تاثیر ابعاد فناوری برتر بر عملکرد بازار محصولات جدید

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 هیأت علمی دانشگاه صنعتی مالک اشتر

2 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد مدیریت دانشگاه صنعتی مالک اشتر

چکیده

امروزه صنایع فناوری برتر عامل مزیت رقابتی میان کشورها محسوب می‌شوند و سهم عمده تولید ناخالص داخلی کشورها را تشکیل می‌دهند. هدف از این تحقیق شناخت عوامل تأثیرگذار بر موفقیت توسعه محصول و بررسی ارتباط ساختاری میان آن‌ها در صنایع فناوری برتر است. اگرچه حوزه‌ی نظری این تحقیق گسترده است، ما در این تحقیق به‌دنبال عوامل درون‌سازمانی هستیم که عملکرد بازار نوآوری‌های فناورانه‌ی سازمان‌ها را تحت‌تأثیر قرار می‌دهند و این سؤال را مطرح می‌کنیم که در صنعت فناوری برتر چه عواملی عملکرد بازار محصولات جدید سازمان‌ها را تحت‌تأثیر قرار می‌دهند؟ سؤال این تحقیق،‌ برگرفته از مسئله صنعت است که در جلسات مشترک با مدیران پروژه شکل‌گرفته‌است. برای این کار، با بومی‌سازی آیتم‌ها و متغیرهای تحقیق به‌وسیله انجام مصاحبه با خبرگان صنعت و دسته‌بندی عوامل تأثیرگذار به سه متغیر ویژگی فناوری ‌برتر، توانمندی‌های پویا و ریسک سرمایه‌گذاری، مدل تحقیق در ۵۴ سازمان بررسی شده‌است، سازمان‌هایی که به‌نحوی با فناوری‌های برتر در توسعه محصولات خود سروکار دارند. گزارشات و نتایج بدست آمده از تحلیل‌های رگرسیون PLS نشان می‌دهد که نوع فناوری از نظر برتر بودن به‌شدت بر عملکرد بازار تأثیرگذار است. همچنین مشاهده شد که هر چه میزان پیشرفته‌بودن فناوری افزایش یابد، ریسک سرمایه‌گذاری، توانمندی‌های پویای سازمان نیز به‌شدت افزایش می‌یابند. یافته‌های تحقیق حاکی از آن است که با پیشرفته شدن فناوری، برای رسیدن به عملکرد بالای بازار در توسعه محصولات جدید، سازمان‌ها نیاز به اتخاذ رویکردهای پویا در مدیریت توانمندی‌های خود و ارزیابی ریسک سرمایه‌گذاری دارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Effect of High Technology Factors on Market Performance of NPD

چکیده [English]

Nowadays high tech industries sector play a key role in economic growth of developing and developed countries as a competitive advantage and build dominant share of GDP of these countries. However competition within high tech market has attracted increasingly scholarly attention, it has been shared concern of managers during a NPD project. Although this issue have a broad limitation, in this research we consider organizational factors influencing market performance of high tech NPD. The main question of this research has been extracted from high tech industry concern discussed by some past project manager and standout CEO's. In do so, first of all, we did 8 interview with these managers and then has been test our structural model in 54 organization as sample. These organizations propose a products exploiting high technology somehow. While the analysis of our research was as an Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), we try to use PLS regression to analyze data extracted from the sample. Result obtained of PLS algorithm and Bootstrapping showed that what extent high tech using in products increase, market performance of these organizations increases. This effective path of high tech exists for dynamic capabilities and risk investment variables as well as market performance. However our research propose a structural model of high tech variable as the effective dimensions of high tech on market performance of NPD.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Technological Innovation
  • Success Factors of NPD
  • High Tech Product Feature
  • Dynamic Capabilities
  • PLS Based SEM

-   مومنی, د. م. (۱۳۹۱). مدلسازی معادلات ساختاری با تاکید بر سازه‌های بازتابنده و سازنده. تهران: دانش‌نگار (دانشیران).

-   Ambrosini, V., & Bowman, C. (2009). What are dynamic capabilities and are they a useful construct in strategic management?. International journal of management reviews, 11(1), 29-49. Beard, C., & Easingwood, C. (1996). New Product Launch, Marketing Action and Launch Tactics for High-Technology Products. Industrial Marketing Management, 87-103.

-   Barreto, I. (2010). Dynamic capabilities: A review of past research and an agenda for the future. Journal of management, 36(1), 256-280.

-   Booz, & Allen & Hamilton. (1982). New products management for the 1980s. Booz, Allen & Hamilton.

-   Chin, K.-S., Tang, D.-W., Yang, J.-B., Wong, S. Y., & Wang, H. (2009). Assessing new product development project risk by Bayesian network with a systematic probability generation methodology. Expert Systems with Applications, 9879–9890.

-   Cooper, R. G. (1979). The Dimensions of Industrial New Product Success and Failure. Journal of Marketing, 93-103.

-  Cooper, R. G., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (2000). New Product Performance: What Distinguishes the Star Products. Australian Journal of Management, 17-46.

-  Diamantopoulos, A., & Siguaw, J. A. (2006). Formative Versus Reflective Indicators in Organizational Measure Development: A Comparison and Empirical Illustration. British Journal of Management, Vol. 17, 263–282.

-  DOVLEAC, L. (2011). AN ANALISYS OF CONSUMERS’ EXPENDITURES ON HIGH-TECH PRODUCTS . Transilvania University of Braşov, Series V: Economic Sciences, 93-98.

-  Easingwood, C., Moxey, S., & Capleton, H. (2006). Bringing High Technology to Market: Successful Strategies Employed in the Worldwide Software Industry. JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT, 498–511.

-  Goodhue, D., Lewis, W., & Thompson, R. (2006). PLS, Small Sample Size, and Statistical Power in MIS Research. Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, none of the page.

-  Gupta, J. P., Chevalier, A., & Dutta, S. (2003). Multicriteria model for risk evaluation for venture capital firms in an emerging market context. European Journal of Operational Research, DOI: 10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00094-8, No of Pages 22.

-  Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a Silver Bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, vol. 19, no. 2, 139–151.

-  Hansen, A. Ø., & Andersen, T. J. (2013). EXPLORING THE CORPORATE RISK OUTCOMES OF EFFECTIVE DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES. the 6th International Risk Management Conference (IRMC) (p. no of the pages). Copenhagen, Denmark, June 21-22, 2013: by permission of the authors.

-  Henard, D. H., & Szymanski, D. M. (2001). Why some new products are more successful than others. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research; Aug 2001; 38, 3; ABI/INFORM Global, 362-375.

-   Henseler, J., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). Goodness-of-fit indices for partial least squares path modeling. Comput Stat, 28, via Springerlink.com, 565–580.

-   Henseler, J., Ringleand, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). THE USE OF PARTIAL LEAST SQUARES PATH MODELING IN INTERNATIONAL MARKETING. Advances in International Marketing, Volume 20, 277–319.

-   Hopkins, D. (1980). New Products Winners and Losers. The Conference Board, Report no. 773, New York.

-   Jiao, H., Alon, I., Koo, C. K., & Cui, Y. (2013). When should organizational change be implemented? The moderating effect of environmental dynamism between dynamic capabilities and new venture performance. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, Elsevier, 188-205.

-   Jiang, H., & Ruan, J. (2010). Investment Risks Assessment on High-tech Projects Based on Analytic Hierarchy Process and BP Neural Network . JOURNAL OF NETWORKS, 393-402.

-   Langerak, F., Hultink, E. J., & Robben, H. S. (2004). The Impact of Market Orientation, Product Advantage, and Launch Proficiency on New Product Performance and Organizational Performance. JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT, 79–94.

-   Lee, J., & Slater, J. (2007). Dynamic capabilities, entrepreneurial rent-seeking and the investment development path: The case of Samsung. Journal of International Management, 13, 241–257.

-   Leiponen, A. (1997). Dynamic competences and firm performance (No. ir97006).

-   Liu, C., & Liu, Y. (2014). Investment Value Evaluation of Hi-Tech Industry: Based on Multi-Factor Dynamic Model. Open Journal of Business and Management, 219-226.

-    Liu, P., Zhang, X., & Liu, W. (2010). A risk evaluation method for the high-tech project investment based on high-tech project investment based on. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, No of Pages 11.

-    MORGAN, N. A., VORHIES, D. W., & MASON, C. H. (2009). MARKET ORIENTATION, MARKETING CAPABILITIES, AND FIRM PERFORMANCE. Strategic Management Journal, Published online in Wiley InterScience, 909–920.

-    Moriarty, R. T., & Kosnik, T. J. (1989). High-tech marketing: concepts, continuity, and change. MIT Sloan Management Review, 30(4), 7.

-    Paladino, A. (2007). Investigating the Drivers of Innovation and New Product Success: A Comparison of Strategic Orientations. J PROD INNOV MANAG, 24, 534–553.

-    Polk, R., Plank, R. E., & Reid, D. A. (1996). Technical Risk and New Product Success: An Empirical Test in High Technology Business Markets. Industrial Marketing Management, 531-543.

-    Quivy, R., & Van Campenhoudt, L. (1998). Manual de investigação em ciências sociais.

-    Slater, S. F., Hult, G. T., & Olson, E. M. (2007). On the importance of matching strategic behavior and target market selection to business strategy in high-tech markets. Academy of Marketing Science, 5-17.

-    Sohn, Y. S., & Moon, T. H. (2003). Structural equation model for predicting technology commercialization success index (TCSI). Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 70, 885–899.

-    Teece, D. J. (2014). A dynamic capabilities-based entrepreneurial theory of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 45, 8–37.

-    Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic management journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.

-    Tenenhausa, M., Vinzia, V. E., Chatelin, Y.-M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modeling. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 48, 159-205.

-     Tishler, A., Dvir, D., Shenhar, A., & Lipovetsky, S. (1996). Identifying critical success factors in defense development projects: A multivariate analysis. Technological Forecasting and social change, 51, 151-171.

-     Tsenga, F.-M., Chiub, Y.-J., & Chen, J.-S. (2006). Omega, the International Journal of Management Science, 686–697.

-    Tushman, M., & O'Reilly, C. (2007). Research and relevance: Implications of Pasteur's quadrant for doctoral programs and faculty development. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 769-774.

-    Varian, H. R. (2001). High-Technology Industries and Market Structure. Proceedings - Economic Policy Symposium, 65-101.

-    Viardot, E. (2004). Successful Marketing Strategy for High-Tech Firms. Norwood, MA 02062: ARTECH HOUSE, INC.

-    Wang, C. L. and Ahmed, P. K. (2007), Dynamic capabilities: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9: 31–51. Doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00201.x

-    Wong, K. K. (2013). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Techniques Using SmartPLS. Marketing Bulletin, 24, Technical Note 1, 1-32.

-    Yalcinkaya, G., Calantone, J., R., & Griffith, D. A. (2007). An Examination of Exploration and Exploitation Capabilities: Implications for Product Innovation and Market Performance . Journal of International Marketing, 63-93.

-    Yap, C. M., & E. Souder, W. (1994). Factors Influencing New Product Success and Failure in Small Entrepreneurial High-Technology Electronics Firms. JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT, 418-432.

-   Yoon, E., & Lilien, G. L. (1985). New Industrial Product Performance: The Effects of Market Characteristics and Strategy. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 134-144.

-    ZAKRZEWSKA-BIELAWSKA, A. (2014). High Technology Company – Concept, Nature, Characteristics. International Conference; 8th, Management, marketing and finances; Recent advances in management, marketing, finances, 93-98.

-    Zare Mehrjerdi, Y., & Dehghanbaghi, M. (2013). A Dynamic Risk Analysis on New Product Development Process. Intternattiionall Journall off Industtriiall Engiineeriing & Producttiion Research, 17-35.

-    ZEMLICKIENĖ, V. (2011). ANALYSIS OF HIGH-TECHNOLOGY PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT MODELS. INTELLECTUAL ECONOMICS, 283–297.