Journal of Information Management, Volume (36), pp. 570-579.
57
LIAO, J. & WELSCH, H. 2003. Social capital and entrepreneurial growth aspiration: a comparison of technology-and non-technology-based nascent entrepreneurs. The Journal of high technology management research, Volume (14), pp. 149-170.
58
LIN, N. 2001. Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action, Cambridge University Press.
59
LIN, N., ENSEL, W. M. & VAUGHN, J. C. 1981. Social resources and strength of ties: Structural factors in occupational status attainment. American sociological review, pp. 393-405.
60
LOPEZ, A. 2008. Determinants of R&D cooperation: Evidence from Spanish manufacturing firms. International Journal of Industrial Organization, Volume (26), pp. 113-136.
61
MANDARANO, L. A. 2009. Social network analysis of social capital in collaborative planning. Society and natural resources, Volume (22), pp. 245-260.
62
MARSDEN, P. V. 1987. Core discussion networks of Americans. American sociological review, pp. 122-131.
63
MASKELL, P. 2001. Towards a knowledge-based theory of the geographical cluster. Industrial and corporate change, Volume (10), pp. 921-943.
64
MCEVILY, B. & ZAHEER, A. 1999. Bridging ties: A source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic management journal, Volume (20), pp. 1133-1156.
65
MIOTTI, L. & SACHWALD, F. 2003. Co-operative R&D: why and with whom?: An integrated framework of analysis. Research policy, Volume (32), pp. 1481-1499.
66
MOLINA-MORALES, F. X. & MARTíNEZ-FERNáNDEZ, M. T. 2010. Social networks: effects of social capital on firm innovation. Journal of Small Business Management, Volume (48), pp. 258-279.
67
MORAN, P. 2005. Structural vs. relational embeddedness: Social capital and managerial performance. Strategic management journal, Volume (26), pp. 1129-1151.
68
MORGAN, K. 2004. The exaggerated death of geography: learning, proximity and territorial innovation systems. Journal of economic geography, Volume (4), pp. 3-21.
69
MUSIOLIK, J. 2012. Innovation system building: on the role of actors, networks and resources. The case of stationary fuel cells in Germany, Utrecht University.
70
NAHAPIET, J. & GHOSHAL, S. 1998. Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage. The Academy of Management Review, Volume (23), pp. 242-266.
71
NARDONE, G., SISTO, R. & LOPOLITO, A. 2010. Social Capital in the LEADER Initiative: a methodological approach. Journal of Rural Studies, Volume (26), pp. 63-72.
72
OECD 2008. Policy Brief November, Open Innovation in Global Networks.
73
OUCHI, W. G. 1980. Markets, bureaucracies, and clans. Administrative science quarterly, pp. 129-141.
74
PORTES, A. & SENSENBRENNER, J. 1993. Embeddedness and immigration: Notes on the social determinants of economic action. American journal of sociology, Volume () 98, pp. 1320-1350.
75
PUTNAM, R. D. 1995. Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of democracy, Volume (6), pp. 65-78.
76
PUTNAM, R. D. 2000. Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of american community, New York, Simon & schuster.
77
RING, P. S. & VAN DE VEN, A. H. 1994. Developmental processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Academy of Management Review, Volume (19), pp. 90-118.
78
ROSENKOPF, L., METIU, A. & GEORGE, V. P. 2001. From the bottom up? Technical committee activity and alliance formation. Administrative Science Quarterly, Volume (46), pp. 748-772.
79
ROWLEY, T., BEHRENS, D. & KRACKHARDT, D. 2000. Redundant governance structures: An analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic management journal, Volume (21), pp. 369-386.
80
RUTTEN, R. 2004. Inter-firm knowledge creation: A re-appreciation of embeddedness from a relational perspective. European Planning Studies, Volume (12), pp. 659-673.
81
RUTTEN, R. & BOEKEMA, F. 2007. Regional social capital: Embeddedness, innovation networks and regional economic development. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Volume (74), pp. 1834-1846.
82
SANDELOWSKI, M. & BARROSO, J. 2003. Classifying the findings in qualitative studies. Qualitative health research, Volume (13), pp. 905-923.
83
SANDELOWSKI, M. & BARROSO, J. 2006. Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research, Springer Publishing Company.
84
SITKIN, S. B. & ROTH, N. L. 1993. Explaining the limited effectiveness of legalistic “remedies” for trust/distrust. Organization science, Volume (4), pp. 367-392.
85
SNEHOTA, I. & HAKANSSON, H. 1995. Developing relationships in business networks, Routledge London.
86
SOETANTO, D. P. & VAN GEENHUIZEN, M. 2010. Social capital through networks: the case of university spin-off firms in different stages. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie, Volume (101), pp. 509-520.
87
STRAUSS, A. & CORBIN, J. 1990. Basics of qualitative research, Sage publications.
88
SVENDSEN, G. T. & SVENDSEN, G. L. H. 2009. Handbook of social capital: the Troika of sociology, political science and economics, Edward Elgar Publishing.
89
TAGLIAVENTI, M. R., BERTOLOTTI, F. & MACRì, D. M. 2010. A perspective on practice in interunit knowledge sharing. European Management Journal, Volume (28), pp. 331-345.
90
TEECE, D. J., PISANO, G. & SHUEN, A. 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, Volume (18), pp. 509-533.
91
TER WAL, A. L. & BOSCHMA, R. A. 2009. Applying social network analysis in economic geography: framing some key analytic issues. The Annals of Regional Science, Volume (43), pp. 739-756.
92
TROTTER, R. T., BRIODY, E. K., SENGIR, G. H. & MEERWARTH, T. L. 2008. The Life Cycle of Collaborative Partnerships: evolution of structure and roles in industry university research networks. Analysis of Transitivity and Reciprocity in Online Distance Learning Networks.
93
TSAI, W. & GHOSHAL, S. 1998. Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of management Journal, Volume (41), pp. 464-476.
94
UYARRA, E. & RAMLOGAN, R. 2012. The effects of cluster policy on innovation. Compendium of Evidence on the Effectiveness of Innovation Policy Intervention, Manchester Institute of Innovation Research.
95
UZZI, B. 1997. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative science quarterly, pp. 35-67.
96
WALKER, G., KOGUT, B. & SHAN, W. 2000. Social capital, structural holes and the formation of an industry network. Knowledge and social capital. Elsevier.
97
WESTERN, J., STIMSON, R., BAUM, S. & VAN GELLECUM, Y. 2005. Measuring community strength and social capital. Regional studies, Volume (39), pp. 1095-1109.
98
WOOLCOCK, M. & NARAYAN, D. 2000. Social capital: Implications for development theory, research, and policy. The world bank research observer, Volume (15), pp. 225-249.
99
ZHENG, W. 2010. A social capital perspective of innovation from individuals to nations: where is empirical literature directing us? International Journal of Management Reviews, Volume (12), pp. 151-183.
100
ZIMMER, L. 2007. Qualitative meta-synthesis: a question of dialoguing with texts. Journal of advanced nursing, Volume (53), pp. 311-318.
101
الوانی، م. و سیدنقوی، م. 1381. سرمایه اجتماعی: مفاهیم و نظریهها. مطالعات مدیریت بهبود و تحول، 9، صص 26-9.
102
الهی، ش. خالدی، آ. مجیدپور، م. و اسدیفرد، ر. 1397. چارچوب تحلیلی زیستبوم همکاریهای فناورانه بین شرکتهای بزرگ و شرکتهای کوچک فناوری محور. مدیریت نوآوری، 7، صص 1-32.
103
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
A Model For The Development Of Iran's Space Technological Capabilities
Access to space and exploitation from it is achieved through space technological capabilities. The implementation of the first decade space program, the announcement of a comprehensive aerospace development plan and space achievements, represent the country's empowerment in this strategic field. While space development patterns of developing countries are based on learning and technology transfer, but due to the country's specific circumstances, the model of space technologies development and pace capability building does not match them. The unit of scale is aerospace sector and its period before the Islamic Revolution until now. The type of research is applied in order to develop knowledge and in the action aspect is mixed method. After documentary studies and exploratory interviews, qualitative data were collected and analyzed by content analysis and coding. In a quantitative section, a questionnaire was used and descriptive and inferential statistical methods were used.In addition to defining the developmental stages and growth of space capabilities , 61 factors were identified in the form of eight technological capability components Monitoring and paying attention to these factors in the current state of affairs that the spatial sector faces many challenges at the policy level, prioritizing and allocating resources to advance spatial plans can accelerate the acquisition and development of the required technological capabilities.
https://www.nowavari.ir/article_97003_c620f25c00f1b51ff17281e97cb892d9.pdf
2019-11-22
53
75
Technological Capabilities
aerospace development plan
Space Development
Shapor
Keramat
keramat@ut.ac.ir
1
INSA
LEAD_AUTHOR
Manouchehr
Manteghi
manteghi@guest.ut.ac.ir
2
Malek-Ashtar University of Technology
AUTHOR
Ahmad
JafarNejad
3
Tehran University
AUTHOR
Aguirre, M. A., 2013. Introduction to Space Systems: Design and Synthesis.1st ed. New York: Springer-Verlag.
1
Bell, M. & Pavitt, K., 1995. The Development of Technological Capabilities. In: R. M. N. Bell & Irfan-Ul-Haque, eds. Trade, Technology, and International Competitiveness. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank, pp. 69-101.
2
Choung, J.-Y. & Hwang, H. R., 2007. Developing the complex system in Korea: the case study of TDX andCDMA telecom system. International Journal of Technological Learning, Innovation and Development, 1(2), pp. 204-225.
3
Christensen, I. S. & Fuller, J., 2010. National Space Technology Capability Base Index. California, AIAA SPACE 2010 Conference & Exposition.
4
Cohen, W. M. & Levinthal, D. A., 1990. Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, Volume (35), pp. 128-152.
5
Dahlman, C. J. & Nelson, R., 1995. Social Absorption Capability, National Innovation Systems and Economic Development. In: B. H. Koo & D. H. Perkins, eds. Social Capability and Long-Term Economic Growth. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 82-122.
6
Dutrénit, G., 2007. The Transition from Building-up Innovative Technological Capabilities to Leadership by Latecomer Firms. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 15(2), pp. 125-149.
7
Edquist, C., 1997. Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations. 1st ed. London: Routledge .
8
Fortescue, P., Swinerd, G. & Stark, J., 2011. Spacecraft Systems Engineering. 4th ed. New Jersey: Wiley.
9
Furman, J. L., Porter, M. E. & Stern, S., 2002. The determinants of national innovative capacity. Research Policy , 31(6), pp. 899-933.
10
Futron, 2009. Space Competitiveness Index (SCI) 2009, Maryland: Futron Corporation.
11
Harding, R. C., 2012. Space Policy in Developing Countries: The Search for Security and Development on the Final Frontier. 1st ed. Abingdon: Routledge.
12
Kim, L., 1997. Imitation to Innovation: the Dynamics of Korea’s Technological Learning. Brighton, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.
13
Kim, L., 1999. Building Technological Capability for Industrialization: Analytical Frameworks and Korea’s Experience. Industrial and Corporate Change, 8(1), pp. 111-136.
14
Lall, S., 1992. Technological Capabilities and Industrialization. World Development, 20(2), pp. 165-186.
15
Lee, M. L. a. S., 2016. Evaluating Internal Technological Capabilities in Energy Companies. energies, p. 145.
16
Leloglu, U. M. & Kocaoǧlan, E., 2008. Establishing space industry in developing countries: Opportunities and difficulties. Advances in Space Research, 42(11), pp. 1879-1886.
17
Lundvall, B.-Å., 1992. National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London: Pinter Publishers.
18
Marcelle, G., 2005. Technological Learning: A Strategic Imperative for Firms in the Developing World,. 1st ed. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar .
19
Ortega, M. J. R., 2010. Competitive Strategies and firm performance : technological capabilities moderating roles. Journal of Business Research, 63(12), pp. 1273-1281.
20
Paikowsky, D., 2009. The space club: space politics and policies. Daejeon, 60th International Astronautical Congress, Korea.
21
Parker, S. P., 2002. McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Terms. 6th ed. New York City: McGraw-Hill Education.
22
Rush, H. et al., 2014. The evolution and use of a policy and research tool: Assessing the technological capabilities of firms. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 26(3), p. 353–365.
23
Shyjith, K., Ilangkumaran, M. & Kumanan, S., 2008. Multi-criteria decision-making approach to evaluate optimum maintenance strategy in textile industry. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 14(4), pp. 375-386.
24
Tarikhi, P., 2014. The Iranian Space Endeavor: Ambitions and Reality. 1st ed. New york: Springer.
25
Wang, Y., Lo, H., Zhang, . Q. & Xue, . Y., 2006. How technological capability influences business performance: An integrated framework based on the contingency approach. Journal of Technology Management in China, 1(1), pp. 27-52.
26
Wilden, R. & Gudergan, S. P., 2014. The impact of dynamic capabilities on operational marketing and technological capabilities: investigating the role of environmental turbulence. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(2), pp. 181-199.
27
Wood and Weigel, 2012. A Framework for Evaluating National Space Activity. Acta Astronautica, Volume (73), pp. 221-226.
28
Wood, D. & Weigel, A., 2009. A Framework for Evaluating National Space Activity. California, AIAA SPACE 2009 Conference & Exposition.
29
Wood, D. & Weigel, A., 2011. Building technological Capability within satellite program in Developing Countries. Acta Astronautica, 69(11-12), pp. 1110-1122.
30
سازمان فضایی ایران، 1391. سند جامع توسعه هوافضای کشور در 1404، تهران: شورای عالی انقلاب فرهنگی.
31
صفدری رنجبر، م.، رحمان سرشت، ح.، منطقی، م. و قاضی نوری، س. س.، 1395. پیشرانهای کسب و ایجاد قابلیتهای فناورانه ساخت محصولات و سامانههای پیچیده در بنگاههای متأخر: مطالعه موردی شرکت توربوکمپرسور نفت (OTC). مدیریت نوآوری، (3)5، صص 1-26.
32
طباطبائیان، س. ح. ا. و نقیزاده، م.، 1391. الگوی بهبود توانمندیهای فناورانه در بنگاههای دانشبنیان تأمینکننده تجهیزات الکترونیک پلیس بر پایه الگوی توانمندیهای پویا. فصلنامه مطالعات مدیریت انتظامی، (2)7، صص159-177.
33
طهماسبی، س. و غیره، 1395. مراحل شکلگیری و توسعه قابلیتهای فناورانه؛ مطالعه یک سازمان صنعتی صنایع دریایی. سیاست علم و فناوری، (4) 7، صص19-34.
34
گرنت، ر. ا.، 1393. تحلیل استراتژی در عصر حاضر. 1 تدوین تهران: مؤسســه رســا.
35
نقیزاده، م. و غیره، 1392. تأثیر گرایش به بازار و ادراک مدیران بنگاهها از پویایی محیط بر ارتقای توانمندی فناورانه در بنگاههای بخش اویونیک ایران. فصلنامه مدیریت توسعه فناوری، (1)1، صص9-36.
36
یاوری، ا.، 1395. چالشهای ملی و نقش فضا در آن. تهران: انتشارات موسسه آموزشی تحقیقاتی صنایع دفاعی.
37
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Designing the Ambidextrous Innovation Model;A Study In A Defense Holding Company
One of the main concerns of achieving an ambidextrous organization, is the determining of ambidextrous innovation features. In fact, finding the appropriate response which ones are the components and features of innovation in each of corporate strategic management approaches, forms the main purpose of designing and explaining the ambidextrous innovation in this research. In this study, structural equation modeling was used to design and explain the interactive model of this study while conducting library studies and using expert opinions. Accordingly, the model of ambidextrous innovation was shown in the 4 key components of Sectional, continuous, Revolutionary and Interactive innovation and 12 observed variables. The results of applying the proposed methodology in a Defense Holding firm are indicative of fit and acceptable validity of graphic relationships in the interactive model of this study.
https://www.nowavari.ir/article_96994_f7947b6dc483e6ec6c063b2d392e4571.pdf
2019-11-22
77
98
Innovation
Ambidexterity
Ambidextrous Innovation
structural equation modeling
mehdi
akbari
akbari.mehdi@gmail.com
1
Ph.D. Student in Business Management, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran.
LEAD_AUTHOR
Mohammad Taghi
Amini
m_amini@pnu.ac.ir
2
Associate Prof., Faculty of Management, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran.
AUTHOR
Mohammad
Mahmoudi Meimand
drmahmoudim@yahoo.com
3
Associate Prof., Faculty of Management, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran.
AUTHOR
Mahmoud
Moradi
m.moradi@guilan.ac.ir
4
Assistant Prof., Faculty of Human Sciences, Guilan University, Rasht, Iran
AUTHOR
Baum, J. A., Li, S. X., & Usher, J. M. 2000. Making the next move: How experiential and vicarious learning shape the locations of chains’ acquisitions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(4), pp. 766–801.
1
Beckman, C. M., Haunschild, P. R., & Phillips, D. J. 2004. Friends or strangers? Firm-specific uncertainty, market uncertainty, and network partner selection. Organization science, 15(3), pp. 259–275.
2
Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. 2003. Exploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited. Academy of Management Review. 28(2), pp. 238–256.
3
Cantarello, S., Martini, A., & Nosella, A. 2012. A Multi- Level Model for Organizational Ambidexterity: In the Search Phase of the Innovation Process. Creativity And Innovation Management. 21(1). pp. 21-48.
4
Chen, Y. 2016. Dynamic Ambidexterity: How Innovators Manage Exploration and Exploitation. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network.
5
Duncan, R. B. 1976. The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation. The management of organization, Volume (1), pp. 167–188.
6
Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. 2004. The antecedents, consequences and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), pp. 209–226.
7
Hill, S. A., & Birkinshaw, J. 2014. Ambidexterity and survival in corporate venture units. Journal of management, 40(7), pp. 1899–1931.
8
Huang, P.-W. 2010. Why and How to be Ambidextrous? The Relationship between Environmental Factors, Innovation Strategy and Organizational Capabilities. School of Management, I-Shou University.
9
Junni, P., Sarala, R. M., Tarba, S. Y., Liu, Y., & Cooper, C. L. 2015. Guest Editors’ Introduction: The Role of Human Resources and Organizational Factors in Ambidexterity. Human Resource Management, 54(S1), pp. 1-28.
10
O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. 2004. The ambidextrous organization. Harvard business review, 82(4), pp. 74–81.
11
O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. 2011. Organizational ambidexterity in action: How managers explore and exploit. California Management Review, 53(4), pp. 5–22.
12
Phene, A., Tallman, S., & Almeida, P. 2012. When do acquisitions facilitate technological exploration and exploitation? Journal of Management, 38(3), pp. 753–783.
13
Reeves, M., Haanaes, K., & Sinha, J. 2016. Your Strategy Needs a Strategy: How to Choose and Execute the Right Approach (Unabridged edition). Audible Studios on Brilliance Audio.
14
Rosenkopf, L., & Nerkar, A. 2001. Beyond local search: boundary-spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry. Strategic Management Journal, 22(4), pp. 287–306.
15
Safiih, M., & Azreen, N. 2016. Confirmatory Factor Analysis Approach: A Case Study of Mathematics Students’ Achievement in TIMSS. Malaysian Journal of Mathematical Sciences, Volume (10), pp. 41-51.
16
Smith, W. K., & Tushman, M. L. 2005. Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation. Organization science, 16(5), pp. 522–536.
17
Simsek, Z., Heavey, C., Veiga, J. F., Souder, D. 2009. A typology for aligning organizational ambidexterity’s conceptualizations, antecedents, and outcomes. Journal of Management Studies, 46(5), pp. 864–894.
18
Turner, N., Swart, J., & Maylor, H. 2013. Mechanisms for Managing Ambidexterity: A Review and Research Agenda: Mechanisms for Managing Ambidexterity. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(3), pp. 317–332.
19
Tushman, M. L., & O’Reilly III, C. A. 1996. Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California management review, 38(4), pp. 8–29.
20
Wang, C. L., & Rafiq, M. 2014. Ambidextrous organizational culture, contextual ambidexterity and new product innovation: a comparative study of UK and Chinese high-tech firms. British Journal of Management, 25(1), pp. 58–76.
21
Yaghtin, A., & Salehi, F. 2014. Enterprise factors as ambidexterity antecedents: contingency model for ambidextrous organizations. Journal of Global Strategic Management, 2(8), pp.46–46.
22
آذر، عادل. غلامزاده، رسول. قنواتی، مهدی. 1391. مدلسازی مسیری- ساختاری در مدیریت: کاربرد نرمافزار Smart PLS. تهران: انتشارات نگاه دانش.
23
اکبری، محسن. 1394. بررسی تأثیر رهبری راهبردی بر مزیتهای رقابتی با میانجیگری دوسوتوانی نوآوری. فصلنامه پژوهشنامه بازرگانی، (1)91، صص. 104-81.
24
اکبری، محسن. ابراهیم پور، مصطفی. هوشمند، میلاد. 1394. بررسی تأثیر گرایش به کارآفرینی و دوسوتوانی نوآوری بر عملکرد صادراتی محصول جدید با تعدیلگری شدت نوآوری محصول در صنعت خودروسازی. فصلنامه علمی - پژوهشی مدیریت نوآوری، (4)4، صص. 81-106.
25
داناییفرد، حسن. الوانی، مهدی. آذر، عادل. 1392. روششناسی پژوهش کمی در مدیریت: رویکردی جامع. چاپ هشتم. تهران: انتشارات صفار.
26
دراکر، پ. 1999. چالشهای مدیریت در سده 21. ترجمه عبدالرضا رضایینژاد. 1384. چاپ سوم. تهران: انتشارات فرا.
27
دهقانی، حسین. اخوان، پیمان. حسینی سرخوش، سیدمهدی. 1392. افزایش موفقیت توسعه محصول جدید مبتنی بر رویکرد نوآوری باز. فصلنامه علمی - پژوهشی مدیریت نوآوری، (2)2، صص. 45-68.
28
طاهری عطار، غزاله. رستم لو، رضا. 1397. بررسی تأثیر کارکردهای مدیریت منابع انسانی بر خلاقیت و نوآوری در محصول و فرایند. فصلنامه علمی - پژوهشی مدیریت نوآوری، (2)7، صص. 47-68.
29
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
The Effect of Corporate Governance on the Innovative Efforts of Companies in the Tehran Stock Exchange
After corporate financial scandals such as Enron, Vantel and ... corporate governance matters, and attracted the attention of the researchers. In this study, the relationship between corporate governance and innovation Efforts in the companies active in the Tehran Stock Exchange (304 companies) has been investigated. This paper attempts to identify the dimensions and indicators of corporate governance, and then the most important factors affecting enterprise innovation are extracted, and indicators such as reliance on disclosed reports and the timeliness of reported disclosures, in other Studies have not been observed. The audited financial statements from 1391 to 1396 analyzed using the data panel method. The results show that the board of directors' education, choice of CEO from within or outside the company and the premium of the board of directors have a positive and significant effect on firm innovation, but the amount of payment for the right of the board of directors, the ability to rely on disclosed reports and the number of years of activity of the firm has a negative effect on the firm's innovation. CEO's education, the outsider board of directors, the ownership concentration and the timeliness of the disclosures by the company have no significant effect on the firm's innovation
https://www.nowavari.ir/article_96996_b5bec6e77887c04207d924150fd5a24e.pdf
2019-11-22
99
126
Corporate Governance
Innovative efforts
Tehran Stock Exchange
mehdi
elyasi
elyasimail@gmail.com
1
Allameh Tabataba'i University
AUTHOR
Hossein
Mirzaei Azandaryani
mirzaeiahossein@gmail.com
2
Phd Student in Management of Technology at Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
seyed yahya
hasas yegane
hassasyegane.atu@gmail.com
3
Allameh Tabataba'i University
AUTHOR
soroush
ghazinoori
ghazinoori@gmail.com
4
Allameh Tabataba'i University
AUTHOR
Aghion, P. and Howitt, P., 2006. Appropriate growth policy: a unifying framework. Journal of the european Economic Association, 4(2-3), pp. 269-314.
1
Amine, B.M. and Fatima, B., 2014. Corporate Governance and Agri-Food Innovation: Empirical Study of Algeria’s Beverage Sector, pp. 86-92.
2
Barbieri, L., Piva, M. and Vivarelli, M., 2016. R&D, Embodied Technological Change and Employment: Evidence from Italian Microdata.
3
Bhagat, S., Bolton, B. and Romano, R., 2008. The promise and peril of corporate governance indices. Colum. L. Rev., Volume (108), p.1803.
4
Bhasin, M., 2009. Corporate Governance Rating Systems: A powerful tool of accountability. The Chartered Secretary, ICSI, pp. 21-28.
5
Belloc, F., 2012. Corporate governance and innovation: A survey. Journal of Economic Surveys, 26(5), pp. 835-864.
6
Bianchini, S., Krafft, J., Quatraro, F. and Ravix, J.L., 2017. Corporate governance and innovation: does firm age matter?. Industrial and Corporate Change, 27(2), pp. 349-370.
7
Bobillo, A.M., Rodríguez-Sanz, J.A. and Tejerina-Gaite, F., 2018. Corporate governance drivers of firm innovation capacity. Review of International Economics, 26 (3), pp. 721-741.
8
CMB., 2005.corporate governance principles capital markets board of turkey.
9
Chesbrough, H., 2011. Open services innovation: Rethinking your business to grow and compete in a new era. John Wiley & Sons.
10
Corporate Governance Scorecards, International Finance Corporate., 2014. www.ifc.org/ corporategovernance.
11
CRISIL Corporate Governance and Value Creation Rating., 2014.http://www.crisil.com/ratings/crisil-gvc-ratings.html
12
Deschamps, J.P. and Nelson, B., 2014. Innovation governance: How top management organizes and mobilizes for innovation. John Wiley & Sons.
13
Djokić, Danila. Duh, Mojca., 2016. Corporate Governance Quality in Selected Transition Managing Global Transitions, 14(4).
14
Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D.C. and Nelson, R.R. eds., 2005. The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford University Press.
15
Godin, B., 2010. Innovation Studies: The Invention of a Specialty (Part I). in Project on the Intellectual History of Innovation, Canada.
16
GMI Rating., 2013. www.gmiratings.com,
17
Global Innovation Index., 2018.
18
Institutional Shareholder Services., 2017. ISS Corporate Governance: Quality Score Overview and Updates.
19
India Ratings & Research ., 2016. Evaluating Corporate Governance, www.indiaratings.co.in
20
Integrity AGR Model: Measuring Accounting and Governance Risks in Public Companies., 2005. http://www.auditintegrity.com/documents/Audit_Integrity_AGR_White_Paper.pdf;
21
JCR_VIS., 2017. Corporate Governance Ratings, www.jcrvis.com.pk
22
La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A. and Vishny, R., 2000. Investor protection and corporate governance. Journal of financial economics, 58 (1-2), pp. 3-27.
23
Koh, Ping-Sheng. Reeb, David M. Sojli. Elvira, Tham. Wing Wah., 2016.Measuring Innovation Around the World”, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
24
Lee, M., 2016.Impact of corporate governance on research & development investment in the pharmaceutical industry in South Korea. Osong Public Health and Research Perspectives.
25
Lodh, S., Nandy, M. and Chen, J., 2014. Innovation and Family Ownership: Empirical Evidence from India. Corporate governance: An international review, 22 (1), pp. 4-23.
26
Nilsson, A., 2013. Innovation Proxy-A study of patent and economic growth in China.
27
OECD., 1996. Government and Technical Innovation, Paris.
28
Acosta-Prado, J.C., Longo-Somoza, M. and Lozano, M.B., 2017. Does family ownership affect innovation activity? A focus on the biotechnological industry. Innovar, 27(65), pp. 11-23.
29
Robeson, Daniel, O’Connor, Gina., 2007. The governance of innovation centers in large established companies, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management. pp.121–147
30
SAHA Corporate Governance Rating Report., 2018.
31
Shapiro, Daniel . Tang, Yao . Wang, Miaojun . Zhang, Weiying., 2014.The Effects of Corporate Governance on the Innovation Performance of Chinese SMEs Article in Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies ·
32
Standard & Poor’s Corporate Governance Scores., 2004. Criteria, Methodology
33
Steger, U., & Amann, W., 2008. Corporate Governance: How to Add Value, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
34
The Corporate Library Corporate Rating., 2008. ww.thecorporatelibrary.com /UserFiles/ Board_Analyst0907 (1).
35
Tseng, Chun-Yao. & Wu, Zong-Jhe . & Lin, Chun-Yi., 2013.Corporate Governance and Innovation Ability: Empirical Study of Taiwanese Electronics Manufactures, International Business Research, 6(7).
36
Valencia, V.S., 2018. Corporate Governance and CEO Innovation. Atlantic Economic Journal, 46 (1), pp. 43-58.
37
Xanthakis, M., Tsipouri, L. and Spanos, L., 2006. The construction of a corporate governance rating system for a small open capital market: Methodology and applications in the Greek market. Τhe IUP Journal of Corporate Governance and University of Athens Economics Working Paper.
38
Yangfan, T.A.N.G., 2015. Ownership Concentration and Innovation: Empirical Examination from China (Doctoral dissertation, Hong Kong Baptist University Hong Kong).
39
اسمیتز، راد ; کوهلمان، استفان و شپیرا، فیلیپ. ترجمه قاضی نوری، سید سروش و آزادگان مهر، ماندانا.، 1393. سیاست نوآوری در تئوری و عمل، انتشارات دارخوین.
40
تید، جو و بسنت، جان. ترجمه آراستی، محمد رضا و باقری، سید کامران و رستمی، مرضیه و ملکیفر، سیاوش و نوری، جواد.، 1391. مدیریت نوآوری، انتشارات رسا.
41
حساسیگانه، یحیی.، 1383.حاکمیت شرکتی و نقش آن در توسعه بازار سرمایه، حاکمیت شرکتی، سرودهای نو برای هزارهای نو، کنفرانس ملی بازار سرمایه موتور محرک توسعه اقتصادی ایران.
42
حساسیگانه، یحیی.، 1384.سیستم های حاکمیت شرکتی، حسابدار، سال بیست، شماره169، صص42-71.
43
حساسیگانه، یحیی.، 1385.مبانی نظری حاکمیت شرکتی، حسابدار، سال 20، شماره168، صص10-57.
44
ریاحی، پریسا.، قاضی نوری، سیدسپهر.، 1392. مقدمهای بر نظام نوآوری (رویکردی گسترده). مرکز نشر دانشگاهی.
45
سلیمی، حسین.، 1390. مدلی برای رتبهبندی حاکمیت شرکتی در ایران، پایان نامه مقطع دکتری، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری.
46
شیلینگ، ملیسا، ترجمه اعرابی، سید محمد و تقی زاده مطلق، محمد.، 1395. مدیریت استراتژیک نوآوری تکنولوژیک، انتشارات دفتر پژوهشهای فرهنگی، چاپ چهارم.
47
کالینز، جیم، ترجمه سپهرپور، ناهید.، 1383. از خوب به عالی انتشارات پیک آوین.
48
مشایخی، بیتا و شاکری، مهین.، 1396.راهبری شرکتی مفاهیم و مورد کاوی، انتشارات بورس.
49
مک گراو، توماس. ترجمه سوزنچی کاشانی، ابراهیم. عطار پور، محمد رضا. خوش سیرت، محسن. فاطمی، علی و فرتاش، کیارش.، 1398. آموزگار نوآوری شومپیتر و تخریب خلاقانه، انتشارات دنیای اقتصاد.
50
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Comparative Conceptualisation of ‘Public Procurement for Capability Building’ (PPCB) In Relation to Public Procurement for Innovation (PPI): A Step Towards Implementation of Iranian Technology Annex
Considering the failure of local content policies (LCPs) in Iran and many developing countries, ‘Public procurement for innovation’ (PPI) as a trending demand-side innovation policy could provide a new theoretical basis for implementation of Technology Annex in the country. However, developing countries are of specificities compared with advanced economies, from which lack of technological capabilities of suppliers has a pivotal role in technological catch-up. The present paper suggests the new concept ‘public procurement for capability building’ (PPCB) based on the technology transfer projects of ten strategic groups of high-tech products based on the evidences of the case of Ten Strategic Equipment Groups in the oil industry of Iran, which is in fact an extension to PPI concept. The suggested concept puts building suppliers’ capabilities as the main goal of the policy. The study showed various commonalities between these two policies, including needs for organisational changes in public procurers, risk management, utilising innovation (knowledge) intermediaries, and legal adjustment. However, two critical distinctions were conceptualised for PPCB, including 1) capability building as the main goal of the policy, and 2) establishment of a dual-track evaluation system which monitors and evaluates both the suppliers’ capabilities and the procured products.
https://www.nowavari.ir/article_96998_fd92d8cb603c464ef1fe148b4331eac4.pdf
2019-11-22
127
154
Public Procurement for Capability Building (PPCB)
Public Procurement for Innovation (PPI)
Iranian Technology Annex
Technological Capabilities of Suppliers
Local Content Policies
Najmoddin
Yazdi
najmoddin.yazdi@sharif.edu
1
1- Researcher at The research Institute for Science, Technology and Industry Policy (RISTIP); Sharif University of Technology
2- PhD student of Science and Technology Policy, Iran University of Science and Technology (IUST)
AUTHOR
Abdollah
Jassbi
jassbi@iust.ac.ir
2
Faculty member at Industrial Engineering Department, Iran University of Science and Technology (IUST), Tehran, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Ali
Maleki
a.maleki@sharif.edu
3
Assistant professor at The research Institute for Science, Technology and Industry Policy (RISTIP); Sharif University of Technology;
AUTHOR
Ali
Bonyadi Naeini
bonyadi.naeini@gmail.com
4
Faculty member of Progress Department, Iran University of Science and Technology (IUST)
AUTHOR
Bell, M., 2007. Technological learning and the development of production and innovative capacities in the industry and infrastructure sectors of the Least Developed Countries: What roles for ODA. UNCTAD Division for Africa, Least Developed Countries Specialised Programme, Brighton, Science Policy research.
1
Bell, M. and Figueiredo, P.N., 2012. Building innovative capabilities in latecomer emerging market firms: some key issues. Innovative firms in emerging market countries, pp.24–109.
2
Buchinger, E., Schiefer, A., 2017. Monitoring & measurement of innovation procurement in Austria, Policy note, Austrian Institute of Technology (AIT), Vienna.
3
Cohen, W.M., Levinthal, D.A., 1989. Innovation and learning: the two faces of R & D. The Economic Journal, 99(397), pp.569–596.
4
Dumay, J., 2011. Intellectual capital and strategy development: an interventionist approach. Vine, 41(4), pp.449–465.
5
Dumay, J., 2009. Reflective discourse about intellectual capital: research and practice. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 10(4), pp.489-503.
6
Edler, J., 2016a. Local needs, global challenges: The meaning of demand-side policies for innovation and development. In Global Innovation Index, pp.97-102.
7
Edler, J., 2016b. The impact of policy measures to stimulate private demand for innovation. In Handbook of innovation policy impact, p.318.
8
Edler, J., 2010. Demand-oriented innovation policy. In The theory and practice of innovation policy: An international research handbook, Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, pp.177-208.
9
Edler, J., Cunningham, P. and Gök, A. eds., 2016. Handbook of innovation policy impact. Edward Elgar Publishing.
10
Edler, J. and Georghiou, L., 2007. Public procurement and innovation—Resurrecting the demand side. Research Policy, 36(7), pp.949-963.
11
Edler, J., Georghiou, L., Blind, K. and Uyarra, E., 2012. Evaluating the demand side: New challenges for evaluation. Research Evaluation, 21(1), pp.33-47.
12
Edler, J. and Yeow, J., 2016. Connecting demand and supply: The role of intermediation in public procurement of innovation. Research Policy, 45(2), pp.414-426.
13
Edquist, C., 2011. Design of innovation policy through diagnostic analysis: identification of systemic problems (or failures). Industrial and Corporate Change, 20(6), pp.1725-1753.
14
Edquist, C. and Hommen, L., 2000. Public technology procurement and innovation theory. In Public technology procurement and innovation (pp. 5-70). Springer, Boston, MA.
15
Edquist, C. and Hommen, L., 1999. Systems of innovation: theory and policy for the demand side. Technology in Society, 21(1), pp.63-79.
16
Edquist, C., Vonortas, N.S., Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J.M. and Edler, J., 2015. Public procurement for innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing.
17
European Commission (EU Com), 2007. A lead market initiative for Europe.
18
Hagerstrand, T., 1952. The propagation of innovation waves.
19
Hausmann, R. and Rodrik, D., 2003. Economic development as self-discovery. Journal of Development Economics, 72(2), pp.603-633.
20
Héder, M., 2017. From NASA to EU: The evolution of the TRL scale in Public Sector Innovation. The Innovation Journal, 22(2), pp.1-23.
21
Helfat, C.E. and Peteraf, M.A., 2003. The dynamic resource-based view: Capability lifecycles. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), pp.997-1010.
22
Izsak, K. and Edler, J., 2011. Trends and challenges in demand-side innovation policies in Europe. Thematic Report.
23
Jassbi, A., Maleki, A., Bonyadi, A. and Yazdi, N., 2017. Intermediation in public procurement of innovation for technology transfer purposes. Presented at the 14th Asialics conference & the 7th International Conference on Management of Technology and Innovation, Tehran.
24
Kiamehr, M., Hobday, M. and Kermanshah, A., 2013. Latecomer systems integration capability in complex capital goods: the case of Iran’s electricity generation systems. Industrial and Corporate Change, 23(3), pp.689-716.
25
Lee, K., 2013. Capability failure and industrial policy to move beyond the middle-income trap: from trade-based to technology-based specialization. In The industrial policy revolution, I (pp. 244-272). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
26
Lee, K. and Malerba, F., 2018. Economic catch-up by latecomers as an evolutionary process. In Modern evolutionary economics: An overview, pp.172-207.
27
Lember, V., Kattel, R. and Kalvet, T. eds., 2013. Public procurement, innovation and policy: International perspectives. Springer Science & Business Media.
28
Maleki, A. and Yazdi, N., 2018a. Public procurement for capability building (PPCB) for economic catch-up, The 17th International Schumpeter Society Conference (ISS 2018), Seoul.
29
Maleki, A. and Yazdi, N., 2018b. Incorporating experiential knowledge into academic science for a new meaning of citizen science (CS), presented at The Workshop of “Anthropocene and Citizen Science: Evidence Gained through the Opening-up of Academic Knowledge Production”, The Kerschensteiner Kolleg of the Deutsches Museum, Munich.
30
Malerba, F., Mani, S. and Adams, P. eds., 2017. The rise to market leadership: New leading firms from emerging countries. Edward Elgar Publishing.
31
Malerba, F., Nelson, R.R., Orsenigo, L. and Winter, S.G., 2016. Innovation and the evolution of industries: History-friendly models. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
32
Mowery, D. and Rosenberg, N., 1979. The influence of market demand upon innovation: a critical review of some recent empirical studies. Research Policy, 8(2), pp.102-153.
33
Neij, L., 2001. Methods of evaluating market transformation programmes: experience in Sweden. Energy Policy, 29(1), 67–79.
34
Noori, J., Yazdi, N. and Mohsennia, S., 2017. How public procurement of innovation (PPI) in developed world could inform technology transfer in developing countries, Presented at the 3rd International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP3), Singapore.
35
Obwegeser, N. and Müller, S.D., 2018. Innovation and public procurement: Terminology, concepts, and applications. Technovation, Volume (74), pp.1-17.
36
OECD, 2017. Public Procurement for innovation: Good practices and strategies. OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris.
37
Pollard, D., 2006. Innovation and technology transfer intermediaries: A systemic international study. In Innovation through collaboration (pp. 137-174). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
38
Roberts, H., Westin, O. and Dumay, J.C., 2010. A critical reflective discourse of an interventionist research project. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 7(1), pp.46-70.
39
Rodrik, D., 2008. One economics, many recipes: Globalization, institutions, and economic growth. Princeton University Press.
40
Rodrik, D., 2004. Industrial policy for the twenty-first century. KSG Working Paper No. RWP04-047.
41
Rogers, E.M., 1962. Diffusion of innovations. The Free Press, New York.
42
Rolfstam, M., 2009. Public procurement as an innovation policy tool: The role of institutions. Science and Public Policy, 36(5), pp.349–360.
43
Rush, H., Bessant, J. and Hobday, M., 2007. Assessing the technological capabilities of firms: developing a policy tool. R&D Management, 37(3), pp.221-236.
44
Teece, D.J., 2012. Dynamic capabilities: Routines versus entrepreneurial action. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), pp.1395-1401.
45
Teece, D.J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A., 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), pp.509-533.
46
Trindade, P.C., Antunes, P. and Partidário, P., 2017. SPP toolbox: Supporting sustainable public procurement in the context of socio-technical transitions. Sustainability, 10(1), pp.1-26.
47
Tsipouri, L., Edler, J., Rolfstam, M. and Uyarra, E., 2010. Risk management in the procurement of innovation: Concepts and empirical evidence in the European Union. Paris.
48
Uyarra, E., 2016. The impact of public procurement of innovation, In Handbook of innovation policy impact. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp. 355–587.
49
Uyarra, E., Edler, J., Garcia-Estevez, J., Georghiou, L. and Yeow, J., 2014. Barriers to innovation through public procurement: A supplier perspective. Technovation, 34(10), pp.631–645.
50
Uyarra, E., Moñux, D., Li, Y., Esteban, A., Rigby, J., Ospina, M.J. and Edler, J., 2016. Spurring innovation-led growth in Latin America and the Caribbean through public procurement, Discussion Paper No. IDB-DP-488, Inter-American Development Bank.
51
Van Seggelen, G.G., 2016. The role of innovation intermediaries in the public procurement for innovation process: The case of the Dutch satellite data service sector. Master of Science in Innovation Management and Innovation Sciences. Eindhoven University of Technology.
52
Viotti, E.B., 2002. National learning systems: A new approach on technological change in late industrializing economies and evidences from the cases of Brazil and South Korea. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 69(7), pp.653-680.
53
Von Hippel, E., 1986. Lead users: a source of novel product concepts. Management science, 32(7), pp.791–805.
54
Yeow, J., Rigby, J. and Li, Y., 2017. The effect of a government target for the procurement of innovation: the case of the UK’s small business research initiative. In Global Public Procurement Theories and Practices (pp. 113-135). Springer, Cham.
55
محسنی کیاسری، م.، محمدی، م.، جعفرنژاد، ا.، مختازاده، ن. و اسدیفرد ر.، 1396. دستهبندی ابزارهای سیاست نوآوری تقاضامحور با استفاده از رویکرد فراترکیب، مدیریت نوآوری، (2)6، ص. 109-138.
56
ملکی، ع. و یزدی، ن.، 1396. بازتعریف سیاستهای خرید دولتی بهمنظور ارتقاء یادگیری و نوآوری، اولین کنفرانس حکمرانی و سیاستگذاری عمومی، تهران.
57
یزدی، ن.، 1394. فناورانه و نوآورانه کردن خریدهای دولتی، سیاستنامه علم و فناوری، (1)5، ص. 27-39.
58