تدوین فهرست محصولات دانش‌بنیان با استفاده از روش نظریه بنیادی و مقایسه آن با مفهوم قابلیت‌های پویا

نویسندگان

1 پژوهشگر پژوهشکده سیاست گذاری علم، فناوری و صنعت دانشگاه صنعتی شریف، تهران

2 عضو هیأت‌علمی پژوهشکده مطالعات فناوری ریاست‌جمهوری، تهران

چکیده

به اعتقاد اندیشمندان، تولید کالا و خدمات دانش‌بنیان یکی از ملزومات تحقق اقتصاد دانش‌محور است. امروزه حمایت از این‌گونه فعالیت‌های اقتصادی به یکی از دغدغه‌های جدی دولت‌ها تبدیل شده است. حرکت اساسی این جریان در ایران از سال 89 و با تصویب قانون حمایت از شرکت‌ها و مؤسسات دانش‌بنیان آغاز شد. اما گام اول در این مسیر، شناسایی محصولات دانش‌بنیان است و تاکنون مدل‌هایی نیز به این منظور ارائه شده اما بکارگیری آنها با موانعی همراه بوده است. این مدل‌ها عمدتاً صنایع را تقسیم‌بندی کرده‌اند در حالی که واحد تحلیل در قانون مذکور، محصولات و خدمات است. در این پژوهش تلاش شده به روش نظریه بنیادی کلاسیک، شاخص‌هایی برای شناسایی محصولات و خدمات دانش‌بنیان ارائه شود. 26 نفر از خبرگان در یک نمونه‌گیری قضاوتی هدفمند مورد مصاحبه قرار گرفته‌اند و سپس، کدها و مفاهیم به دست آمده تحلیل و در قالب معیارهای شش‌گانه شناسایی محصولات و خدمات دانش‌بنیان نظم یافته‌اند. در گام بعد هم این نتایج با مفهوم قابلیت‌های پویا مقایسه شده و نظریه نهایی ارائه گردیده است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که شناسایی محصولات و خدمات دانش‌بنیان، از طریق بررسی قابلیت‌های پویای همه تولیدکنندگان آنها امکان‌پذیر است. لازم به ذکر است که بر اساس شروط شش‌گانه به دست آمده در این مطالعه، در فرآیند بازنگری آئین‌نامه ارزیابی شرکت‌های دانش‌بنیان (سال 95) معیار "شرط ورود شرکت‌های جدید" با عنوان "شرط قابلیت کپی‌برداری" به متن آئین‌نامه تشخیص صلاحیت شرکت‌ها و مؤسسات دانش‌بنیان اضافه شد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

dor 20.1001.1.20080840.1396.10.2.7.8

عنوان مقاله [English]

Preparing a List of Knowledge-Based Products Using Grounded Theory and Comparing Its Findings with the Concept of Dynamic Capabilities

نویسندگان [English]

  • Seyd Hamzeh Hasani 1
  • Mohammad Sahebkar Khorasani 2
1 Researcher, Research Institute for Science, Technology and Industrial Policy, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Technology Studies Institute (TSI), Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

According to many thinkers, production of knowledge-based products and services comprises an essential component of knowledge economy. So that, supporting such economic activities has become a serious concern to governments. In Iran, this movement was fundamentally started by adopting Knowledge-Based Companies and Institutions Support Act of 2010. However, the first step toward realizing this purpose is to identify knowledge-based products and services. As of now, various methods have been presented for this purpose. Meanwhile, implementation of them has faced particular challenges, because these methods have been mainly based on industrial categorizations. This is while, products and services are regarded as the unit of analysis in related laws of Iran. In the present research, an attempt has been made to present criteria for identifying knowledge-based products and services. Classical grounded theory was used to approach this purpose. On this basis, theoretical sampling was performed via purposive judgment method, wherein 26 experts were interviewed. Then the relationship among the resulted concepts was investigated and organized into six constraints for identifying knowledge-based products and services. Finally, findings of this research were compared to the concept of dynamic capabilities and final theory was presented. The theory indicates that, knowledge-based products and services can be identified through investigating dynamic capabilities of majority of manufacturer of these products. Furthermore, the six constraints obtained in the present research were used in the revision process of the knowledge-based companies evaluation code, which was undertaken in 2016, with the criterion of "new companies entrance constraint" added to the knowledge-based companies and institutions qualification code under the title "imitability".

 

 

 

 

 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Knowledge-Based Products
  • Dynamic Capabilities
  • Technological Dynamics
[1] O’Shea, R. P., Chugh, H., & Allen, T. J. (2008). Determinants and consequences of university spinoff activity: a conceptual framework. The journal of Technology Transfer, 33(6), 653-666.
[2] Vice-Presidency for Science and Technology. (2016). Knowledge-Based Companies Evaluation Code. Retrieved from http://daneshbonyan.isti.ir/index.aspx?fkeyid=&siteid=2&pageid=2994. {In Persian}.
[3] Heidari, A., & Seyed Kalali, N. (2016). Presenting a Model of Competitive Advantage of Management Consulting Firms Based on Dynamic Capability Theory. Journal of Business Management, 28(8), 317-338. {In Persian}.
[4] Li, D.-y., & Liu, J. (2014). Dynamic capabilities, environmental dynamism, and competitive advantage: Evidence from China. Journal of Business Research, 67(1), 2793-2799.
[5] Hamidi Motlagh, R., Sadegh Nia, M., Talebi Eskandari, S., Mohammadi Por, M., & Soozanch-Kashani, E. (2012). Analytical review of export and import statistics of goods and services of knowledge base of the country. Research Institute for Science, Technology and Industrial Policy (Sharif University of Technology). {In Persian}.
[6] Saremi, M., Hossaini, S. M., Mohaghar, A., & Heidari, A. (2009). Proposing a Qualitative Model for Competitive Advantage in High Tech Industries. Journal of Industrial Management, 3(1), 53-68. {In Persian}.
[7] OECD. (2013). Raising the Returns to Innovation: Structural Policies for a Knowledge-based Economy. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/economy/KBC%20Policy%20note.pdf
[8] Walters, B. (2006). IT-enabled strategic management: increasing returns for the organization: increasing returns for the organization: IGI Global.
[9] Bălan, A. (2009). The knowledge management–necessity for the modernization of the organizations. Journal of Applied Economic Science, 4(4), 494-501.
[10] Hassani, S. H., Rafiei, S. H., & Bakhshiani, A. (2016). Investigating the Role of Research and Technology Organizations in National Innovation System (A Case Study of Research Institute of Petroleum Industry in Iran). Journal of Science & Technology Policy, 8(4), 63-76. {In Persian}.
[11] Vice-Presidency for Science and Technology. (2010). The Law of Supporting Knowledge-Based Corporations and Institutes and the commercialization of innovations and inventions. Retrieved from http://daneshbonyan.isti.ir/index.aspx?siteid=2&pageid=146. {In Persian}.
[12] Khyatyan, M. S., Tabatabaeian, S. H., Amiri, M., & Eliasi, M. (2015). Content Analysis of Knowledge-Based Firms Characteristics. Journal of Organizational Resources Managment Research, 18(5), 21-47. {In Persian}.

[13] United Nations Statistics Division. (2017). Search SITC (Standard International Trade Classification) code description. from Un Trade Statastic http://unstats.un.org/unsd/tradekb/Attachment192.aspx?AttachmentType=1

[14] Eurostat. (2017). Eurostat indicators on High-tech industry and Knowledge – intensive services. Retrieved from
http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/Annexes/htec_esms_an5.pdf
[15] Bell, M., & Pavitt, K. (1997). Technological accumulation and industrial growth: contrasts between developed and developing countries. Technology, globalisation and economic performance, 2(2), 83-137.
[16] Archibugi, D. (2001). Pavitt's taxonomy sixteen years on: a review article. Economics of innovation and new technology, 10(5), 415-425.
[17] Tabatabaeian, S. H., & Farnoodi, S. (2009). The framework and concepts of superior technology. Retrieved from https://goo.gl/LzEG5o. {In Persian}.
[18] Ministry of Industry, Mine and Trade. (2011). Definition of advanced technology industries. Retrieved from https://goo.gl/FZawfN. {In Persian}.
[19] Shenavar, B., Moshiri, B., & Estiri, R. (2012). Comprehensive Report on the Compilation of a List of Knowledge-Based Products. Vice-Presidency for Science and Technology. {In Persian}.
[20] Hassani, S. H. (2016). Developing a Model for Assessing the Level of Technology for Knowledge Based Products. Vice-Presidency for Science and Technology. {In Persian}.
[21] Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management, 17(1), 99-120.
[22] Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strategic management journal, 21, 1105-1121.
[23] Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, 18, 509-533.
[24] Collis, D. J. (1994). Research note: how valuable are organizational capabilities? Strategic management journal, 15(S1), 143-152.
[25] Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic management journal, 24(10), 991-995.
[26] Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic management journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.
[27] Pavlou, P. A., & El Sawy, O. A. (2011). Understanding the elusive black box of dynamic capabilities. Decision Sciences, 42(1), 239-273.
[28] Verona, G., & Ravasi, D. (2003). Unbundling dynamic capabilities: an exploratory study of continuous product innovation. Industrial and corporate change, 12(3), 577-606.
[29] Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization science, 13(3), 339-351.
[30] Helfat, C. E. (1997). Know-how and asset complementarity and dynamic capability accumulation: The case of R&D. Strategic management journal, 18(5), 339-360.
[31] Wang, C. L., & Ahmed, P. K. (2007). Dynamic capabilities: A review and research agenda. International journal of management reviews, 9(1), 31-51.
[32] Danaeifard, H., Alvani, S. M., & Azar, A. (2007). Qualitative research methodology in management: A comprehensive approach. Tehran: Safar-Eshraghi press. {In Persian}.
[33] Sarmad, Z., Bazargan, A., & Hejazi, E. (2016). method of research in behavioral science. Tehran: Agah. {In Persian}.
[34] Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons and evaluative criteria. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 19(6), 418-427.
[35] Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1968). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research (Vol. 17). Transaction publishers.
[36] Dunican, E. (2006). Initial experiences of using grounded theory research in computer programming education. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 18th Workshop of the Psychology of Programming Interest Group.
[37] Goulding, C. (1999). Grounded Theory: some reflections on paradigm, procedures and misconceptions.
[38] Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1999). Naturalistic inquiry. 1985, Beverly Hills.