Explaining the Institution of Creating Common Value in the Ecosystem of Electronics Industries

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Technology Management, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Faculty of Management and Economics, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Numerous studies have been conducted on the position of the mediator in the ecosystem of non-electronic industries. However, there are limited studies on the intermediary of creating common value in the ecosystem of electronics industries. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to explore the dimensions of the value creation mediator in the ecosystem of electronics industries.
The present study was conducted using a qualitative method and a systematic data theory approach. In-depth interviews were conducted with 19 experts in the field of innovation and electronics industry in order to gather information. From the analysis of data on 236 concepts, a total of 186 open source and after analyzing and aggregating the data, 19 sub-categories were obtained and finally 6 main categories were identified and discovered as the dimensions of the mediating entity of creating common value in the ecosystem of electronic industry. These six main categories are the category of "shared value creation institution" as a central phenomenon whose role is the creation and development of common assets, resulting from inter-institutional cooperation and the category of "creative exchange network" as causal conditions that underlie the realization, discovery and development of assets. Includes the category of "cooperation network requirements" as effective conditions for enabling value-creating cooperation between institutions, and the category of "institutional cooperation conflict" as intervening conditions that prevent divergence of inter-institutional cooperation, and the category of "cooperation programs". "Joint" as an action strategy that determines the main way of creating value in inter-institutional cooperation, and finally, the category of "eco-excellence of the electronics industry" as the effects and consequences of that central phenomenon.

Keywords

References

[1] Elyasi, M., & Malekifar, F. STI Policies to Augment Innovation Ecosystems. Journal of Science & Technology Policy. Volume 11, Number 2, Summer 2019.209-220. {In Persian}.
 [2] Camarinha-Matos, L., Afsarmanesh, H., & Ollus, M (2008). Methods and tools for collaborative networked organizations, Springer.
[3] Allee, V. (2008). Value network analysis and value conversion of tangible and intangible assets. Journal of intellectual capital.
[4] Ghazinoory ,S., Afshari-Mofrad , M  ., Elahi ,S  ., & Soltani, B .(2018) . A typology of institutions and strategies for improving their performance; The case of Iran's. national innovation system Public Policy, Volume:4 Issue: 1, 2018. 9 - 35. {In Persian}.
[5] Mohammad-hashemi, z. (2017). The relationship among university, industry and government with emphasis on the role of intermediary institutions )Case Study: Coordination centers of Knowledge, Industry and Markets. Rahyaft Journal، Volume 27, Issue 66, Autumn 2017, Pages 75-88. {In Persian}.
[6] Sadeghi, E., Saadabadi, A., Mazarei, H., & Norouzi, K. (2015). Investigating the role of innovation mediators in the electronics industry. {In Persian}.
[7] Beygi, V., & Alimohammadi, A. (2015). Identification Of Factors impacting The Failure Of Science Collaboration And Innovation Networks: The Pathology Of The Offices Of Mediator Institution. jornal of Tecnology Development Management. Volume 3, Issue 3 ,Autum 2015. 81-104. {In Persian}.
[8] Karimmian, Z., Mohammadi, M., Zolfagharzadeh, M., & Ghazinoory, S. S. (2019). Historical Evolution in STI Policy-making in Iran: a Network Governance Approach. Journal of Improvement Management. Vol. 13, No. 2, Summer 2019 (Serial 44).98-129. {In Persian}.
[9] Lotchi, K., Kwegyir-Afful, E., Zafar, A., Sivula, A., & Kantola, J. (2020). Intermediary Organization and Collaboration Platform for SMEs. 10.1007/978-3-030-20154-8_11.
[10] Howard, P. (2007). The Role of Intermediaries in Support of Innovation. Report prepare for the Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources, Australia. April 2007.
[11] Germundsson, L. B., Augustinsson, S., & Lidén, A. (2020). Collaboration in the Making—Towards a Practice-Based Approach to University Innovation Intermediary Organisations. Sustainability. 12. 5142. 10.3390/su12125142.
[ 12] Kage, M., Drewel, M., Gausemeier, j., & Schneider, M. (2016). Value Network Design for Innovations: Developing Alternative Value Network Drafts. Technology Innovation Management Review 6(7): 21-33.
[13] Sherer, S., & Adams, B. (2001). Collaborative Commerce: The Role of Intermediaries in e-Collaboration Collaborative Commerce: The Role of Intermediaries in e-Collaboration. J. Electron. Commerce Res.. 2. 66-77.
[14] Albats, E., Fiegenbaum, I., & Alexander, A. (2016). Innovation intermediaries in university-industry collaboration: analysis of the online platforms.
[15] Thomas, E., Balestrin, A., & Howells, J. (2014). The Role of Intermediaries in Open Innovation: Developing a Model for Collaborative R&D. 10.5465/AMBPP.2014.14428abstract.
[16] Metcalfe, J. S.  (1995). Technology systems and technology policy in an evolutionary framework. Cambridge Journal of Economics, pp. 25-46
 [17] Faraskhah, M. (2015). Qualitative research method in social sciences with emphasis on theory based (Grounded Theory-GTM). Agah Publishing {In Persian}.
 [18] Salar, A., Ahmadi. F., & Navipour, H. (2015). Concerns about Ward Management or Self-protection: The Paradox of Ward Management by Head Nurses. Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences 25(123): 54-64. {In Persian}.
[19] Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2014). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage publications.
[20] Kheirgo, M. (2012). Designing a model to explain transfer of change policies in administrative system to public management of Iran: combinatorial exploration. Tehran: Trabiat Modares University Press. {In Persian}.
[21] Gilgun, J. F. (2005). Qualitative research and family psychology. Journal of family psychology 19(1): 40.
[22] Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. Handbook of qualitative research 2(163-194): 105.
 [23] Ghazinoory, S. S., & Ghazinoori, S. S. (2012). Introduction to Science, Technology and Innovation Policy. Tarbiat Modares University Press, First Edition. {In Persian}.
 [24] Smits, R., & Kuhlmann, S. (2004). The rise of systems instruments in innovation policy. Internatnal journal of Forecasting and Innovation policy ,1(1). 4-3
[25] Noruzi, E.,  Tabatabaeian , H., &  Ghazinoori, S. S. (2016). Assessing the Effect of Intermediary Institutions in Addressing the Weaknesses of the NIS Functions of Iran. Journal of Science & Technology Policy, Volume:8 Issue: 1, 2016.15
[26] Dion, M. (2009). Corporate crime and the dysfunction of value networks. Journal of Financial Crime: 436-445.
[27] Stewart, J., & Hyysalo, S. (2008). Intermediaries, users and social learning in technological innovation. International Journal of Innovation Management, 12(03), 295-325.
[28] Dalziel, M. (2009). Why do innovation intermediaries exist. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Conference. August, Chicago, Il. p 4.
[29] Klerkx, L., & Leeuwis, C. (2009). Establishment and embedding of innovation brokers at different innovation system levels: Insights from the Dutch agricultural sector. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(6), 849-860.
[30] Asadifard, R., Tabatabaeian, S. H., Soofi. J. B., & Taghva, M. R. (2012). Life cycle of science and technology cooperation networks Rahneghasht 50(1):37-48. {In Persian}.
[31] Tabatabaeian H., Soofi. J. B., Taghva, M. R., & Asadifard, R. (2010). Structural Typology of the Formal S&T Collaborative Networks in Iran: A Multiple-case Study. Jouranl Of Science and Technology Policy. Volme 3. 2010. 61-78
[32] Ghazinoory, S., & Ghazinoori, S. (2008). Extracting strategies for modification of the national innovation system of Iran based on a comparative study. Jouranl of Science and Technology Policy. Volme 3. 61-78 {In Persian}.
 [33] Johnson, W. H. (2008). Roles, resources and benefits of intermediate organizations supporting triple helix collaborative R&D: The case of Precarn. Technovation, 28(8), 495-505.
 

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics