تأثیر عوامل نهادی بر عملکرد بازار شرکت‌های مستقر در پارک علم و فناوری با نقش قابلیت‌های دانش و فناوری

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد مدیریت استراتژیک، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ایران

2 دانشیار گروه مدیریت بازرگانی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ایران

3 استادیار گروه مدیریت صنعتی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ایران

10.22034/jbar.2022.11500.2986

چکیده

امروزه تغییرات مداوم محیطی و گستردگی رقابت سبب شده است تا عملکرد بازار برای مدیران شرکت‌ها امری حیاتی باشد. موفقیت سازمان‌ها در این امر تنها محدود به عوامل ملموس نبوده، بلکه عوامل ناملموسی مانند عوامل نهادی و قابلیت‌های سازمانی نیز تأثیرات فراوانی بر عملکرد بازار بنگاه‌های تجاری می‌گذارد لذا شرکت‌های پارک‌های علم و فناوری (به‌ویژه پارک علم و فناوری رشت) می‌توانند با استفاده صحیح از عوامل نهادی و دستیابی به قابلیت دانش و قابلیت فناوری به اهداف خود نائل شوند. این پژوهش باهدف بررسی اثر عوامل نهادی بر عملکرد بازار انجام‌شده است، همچنین بر نقش میانجی قابلیت‌های سازمانی (قابلیت دانش و قابلیت فناوری) نیز تأکید شده است. پژوهش حاضر از نظر هدف پژوهش توصیفی- پیمایشی است. جامعه آماری پژوهش حاضر شرکت‌های مستقر در پارک علم و فناوری رشت را در برمی‌گیرد. بر این اساس نمونه‌ای مشتمل بر 57 شرکت مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. داده‌ها به کمک پرسشنامه‌ای گردآوری شدند و برای تجزیه‌وتحلیل داده‌ها از مدلسازی معادلات ساختاری و تکنیک حداقل مربعات استفاده شده است. مدل پژوهش در دو سطح اول و دوم مورد تجزیه‌وتحلیل قرار گرفته است. نتایج حاصل از پژوهش نشانگر آن است که عوامل نهادی بر ایجاد قابلیت دانش و قابلیت فناوری تأثیر دارد. همچنین قابلیت دانش و قابلیت فناوری نقش میانجی در رابطه بین عوامل نهادی و عملکرد بازار دارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The effect of institutional factors on the market performance of companies located in science and technology parks with a focus of the role of knowledge and technological capabilities

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohammad Hataminezhad 1
  • Mohsen Akbari 2
  • Mostafa Ebrahimpour Azbari 3
1 MSc Student in Strategic Management, Literature and Humanities, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Literature and Humanities, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran
3 Assistant Professor, Literature and Humanities, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran
چکیده [English]

Introduction: Nowadays, the global approach can be clearly seen in the movement of ‎countries towards a "knowledge-based" economy. Knowledge and ‎technology are the main factors in creating wealth in countries and are ‎considered as powerful tools in national development. In this regard, science and technology ‎parks support companies to develop knowledge and technological ‎ideas and commercialize their products. They also span a bridge between academia, industry and government, leading ‎to sustainable growth and development based on competitive advantages at the national level. Companies in these parks can use the norms ‎and values in the environment through institutional factors to ‎improve their performance, increase their market share, retain their current ‎customers, attract new customers and ultimately improve their market ‎performance. Constant environmental changes and the extent of ‎competition have made market performance critical for corporate ‎executives. In this context, there are not only ‎tangible but also intangible factors involved institutional factors and ‎organizational capabilities; these factors have great impacts on the market ‎performance of businesses. Since improving market performance requires ‎effective and stable communication with the institutional environment of the ‎organization, companies in science and technology parks (especially Rasht ‎Science and Technology Park) can make good use of institutional factors ‎‎(i.e., institutional support, political management relations, and legal legitimacy). ‎Knowledge and technological ‎capability are considered as intangible organizational resources to achieve goals. This ‎study was conducted to investigate the effects of institutional factors on ‎market performance, in which the mediating role of organizational ‎capabilities (knowledge capability and technology capability) is also ‎emphasized.‎
Methodology: This research is descriptive in terms of the purpose, a survey in terms of strategies and questionnaire-based in terms of data collection. The study population consisted of companies located in Rasht Science and Technology Park. Cochran's formula was also used to determine the required number of samples. According to this formula and the 67 people in the study population, 57 were finally selected as the sample. Accordingly, after referring to the companies, 57 questionnaires were collected. The questionnaires were designed based on seven Likert options (1 = very low to 7 = very high). As for the characteristics of the respondents in this research, about 66.7% of them were men, 47.4% were bachelors, 36.8% were masters, and 12.3% were doctors. Also, 60.9% of the cases were from 30 to 35 years old.
Results and Discussion: According to the output of the Smart PLS 2 software, in the first model, "institutional support" explains 88%, "management political relations" 39% and "organizational legal legitimacy" 74% of the changes in institutional factors. Institutional factors explain 67% of the changes in knowledge capability and 62% of the changes in technology capability. These relationships are significant at the 95% significance level. At the same time, institutional factors account for 39% of the changes in market performance. Knowledge and technological capability explain 20% and 16% of the changes in market performance. These were confirmed at the significant level of 99.9%. According to the software output in the second model, "institutional support" explains 10% of the changes in market performance, 42% of the changes in knowledge capability, and 46% of the changes in technology capability. "Management political relations" explains 17% of the changes in market performance, 16% of the changes in knowledge capability, and 19% of the changes in technology capability. The legal legitimacy of the organization also explains 36% of the changes in market performance, 34% of the changes in knowledge capability and 17% of the changes in technology capability. At the same time, knowledge capability explains 14% and technology capability 16% of the changes in market performance.
Conclusion: The results show that the development and creation of organizational capabilities has had a great impact on improving the market performance of the companies in the Rasht Science and Technology Park. The research results also showed that institutional factors affect the creation of knowledge and technology capability, so companies must establish proper relationships with the institutional environment and government entities, correctly use this environment and its factors and acquire organizational capabilities. It was found that knowledge and technology have a mediating role in the relationship between institutional factors and market performance.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Market performance
  • institutional factors
  • knowledge capability
  • technology capability
Afonina, A. (2015). Strategic management tools and techniques and organizational performance: Findings from the Czech Republic. Journal of Competitiveness7(3),19-36.
Aghazadeh, H., Esfidani, M., Mohammadi, M., zadbar, H. (2017). Identification and Prioritization of Commercialization Services needed for Technology Units Located at Science and Technology Park of University of Tehran. Innovation Management Journal, 6(4), 137-161. (in Persian)
Albers, J. A. (2009). A practical approach to implementing knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, 10(1), 1-14.‏
Andrews, R., Beynon, M. J., & McDermott, A. M. (2015). Organizational capability in the public sector: a configurational approach. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(2), 239-258.
Asli Beigi, M, Dodanje, S, & Afshar, P. (2017). Orbital Competitor and Customer-Oriented Competitor on Innovation and Market Performance in the Bank Industry (Case Study: Bank of Commerce), Journal of Management Studies and Accounting, 3 (3), 77-94. (in Persian)
Auh, S., & Menguc, B. (2009). Broadening the scope of the resource-based view in marketing: The contingency role of institutional factors. Industrial Marketing Management, 38(7), 757-768.‏
Bojar Dolabi, M, Barkhordari, A., & Bakhshi,S, M. (2016). Investigating the Relationship Between Market Orientation and Organizational Performance Considering the Role of E-Marketing and Market Performance Mediators (Case Study: Mellat Bank Management in Branches 5 of Tehran), Research Journal of the Nations, 1 (6), 24-34. (in Persian)
Brown, E. D., & Ibekwe, E. E. (2018). Effect of Institutional Factors on Foreign Direct Investment in Nigeria. The Economics and Finance Letters5(1), 12-27.
Chengecha, A. M. (2016). Knowledge capability and competitiveness of firms in the banking industry in Kenya. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Nairobi: University of Nairobi.‏
Coombs, J. E., & Bierly III, P. E. (2006). Measuring technological capability and performance. R&D Management, 36(4), 421-438.‏
De Mori, C., Batalha, M. O., & Alfranca, O. (2016). A model for measuring technology capability in the agrifood industry companies. British Food Journal, 118(6), 1422-1461.‏
Deephouse, D. L., Bundy, J., Tost, L. P., & Suchman, M. C. (2017). Organizational legitimacy: Six key questions. The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism4(2), 27-54.‏
Ebrahimpour, M., Nopasand A, S., Ahmadi S, M. (2015). The impact of strategic flexibility on companies' market performance: The Mediating Role of open innovation. Journal of Industrial Technology Development, 13(26), 5-16. (In Persian)
El-Gazzar, R., Hustad, E., & Olsen, D. H. (2017). "An institutional lens on cloud computing adoption – a study of institutional factors and adoption strategies". In Proceedings of the 25th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), 2477-2492.
Elnihewi, I., Fadzil, F. H., & Mohamed, R. (2014). The effect of institutional factors on the organizational performance through performance measures of commercial banks in Libya. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 164, 635-640.‏
Garcia-Perez, A., Cegarra-Navarro, J. G., Bedford, D., Thomas, M., & Wakabayashi, S. (2019). Building Knowledge Capacity Through Knowledge Capabilities. Critical Capabilities and Competencies for Knowledge Organizations (Working Methods for Knowledge Management), 67-92.‏
Gaur, A. S., Kumar, V., & Singh, D. (2014). Institutions, resources, and internationalization of emerging economy firms. Journal of World Business, 49(1), 12-20.‏
Gök, O., & Peker, S. (2017). Understanding the links among innovation performance, market performance and financial performance. Review of Managerial Science11(3), 605-631.‏
Goll, I., Brown Johnson, N., & Rasheed, A. A. (2007). Knowledge capability, strategic change, and firm performance: the moderating role of the environment. Management Decision, 45(2), 161-179.‏
Guo, H, Xu, E, & jacobs, M. (2014). Managerial political ties and firm performance during institutional transitions: An analysis of mediating mechanisms. Journal of Business Research, 67(2), 116-127.
Haji Gholam Saryazdi, A., & Manteghi, M. (2013). Analyzing the impact of the policies of Yazd Science and Technology Park on the development of technology of the institutions located in it using the systemic dynamics approach. Innovation Management, 2 (2), 69-98. (in Persian)
Iran Zadeh, S,& Barghi, A. (2010). Evaluation of Organizational Performance with Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC) (Case Study), Industrial Management Journal, 4 (8), 67-86. (in Persian)
Kianto, A., Hussinki, H., & Vanhala, M. (2018). The Impact of Knowledge Management on the Market Performance of Companies. In Knowledge Management in the Sharing Economy (pp. 189-207). Springer, Cham.‏
Kodama, M. (2018). Service Innovation Through Collaborative Dynamic Capabilities: A Systems Approach. In Collaborative Dynamic Capabilities for Service Innovation (pp. 47-90). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.‏
Kostova, T., & Roth, K. (2002). Adoption of an organizational practice by subsidiaries of multinational corporations: institutional and relational effects. Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 215-233.
Leonidou, L. C., Leonidou, C. N., Fotiadis, T. A., & Zeriti, A. (2013). resources and capabilities as drivers of hotel environmental marketing strategy: implications for competitive advantage and performance. Tourism Management, 35, 94-110.
Mao, H., Liu, S., & Zhang, J. (2015). How the effects of IT and knowledge capability on organizational agility are contingent on environmental uncertainty and information intensity. Information Development, 31(4), 358-382.‏
Martinez-Conesa, I., Soto-Acosta, P., & Carayannis, E. G. (2017). On the path towards open innovation: Assessing the role of knowledge management capability and environmental dynamism in SMEs. Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(3), 553-570.‏
Mubarak, A,. (2011). Investigating the Effects of Institutional Factors on Economic Growth in Islamic Countries, Journal of Audit Knowledge, 10 (1), 73-101.
Nelson, Richard R., (2008).What enables rapid economic progress: What are the needed institutions?, Research Policy.1-11.
Olweny, T. O., & Kimani, D. (2011). Stock market performance and economic growth Empirical Evidence from Kenya using Causality Test Approach. Advances in Management and applied Economics, 1(3), 177-191‏
Oseghale, R. O., Nyuur, R. B., & Debrah, Y. A. (2019). Institutional Factors and High-Performance Work Organization's (HPWOs) in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). In Management Science (pp. 199-218). Springer, Cham.‏
Paytakhti Oskoyi, S. A, Pourkarim, V., & Tabaghchi A, L. (2011). Investigating the Effect of Institutional Factors on Capital Markets Development: Evidence from Iran and the Selected Countries of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Journal of Economic Studies, 2 (4), 1-24. (in Persian)
Poor Serajian, D., Shokoohi, S., Yarahmadi Bafghi, A., & Haji Gholam Sarizadi, A. (2010). Technology Research and Development Center; The Mechanism of the Role of Science and Technology Parks in Technology Management and Development, 4th National Conference on Technology Management, November 17-18, Tehran, Iran. (in Persian)
Rahimnia, F., Kafashpour, A., & Pourreza, M. (2012). Strategic Orientation and Marketing Capabilities. Journal of Strategic Management Studies, 3 (12), 145-166. (in Persian)
Rao, R., Chandy, R., & Prabhu, J. (2008). The fruits of legitimacy: why some new ventures gain more from innovation than others. Journal of Marketing, 72(4), 58-75.
Rasiah, R., & Xiao Shan, Y. (2016). Institutional support, technological capabilities and domestic linkages in the semiconductor industry in Singapore. Asia Pacific Business Review, 22(1), 180-192.‏
Rasiah, R., Shahrivar, R. B., & Yap, X. S. (2016). Institutional support, innovation capabilities and exports: Evidence from the semiconductor industry in Taiwan. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 109(16), 69-75.‏
Richard, P. J.; Devinney, T. M.; Yip, G. S.; Johnson, G. (2009). Measuring organizational performance: towards methodological best practice. Journal of Management, 35(3), 718-804.
Safaei, N., Taleghaninia, F., & Gholamian., F. (2016). Prioritization and Analysis of Effective Criteria in the Performance of Knowledge-Based Organizations with Knowledge Management Approach in Growth Centers and Science and Technology Parks in Tehran, Technology Growth, 15(57), 24-33. (in Persian)
Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests and identities (4th ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Serrano, C., & Karahanna, E. (2016). The compensatory interaction between user capabilities and technology capabilities in influencing task performance: an empirical assessment in telemedicine consultations. Mis Quarterly40(3), 597-621.‏
Shirodkar, V., McGuire, S., & Strange, R. (2020). MNEs, Organizational Legitimacy, and the Need for Non-market Strategies. In Non-market Strategies in International Business (pp. 1-15). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.‏
Simpson, D. (2012). Institutional pressure and waste reduction: The role of investments in waste reduction resources. International Journal of Production Economics, 139(1), 330-339.‏
Torkkeli, M., & Tuominen, M. (2002). The contribution of technology selection to core competencies. International journal of production economics, 77(3), 271-284.‏
Tsai, L. C., Zhang, R., & Zhao, C. (2019). Political connections, network centrality and firm innovation. Finance Research Letters28(16), 180-184.‏
Tutar, H., Nart, S., & Bingöl, D. (2015). The effects of strategic orientations on innovation capabilities and market performance: The case of ASEM. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 207(7), 709-719.‏
Urbano, D., Toledano, N. & Soriano, D. (2010). “Analyzing social entrepreneurship from an institutional perspective: Evidence from Spain”. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 54-69.
Valmohammadi, C., & Ahmadi, M. (2015). The impact of knowledge management practices on organizational performance. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 28(1), 131-159.‏
Yan, J. Z., & Chang, S. J. (2018). The contingent effects of political strategies on firm performance: A political network perspective. Strategic Management Journal39(8), 2152-2177.‏
Zang, J., & Li, Y. (2017). Technology capabilities, marketing capabilities and innovation ambidexterity. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 29(1), 23-37.‏
Zhang, S., Wang, Z., Zhao, X., & Zhang, M. (2017). Effects of institutional support on innovation and performance: roles of dysfunctional competition. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 117(1), 50-67.
Kearns, G. S., & Lederer, A. L. (2003). A resource‐based view of strategic IT alignment: how knowledge sharing creates competitive advantage. Decision sciences34(1), 1-29.