الگویی جدید برای ارزیابی اکوسیستم صادراتی محصولات دانش بنیان
محورهای موضوعی : مدیریت بازرگانی- کارآفرینی
عباس معینی
1
,
حسین وظیفه دوست
2
,
فریدون رهنمای رودپشتی
3
1 - دانشـجوی دکتـری گـروه مدیریت، واحـد امارات، دانشـگاه آزاد اسـلامی، دبـی، امـارات متحـده عربـی.
2 - استاد گروه مدیریت، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران (نویسنده مسئول).
3 - استاد گروه حسابداری، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
کلید واژه: اکوسیستم, ارزیابی, اکوسیستم صادراتی,
چکیده مقاله :
در سال‌های اخیر توسعه اقتصاد دانش محور، موجب تولید انبوه محصولات دانش بنیان شده است، که در مواردی بیش از نیاز داخل بوده و بازار صادراتی آن از اهمیت ویژه ای برخودار شده است. تمرکز بر کیفیت و افزایش صادرات این محصولات، توجه را به موضوع اکوسیستم صادراتی و ارزیابی آن جلب کرده است. با وجود اهمیت این موضوع، نبود یک الگوی ارزیابی، خلاء پژوهش‌های علمی در این زمینه را نمایان ساخته است. این پژوهش با هدف ارائه الگویی جدید برای ارزیابی اکوسیستم صادراتی محصولات دانش بنیان انجام گردید. این تحقیق از نوع اکتشافی و از نظر هدف، کاربردی توسعه‌ای و برحسب گردآوری داده‌ها، پژوهشی کیفی است که از نظریه داده بنیاد سیستماتیک برای تحلیل داده‌ها استفاده می‌شود. گردآوری داده‌ها از طریق مصاحبه‌های نیمه ساختار یافته با 15 نفر از خبرگان انجام گرفت. در این پژوهش 3667 مقوله شناسایی شد که از این تعداد 83 مقوله فرعی، 13مقوله محوری و 5 مقوله انتخابی در چارچوب مدل پارادایمی و پدیده محوری انتخاب شد، که چارچوبی را فراهم می‌کند تا بر اساس آن سیاستگذاران حوزه دانش بنیان بتوانند پتانسیل لازم را برای بهسازی و نوسازی این اکوسیستم به منظور تکامل پذیری آن به دست آورند. علاوه بر این، نتایج این مطالعه اکوسیستم صادراتی را قادر می‌سازد تا با استفاده از الگوی ارزیابی ارائه شده چارچوب اجرایی مناسب‌تری را برای صادرات محصولات دانش بنیان طراحی نمایند.
In the evolving landscape of the knowledge-based economy, there has been a notable increase in the production of knowledge-based goods within the nation, some of which now surpass local demands. This trend has propelled a shift towards marketing and expanding into global markets. However, challenges persist in the exportation of these goods due to a lack of scientific research and a specific model for assessing the export ecosystem. This study aims to fill this gap by introducing an evaluation model for the export ecosystem of knowledge-based products through qualitative methods. This exploratory study takes a qualitative approach, utilizing systematic grounded theory for data analysis. Data collection involved semi-structured interviews with 15 experts, ensuring research validity through data and method triangulation. The reliability of the study was confirmed through the methodology of retesting and agreement between two coders. Throughout the research process, a total of 3,667 categories were identified, including 83 subcategories, 13 core categories, and 5 selective categories within the paradigmatic model and core phenomenon framework. These findings offer a roadmap for policymakers in the knowledge-based sector to pinpoint areas for improvement within the ecosystem, enhancing its adaptability. Additionally, the results of the study support the development of a more effective executive framework for exporting knowledge-based products using the proposed evaluation model.
- Abdi, Y. (2017). Investigating factors affecting the export development of knowledge-based products with high technology in selected countries. Master's thesis in the field of economic sciences. Research Institute of Economics and Management. Research Institute of Humanities and Cultural Studies. [In Persian].
- Acs, Z., Stam, E., Audretsch, D. B., & O’Connor, A. (2017). The lineages of the entrepreneurial ecosystem approach. Small Business Economics, 49(1), 1–10.
-
Adner, R. (2006). Match your innovation strategy to your innovation ecosystem. Harv. Bus. Rev., 84 (4) (2006), pp. 98-107 - Adner R, Kapoor R (2016) Innovation ecosystems and the pace of substitution: re-examining technology S-curves. Strateg Manag J 37(4):625–648
- Alirahmzadeh, R. (2014). Investigating the factors affecting the export of knowledge-based products and its relationship with the evolution of international trade. Dissertation of Master of Business Administration in the direction of transformation. Faculty of Management, Central Tehran Azad University. [In Persian].
- Aghaei, E., Zakery, A., & Aliahmadi, A. (2021). The Role of Export Incubators in Facilitating Technology-based Firms’ Entry into Foreign Markets; Case Study in Iran Nanotechnology Center in China. Journal of Science & Technology Policy, 14(1), 71-88. [In Persian]. DOI: 10.22034/jstp.2021.14.1.1341
- Amini, M., Ramezani Dastak, M., Forouzandeh dehkordi, L., Ahadmotlaghi, E. (2023). Designing and explaining the executive model in order to strengthen non-oil exports in Gilan province by mixed methods. Journal of Strategic Management Studies, Doi,10.22034/SMSJ.2023.393906.1834
- Ansari, S., Garud, R., & Kumaraswamy, A. (2016). The disruptor's dilemma: TiVo and the US television ecosystem. Strategic management journal, 37(9), 1829-1853.
- Azeem, M., Ahmed, M., Haider, S., & Sajjad, M. (2021). Expanding competitive advantage through organizational culture, knowledge sharing and organizational innovation. Technology in Society, 66, 101635.
- Bossaghzadeh, N., Moradi, M., Tamimi, M. (2023). A model for gaining competitive advantage in Iranian export companies based on organizational ambidexterity and absorptive capacity. Journal of Decisions and Operations Research, 8(1): 102-122. doi.10.22105/dmor.2021.309305.1497
- Che, N, X.., Xuege Zhang, X. (2022). High Performance Export Portfolio: Design Growth-Enhancing Export Structure with Machine Learning. Publication Internationla Monetary Fund, Retrieved May 16, 2022, from https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2022/04/29/High-Performance-Export-Portfolio-Design-Growth-Enhancing-Export-Structure-with-Machine-517446
- D’Aveni, R. A., Dagnino, G. B., & Smith, K. G. (2010). The age of temporary advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 31(13), 1371–1385.
- Ebrahimi, I., Rahnama, A., and Tawanazadeh, S. (2014). Evaluating the impact of factors affecting export development in small and medium-sized companies. Quantitative Studies in Management, 5(3), 141-162. [In Persian].
- Edwards, L., Alves, P. (2005). South Africa’s Export Performance: Determinants of Export supply. Africa Region Working Paper Series No. 95. http://www.worldbank.org/afr/wps/index.htm.
-
Feld, B. (2012). Startup communities: Building an entrepreneurial ecosystem in your city. JohnWiley & Sons. - Gertler, M. S., & Wolfe, D. A. (2006). Spaces of knowledge flows: Clusters in a global context. In Clusters and regional development (pp. 236-253). Routledge.
-
Granabetter, D. M. (2017). Successful Knowledge Management for the Export Industry–The Needs of Entrepreneurs. - Hosseini, M., H.; Mousavi, S, M, J; Ashrafi Sultan Ahmadi, M.; Khavari, S. (2019). Export performance of knowledge-based businesses, a model to explain the role of entrepreneurial awareness and strategic learning. International Business Management, 2(1): 221-242. [In Persian].
- Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018). Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic management journal, 39(8), 2255-2276.
- Kacoua, K, Y, T., Kassouri, Y., Evrard, T, H., Altuntaş, M. (2022). Trade openness, export structure, and labor productivity in developing countries: Evidence from panel VAR approach. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 60: 194-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2021.11.015
- Kapoor R., Lee J.M. (2013). Coordinating and competing in ecosystems: how organizational forms shape new technology investments Strateg. Manag. J., 34 (3) (2013), pp. 274-296
- Kuratko, D. F., Fisher, G., Bloodgood, J. M., & Hornsby, J. S. (2017). The paradox of new venture legitimation within an entrepreneurial ecosystem. Small Business Economics, 49(1), 119–140.
- Lehmann, E. E., & Menter, M. (2018). Public cluster policy and performance. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 43(3), 558–592.
- Liu, G., & Rong, K. (2015). The nature of the co-evolutionary process: Complex product development in the mobile computing industry’s business ecosystem. Group & Organization Management, 40(6), 809-842.
- Minà, A., Dagnino, G. B., & Ben-Letaifa, S. (2016). Competition and cooperation in entrepreneurial ecosystems: A life-cycle analysis of Canadian ICT ecosystems. In F. Belussi & L. Orsi (Eds.), Innovation, alliances and networks in high-tech environment (pp. 65–81). Abingdon: Routledge.
- Mirzaei, V., Vahidi, T., and Gholamzadeh, A. (2020). Investigating the factors affecting the development capabilities of the active export market and the dimensions of export performance in knowledge-based export companies. Journal, management science researches, 2(5), 46-65. [In Persian].
- Mohammadyari, F., Zarandian, A. (1400). Economic Valuation of Ecosystem Services: A Review of Concepts and Methods. Comprehensive watershed management, 1(2), 63-81. [In Persian]. doi: 10.22034/iwm.2022.250823
- Medhat, M. M. (2018). Prioritizing the key issues of managing the export of knowledge-based companies' products in order to realize a resistance economy. Master's thesis in the field of Islamic studies and business management. Faculty of Islamic Studies and Management of Imam Sadiq University. [In Persian].
- Moore, J. F. (1996). The Death of Competition: Leadership and Strategy in the Age of Business Ecosystems. New York, NY: Wiley Harper Business.
- Mostafiz, M, I., Sambasivan, M., Goh, S, K. (2022). Foreign market knowledge, international opportunity recognition, and the performance of export-manufacturing firms. Briefings in Entrepreneurial Finance celebrates inclusive entrepreneurship, 31(1): 179-191.
-
Neffke, F. & Henning, M. (2013). Skill relatedness and firm diversification. Strategic Manag. J. 34, 297–316. - Nourouzpour, N., Ebrahimi, A., Valibeigi, H., Didehkhani, H. (2021). Formulating a Model for Export Development of Iran’s High-Tech Industries. Iraninan Jouornal of Trade Studies (IJTS), 26(101), 193-228. [In Persian].
- Ostadi, B., Sadri M. (2019). Identifying and prioritizing performance evaluation indicators of knowledge-based companies. Journal of innovation and value creation. 9(18), 69-80. [In Persian].
-
Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. New York: The Free Press - Qamar, S., Mujtaba, H., Majeed, H., & Beg, M. O. (2021). Relationship identification between conversational agents using emotion analysis. Cognitive Computation, 13, 673-687.
- Researchs Center, Islamic Council Parliament. (2018). Challenges and solutions for the development of the export of knowledge-based products and services. Vice President of infrastructure research and production affairs, Office: Communication studies and new technologies, Subject code: 280, Machine gun number: 16162. Retrieved May 28, 2024, from https://rc.majlis.ir/fa/report/download/1086832
- Rong, K., Ren, Q., & Shi, X. (2018). The determinants of network effects: Evidence from online games business ecosystems. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 134, 45-60.
- Rong, K., Wu, J., Shi, Y., & Guo, L. (2015). Nurturing business ecosystems for growth in a foreign market: Incubating, identifying and integrating stakeholders. Journal of International Management, 21(4), 293-308.
- - Sepehrdoust, H., Davarikish, R., & Setarehie, M. (2019). The knowledge-based products and economic complexity in developing countries. Heliyon, 5(12), e02979.
- Siahsarani Kojuri, M.A. (2023). Designing and explaining the competitive intelligence model in line with the sustainable export of knowledge-based products. Management Research in Iran, 27(2), 47-70. [In Persian].
- Spigel, B. (2017). The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(1), 49–72.
- Steijn, M, P, A; Koster, H, R, A; Van Oort, F, G. (2022). The dynamics of industry agglomeration: Evidence from 44 years of coagglomeration patterns. Journal of Urban Economics, 130: 103456.
Stufflebeam, D. L., & Coryn, C. L. S. (2014). Evaluation theory, models, and applications. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. - Weissa, V, G., Bórquez, C, U., Coudounaris, D, N., Pérezd, J, M. (2016). Innovation and experiential knowledge in firm exports: Applying the initial U-model. Journal of Business Research, 69(11): 5076-5081.
