شناسایی شیوه‌های یادگیری فناورانه و عوامل موثر بر آن در شرکت‌های دانش‌بنیان نانوفناوری

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکترا ، گروه مدیریت تکنولوژی، دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.

2 استادیار گروه مدیریت تکنولوژی، دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران

3 دانشیار گروه مدیریت آموزشی، دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

صنایع مبتنی‌بر دانش‌ و فناوری‌های پیشرفته، پایه‌گذار تحولات گسترده‌ای در اقتصادهای صنعتی و نوظهور بوده‌اند. عوامل مختلفی بر این تحولات تاثیر گذارند که یکی از مهم‌ترین عوامل درون بنگاهی، یادگیری‌های فناورانه است. هدف این مقاله، شناسایی شیوه‌های یادگیری فناورانه و عوامل موثر بر آن در شرکت‌های دانش‌بنیان نانوفناوری است. این تحقیق از لحاظ هدف، کاربردی و از منظر نوع داده، تحقیقی کیفی است. شرکت کنندگان، متخصصان فعال در بخش‌های مرتبط با یادگیری فناورانه شرکت‌های دانش‌بنیان نانوفناوری بوده که به روش نمونه‌گیری هدفمند و حجم نمونه بر اساس اصل اشباع نظری، انتخاب شده‌اند. در فرایند تحلیل متون و اسناد، از تحلیل محتوای کیفی جهت‌دار و برای غربال‌گری از دلفی فازی استفاده شده است. نتایج نشان داد شیوه‌های یادگیری فناورانه در این شرکت‌ها، اغلب با آنچه در پیشینه موضوع آورده شده، مشابه است اما تفاوت‌هایی نیز وجود دارد. در یادگیری مبتنی بر علم، ارتقاء بنیان‌های علمی شرکت، تحقیق و توسعه داخلی و فعالیت‌های پژوهشی مشترک، مهم‌ترین شیوه‌های یادگیری فناورانه می‌باشند. در یادگیری مبتنی بر تجربه، ارتباطات فردی کارکنان، تعاملات شرکت با محیط بیرون، تجربه انجام کار، آموزش‌های فنی و مهارتی، کار گروهی و انعطاف‌پذیری سازمانی، از مهم‌ترین شیوه‌های یادگیری هستند. در بخش نوآوری، در کنار نوآوری در محصول، فرایند و فناوری، اخذ تاییدیه‌ها و گواهی‌نامه‌ها یکی از شیوه‌های متفاوت در این شرکت‌ها بوده است. از مهم‌ترین عوامل موثر بر یادگیری فناورانه، می‌توان به فرهنگ یادگیری در بخش پیشران‌های داخلی و محدودیت‌های داخلی و بین‌المللی و ظرفیت‌های قانونی و مداخلات دولت، در بخش پیشران‌های خارجی اشاره کرد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Identifying Technological Learning Modes and Its Effective Factors in Nanotechnology Knowledge-based Companies

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hedayat Samadi Ansari 1
  • Mohammad Reza Razavi 2
  • Parivash Jafari 3
1 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Technology Management, Faculty of Management & Economics, Science & Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
2 Faculty Member, Department of Technology Management, Faculty of Management & Economics, Science & Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Faculty Member, Department of Learning Management, Faculty of Management & Economics, Science & Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

The growth of knowledge-based industries based on new technologies has marked extensive changes in advanced and emerging economies. Various factors inside and outside the company affect this growth. One of the most important factors inside the company, is technological learning. The purpose of this article is to identify technological learning modes and factors affecting them in nanotechnology knowledge-based companies. This research is applied in terms of purpose, and in terms of data type, it is a qualitative research based on a case study. The participants were experts in the various departments of knowledge-based nanotechnology companies, which were selected by purposeful sampling. The sample size was determined based on the principle of theoretical saturation. Qualitative content analysis has been used in the process of analyzing texts and documents. In science-based learning, scientific promotion of the company, internal R&D, and joint research activities have been the most important modes of technological learning. In experience-based learning, the most important learning modes are individual employee communication, company interactions with the outside, work experience, technical and skill training, teamwork, organizational flexibility, and knowledge and experience sharing. The innovation of these learnings also includes product innovation, process and technology innovation, market innovation and obtaining approvals and certificates. Factors affecting technological learning are R&D capability, production capability and learning culture as internal drivers and internal and international restrictions, legal capacities and government interventions, technological changes and competition intensity as external drivers.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Knowledge-Based Companies
  • Innovation
  • Technological Learning Modes
  • Experience-Based Learning
  • Science-Based Learning

مراجع

[1] Lema, R., Rabellotti, R., & Gehl Sampath, P. (2018). Innovation trajectories in developing countries: Co-evolution of global value chains and innovation systems. The European Journal of Development Research, 30, 345-363. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-018-0149-0
[2] Perez, A. J. G., & Hansen, T. (2020). Technology characteristics and catching-up policies: Solar energy technologies in Mexico. Energy for Sustainable Development, 56, 51-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2020.03.003
[3] Pellegrino, J. M., & McNaughton, R. B. (2017). Beyond learning by experience: The use of alternative learning processes by incrementally and rapidly internationalizing SMEs. International business review, 26(4), 614-627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2016.12.003
[4] Lundvall, B. Ä., & Johnson, B. (1994). The learning economy. Journal of industry studies, 1(2), 23-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662719400000002
[5] Lall, S. (1998). Exports of manufactures by developing countries: emerging patterns of trade and location. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 14(2), 54-73. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/14.2.54 
[6] Simpson, B. M., Seidel, R., Byrne, S., Woods, C., Crossan, M. M., & Olivera, F. (2001). Technological learning: Towards an integrated model. In Organizational Learning & Knowledge Management: New Directions: 4th International Conference. https://pure.strath.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/270162/simpsonseidelbyrewoods.pdf
[7] Dosi, G., & Castaldi, C. (2002). Local and divergent patterns of technological learning within (partly) globalized markets: is there anything new? and what can policies do about it?: a concise guide. https://pure.tue.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/3165998/44158775670103.pdf
[8] Matew, N., & Paily, G. (2021). STI-DUI innovation modes and firm performance in the Indian capital goods industry: Do small firms differ from large ones?. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-021-09862-5
[9] Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., & Lee, H. U. (2000). Technological learning, knowledge management, firm growth and performance: an introductory essay. Journal of Engineering and Technology management, 17(3-4), 231-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0923-4748(00)00024-2
[10] Riahi, K., Rubin, E. S., Taylor, M. R., Schrattenholzer, L., & Hounshell, D. (2004). Technological learning for carbon capture and sequestration technologies. Energy economics, 26(4), 539-564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2004.04.024
[11] Smit, T., Junginger, M., & Smits, R. (2007). Technological learning in offshore wind energy: Different roles of the government. Energy policy, 35(12), 6431-6444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.08.011
[12] Jensen, M. B., Johnson, B., Lorenz, E., Lundvall, B. Å., & Lundvall, B. A. (2007). Forms of knowledge and modes of innovation. The learning economy and the economics of hope, 155. https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/31613/626406.pdf#page=172
[13] Thomä, J. (2017). DUI mode learning and barriers to innovation—A case from Germany. Research Policy, 46(7), 1327-1339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.06.004
[14] Ghazinoory, S., & Mohajeri, A. (2019). Technological Learning and Its Promotion Policies. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 12(2), 439-454. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.20080840.1398.12.2.29.4  {In Persian}.
[15] Parrilli, M. D., & Radicic, D. (2021). STI and DUI innovation modes in micro-, small-, medium-and large-sized firms: distinctive patterns across Europe and the US. European Planning Studies, 29(2), 346-368. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2020.1754343
[16] Apanasovich, N., Heras, H. A., & Parrilli, M. D. (2016). The impact of business innovation modes on SME innovation performance in post-Soviet transition economies: The case of Belarus. Technovation, 57, 30-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2016.05.001
[17] Doloreux, D., Shearmur, R., Porto‐Gomez, I., & Zabala‐Iturriagagoitia, J. M. (2020). DUI and STI innovation modes in the Canadian wine industry: The geography of interaction modes. Growth and Change, 51(3), 890-909. https://doi.org/10.1111/grow.12385
[18] Figueiredo, P. N., Larsen, H., & Hansen, U. E. (2020). The role of interactive learning in innovation capability building in multinational subsidiaries: A micro-level study of biotechnology in Brazil. Research Policy, 49(6), 103995. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.103995   
[19] Figueiredo, P. N., & Piana, J. (2021). Technological learning strategies and technology upgrading intensity in the mining industry: evidence from Brazil. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 46(3), 629-659. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-020-09810-9
[20] Nakandala, D., Turpin, T., & Djeflat, A. (2015). Parallel innovation policies to support firms with heterogeneous innovation capabilities in developing economies. Innovation and Development, 5(1), 131-145. https://doi.org/10.1080/2157930X.2014.980552
[21] Dorjsuren, B. (2019). Changing practices of modes of innovation and interactions. https://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=downloadFile&recordOId=8989218&fileOId=8989219
[22] Lukhele, N., & Soumonni, O. (2021). Modes of innovation used by SMMEs to tackle social challenges in South Africa. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 13(7), 829-837. https://doi.org/10.1080/20421338.2020.1834960
[23] Ahmadi, M., Naghi zadeh, M., Ghazinoori, S. S., Goudarzi, M., & Pakseresht, S. (2022). Factors affecting the technological learning of companies in research collaboration projects with universities and research centers (Case study: oil, gas and petrochemical industries). Innovation Management Journal, 11(1). https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.23225386.1401.11.1.3.5}In Persian{.
[24] Dadashpoor, H., & Saeidi, S. (2017). Evaluating the Regional Learning Effect on the Enhancing Innovation of Industiral Firms. Journal Of Economics and Regional Development, 23(12), 1-33. https://doi.org/10.22067/erd.v23i12.53067  {In Persian}.
[25] Hakimi, I. (2019). Investigating the Effect of Learning Orientation on New Product Performance: Explaining the Mediating Role of Ambidextrous Capability and Organizational Agility. Journal of Executive Management, 11(21), 115-136. https://doi.org/10.22080/jem.2020.17181.2993 {In Persian}.
[26] Hosseini, M., Mosavi, S., Ashrafii Soltan Ahmadi, M., Khavari, S. (2019). Export performance of knowledge based companies; A model for explaining the role of entrepreneurial awareness and strategic learning. Journal of International Business Administration, 2(1), 221-242. https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/jiba.2019.9142 {In Persian}.
[27] Attarpour, M. R., Kazazi, A., Elyasi, M., & BamdadSoofi, J. (2018). A Model for Promoting Technological Learning for Innovation Ambidexterity Development: A Case Study of Iran Steel Industry. Journal of Improvement Management, 12(3), 45-69. https://www.behboodmodiriat.ir/article_81012_88cfd8f097d59f7bb9037d6b9ca7ae9c.pdf?lang=en  {In Persian}.
[28] Safdari Ranjbar, M., Alizadeh, P., & Elyasi, M. (2020). Analyzing the Legal Capacity for Supporting Technological Learning and Catch-up in Iran: A Comparative Study with Successful International Experiences. Journal of Improvement Management, 14(3), 47-72. https://doi.org/10.22034/jmi.2020.117987 {In Persian}.
[29] Miri Moghaddam, M., Ghazinoori, S., Towfighi, J., & Elahi, S. (2014). Technological Learning in The Oil Industry: A Case Study of the Development Phases of South Pars Gas Field. Science and Technology Policy, 7 (2), 17-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.12.004 {In Persian}.
[30] Mohammadi, M., Bagheri Moghadam, N., & Shojaei Charmineh, A. (2017). Analysis of Learning and Innovation Modes in Developing Countries; Case study ICT in Iran. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 10(1), 53-68. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.20080840.1396.10.1.4.3 {In Persian}.
[31] Habibzadeh, E., & Esmaelian, M. (2016). Identifying and Prioritizing Internal Organizational Factors Affecting Technological Learning - The Case of Mobarakeh Steel Company. Journal of Technology Development Management, 4(1), 9-42. https://doi.org/10.22104/jtdm.2017.476 {In Persian}.
[32] Kargar Shahamat, B., Taghva, M. R., & Tabtabaiean, S. H. (2017). Functions of Innovation Network An Analysis of Technological Learning in Iran’s Pharmaceutical Sector. Journal of Technology Development Management, 5(2), 9-39. https://doi.org/10.22104/jtdm.2018.2526.1854 {In Persian}.
[33] Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative health research, 15(9), 1277-1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
[34] Potter, W. J., & Levine‐Donnerstein, D. (1999). Rethinking validity and reliability in content analysis. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909889909365539
[35] Habibi, A., Jahantigh, F. F., & Sarafrazi, A. (2015). Fuzzy Delphi technique for forecasting and screening items. Asian Journal of Research in Business Economics and Management, 5(2), 130-143. http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/2249-7307.2015.00036.5
[36] Cheng, C. H., & Lin, Y. (2002). Evaluating the best main battle tank using fuzzy decision theory with linguistic criteria evaluation. European journal of operational research, 142(1), 174-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(01)00280-6
[37] Silverman, D. (2019). Interpreting qualitative data. Interpreting Qualitative Data, 1-568. http://digital.casalini.it/9781526482822 
[38] Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2006). Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. springer publishing company.
[39] Nunes, S., Lopes, R., & Dias, J. (2013). Innovation Modes and Firm's Performance: Evidence from Portugal. https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/123875/1/ERSA2013_00252.pdf
[40] Alhusen, H., Bennat, T., Bizer, K., Cantner, U., Horstmann, E., Kalthaus, M., & Töpfer, S. (2021). A new measurement conception for the ‘doing-using-interacting’mode of innovation. Research Policy, 50(4), 104214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104214

فایل ها

همرسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار