مطالعات مدیریت صنعتی

شماره جاری

بر اساس شماره‌های نشریه

بر اساس نویسندگان

بر اساس موضوعات

نمایه نویسندگان

نمایه کلیدواژه ها

درباره نشریه

اهداف و چشم انداز

اصول اخلاقی انتشار مقاله

بانک ها و نمایه نامه ها

پیوندهای مفید

پرسش‌های متداول

فرایند پذیرش مقالات

اطلاعات آماری نشریه

اخبار و اعلانات

تفاهم نامه با انجمن علوم مدیریت ایران

راهنمای نگارش

فایل ها

داوران 1402

داوران 1401

داوران 1400

داوران 1399

راهنمای ثبت نام درPublons

بررسی تاثیر استراتژی‌های یادگیری سازمانی بر خلاقیت، نوآوری و عملکرد محصول جدید شرکت‌های صنعتی کوچک شهرک صنعتی پایتخت

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیارگروه مدیریت صنعتی دانشکده علوم اجتماعی دانشگاه بین‌المللی امام خمینی(ره)

2 کارشناس ارشد گروه مدیریت صنعتی دانشکده علوم اجتماعی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد تهران مرکز

3 کارشناس ارشد گروه مدیریت صنعتی دانشکده علوم اجتماعی دانشگاه بین‌المللی امام خمینی(ره)

چکیده

تجربیات بحران اقتصادی اروپا در سال 2008 نشان داد که دارایی‌های نامشهود شرکت‌ها هم‌چون مهارت، تجربه و دانش‌ کارکنان، از آن‌ها در مقابل ورشکستگی محافظت کرد. همین مسئله سبب شد شرکت‌ها دارایی‌هایی چون توانایی فردی برای یادگیری، خلاقیت و خلق و ادغام دانش‌های عملی را به‌عنوان منابع مزیت‌های رقابتی قرار دهند. مطالعات نشان داده است که شرکت‌های کوچک علاوه بر اثری که بر رشد اقتصادی دارند، نسبت به شرکت‌های بزرگ‌تر توانایی بالاتری برای تغییر و نوآور بودن دارند. درگاه خدمات‌رسانی سازمان صنایع کوچک و شهرک‌های صنعتی ایران در آمارنامه کامل عملکرد سازمان تا پایان خرداد سال 1402 تعداد واحدهای به بهره‌برداری رسیده را بیش از 50000 واحد اعلام کرده که حاکی از اهمیت و نقش این شرکت‌ها در اقتصاد کشور است[1]. از سویی نرخ شکست محصول جدید بسیار بالا و منابع شرکت‌های کوچک بسیار محدود است که آن‌ها را فوق‌العاده آسیب‌پذیر می‌سازد. ازاین‌رو هدف اصلی این مطالعه بررسی اثر استراتژی‌های یادگیری بر خلاقیت، نوآوری و عملکرد محصول جدید شرکت‌های کوچک صنعتی در شهرک صنعتی پایتخت تعیین‌شده است. به‌همین منظور برای تعیین روابط میان این متغیرها از مدل‌یابی معادلات ساختاری و رویکرد کم‌ترین مربعات جزئی استفاده شد. نتایج این پژوهش از بررسی 473 شرکت این شهرک نشان داد که استراتژی یادگیری اکتشافی بر هر دو نوع خلاقیت بداهه و ترکیبی اثر مثبت و معنی‌داری دارد و به‌طور غیرمستقیم بر نوآوری و عملکرد محصول جدید اثر می‌گذارد. استراتژی یادگیری بهره‌بردارانه تنها بر خلاقیت بداهه اثر می‌گذارد. خلاقیت بداهه نه‌تنها اثر قابل‌توجهی بر خلاقیت ترکیبی دارد، بلکه هر دو این خلاقیت‌ها اثر مثبت و معنی‌داری بر نوآوری و عملکرد محصول جدید این شرکت‌ها دارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Investigating the Effect of Organizational Learning Strategies on Creativity, Innovation and New Product Performance: Case of Study: Small Firms in Paytakht Industrial City

نویسندگان [English]

  • Seyed Majid Elahi 1
  • , Seyedeh Marziyeh Hosseini Hosseini 2
  • masomeh rahmani 3

1 Assistant Professor of Industrial Management Department, Faculty of Social Sciences, Imam Khomeini International University (IKIU), Noruzian Street, Qazvin

2 Senior expert in the Department of Industrial Management, Faculty of Social Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran Branch, Center, Tehran, Iran

3 Master of Industrial Management, Industrial Management Department, Faculty of Social Sciences, Imam Khomeini International University (IKIU), Noruzian Street, Qazvin

چکیده [English]

In this era of rapid changes, industries must be flexible and responsive to survive in the market. Achieving this flexibility and responsiveness requires learning from the environment, alongside fostering innovation, creativity, and possibly launching new products. Different learning strategies lead to varying outcomes; thus, this research explores the effects of learning strategies on innovation, creativity, and the performance of new products in small firms.
The experience of the 2008 economic crisis in Europe demonstrated that firms' intangible assets, such as employee skills, experience, and knowledge, played a critical role in preventing bankruptcy. This realization led companies to recognize assets such as personnel abilities in learning, creativity, innovation, and the integration of practical knowledge as key sources of competitive advantage. Research has shown that small firms, in addition to their positive impact on economic growth, outperform larger firms in terms of adaptability and creativity. The service portal of the Organization for Iran Small Industries and Industrial Towns reported over 50,000 active small firms by the end of June 2022, underscoring their significance in the country's economy. However, the high failure rate of new products and the limited resources available to small firms make the success of new product development a critical issue.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Organizational learning strategies
  • innovation
  • creativity
  • new product performance
  • small industrial firms
مراجع
  1. چاوشی. زینب؛ خاشعی ورنامخواستی. وحید (تابستان 1401)؛ تأثیر سازوکارهای یادگیری سازمان بر ظرفیت نوآوری استراتژیک؛ مطالعات مدیریت راهبردی،50، 38-21. DOI:22034/smsj.2022.135056
  2. رجبی. فرجاد، میرسپاسی. نیلوفر، سلطانی ستوبادی. وحید. (تابستان 1400) نقش یادگیری سازمانی به‌عنوان متغیر میانجی در ارتباط بین رهبری توانمندساز و نوآوری باز. فصلنامه آینده‌پژوهی مدیریت، سال سی یکم/ شماره 125، 82-68.
  3. رضائیان. علی (1383) مبانی سازمان و مدیریت. سمت. تهران.
  4. Amabile, T. M. (1997). Motivating creativity in organizations: On doing what you love and loving what you do. California management review, 40(1), 39-58. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165921
  5. Argote, L. (2012). Organizational learning: Creating, retaining and transferring knowledge. Springer Science & Business Media.
  6. Atuahene-Gima, K., & Murray, J. Y. (2007). Exploratory and exploitative learning in new product development: A social capital perspective on new technology ventures in China. Journal of International Marketing, 15(02), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1509/jimk.15.2.1
  7. Azadegan, A., & Dooley, K. J. (2010). Supplier innovativeness, organizational learning styles and manufacturer performance: An empirical assessment. Journal of Operations Management, 28(6), 488-505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2010.02.001
  8. Breznik, K. (2016). Using social network analysis to identify innovation clusters. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 19(3), 272-285. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJIL.2016.075654
  9. Calantone, R. J., Cavusgil, S. T., & Zhao, Y. (2002). Learning orientation, firm innovation capability, and firm performance. Industrial marketing management, 31(6), 515-524. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-8501(01)00203-6
  10. Cassidy, S. (2004). Learning styles: An overview of theories, models, and measures. Educational psychology, 24(4), 419-444. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341042000228834
  11. Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern methods for business research, 295(2), 295-336. DOI:10.4324/9781410604385-10
  12. Crossan, M. M. (1998). Improvisation in action. Organization Science, 9(5), 593-599. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.9.5.593
  13. Crossan, M., & Sorrenti, M. (2002). Making sense of improvisation. Kamoche, KN, e Cunha, MP & da Cunha, JV (Eds.) Organizational improvisation. London: Routledge, 29-51.
  14. Cunha, M. P. E., Neves, P., Clegg, S. R., & Rego, A. (2015). Tales of the unexpected: Discussing improvisational learning. Management Learning, 46(5), 511-529. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507614549121
  15. Cunha, M. P. E., Kamoche, K., & Cunha, R. C. E. (2003). Organizational improvisation and leadership-a field study in two computer-mediated settings. International studies of management & organization, 33(1), 34-57. https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.2003.11043677
  16. D'aveni, R. A. (2010). Hypercompetition. Simon and Schuster.
  17. Dodgson, M. (1993). Organizational learning: a review of some literatures. Organization studies, 14(3), 375-394. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069301400303
  18. Fiol, C. M., & Lyles, M. A. (1985). Organizational learning. Academy of management review, 10(4), 803-813. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1985.4279103
  19. Fisher, C. M., & Amabile, T. (2009). Creativity, improvisation and organizations. The Routledge companion to creativity, 13-24.
  20. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of marketing research, 382-388. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800313
  21. Gong, Y., Huang, J. C., & Farh, J. L. (2009). Employee learning orientation, transformational leadership, and employee creativity: The mediating role of employee creative self-efficacy. Academy of management Journal, 52(4), 765-778. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.43670890
  22. Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of management journal, 49(4), 693-706. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.22083026
  23. Hahn, M. H., Lee, K. C., & Lee, D. S. (2015). Network structure, organizational learning culture, and employee creativity in system integration companies: The mediating effects of exploitation and exploration. Computers in Human Behavior, 42, 167-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.026
  24. Hernández-Espallardo, M., Sánchez-Pérez, M., & Segovia-López, C. (2011). Exploitation-and exploration-based innovations: the role of knowledge in inter-firm relationships with distributors. Technovation, 31(5), 203-215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2011.01.007
  25. Hirst, G., Van Knippenberg, D., & Zhou, J. (2009). A cross-level perspective on employee creativity: Goal orientation, team learning behavior, and individual creativity. Academy of management journal, 52(2), 280-293. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.37308035
  26. Huang, L. C., & Shiau, W. L. (2017). Factors affecting creativity in information system development: Insights from a decomposition and PLS–MGA. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 117(3). https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-08-2015-0335
  27. Ko, S., & Butler, J. E. (2006). Prior knowledge, bisociative mode of thinking and entrepreneurial opportunity identification. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 3(1), 3-16. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2006.008659
  28. Kyrgidou, L. P., & Petridou, E. (2011). The effect of competence exploration and competence exploitation on strategic entrepreneurship. Technology analysis & strategic management, 23(6), 697-713. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2011.585040
  29. Lavie, D., & Rosenkopf, L. (2006). Balancing exploration and exploitation in alliance formation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 797-818. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.22083085
  30. Lei, D., Hitt, M. A., & Bettis, R. (1996). Dynamic core competences through meta-learning and strategic context. Journal of management, 22(4), 549-569. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(96)90024-0
  31. Leybourne, S., & Kennedy, M. (2015). Learning to improvise, or improvising to learn: Knowledge generation and ‘Innovative Practice’in project environments. Knowledge and Process Management, 22(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.1457
  32. Li, C. R., Chu, C. P., & Lin, C. J. (2010). The contingent value of exploratory and exploitative learning for new product development performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(7), 1186-1197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2010.02.002
  33. Lichtenthaler, U. (2009). Absorptive capacity, environmental turbulence, and the complementarity of organizational learning processes. Academy of management journal, 52(4), 822-846. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.43670902
  34. Lisboa, A., Skarmeas, D., & Lages, C. (2011). Entrepreneurial orientation, exploitative and explorative capabilities, and performance outcomes in export markets: A resource-based approach. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(8), 1274-1284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2011.10.013
  35. Magni, M., & Maruping, L. M. (2013). Sink or swim: Empowering leadership and overload in teams' ability to deal with the unexpected. Human Resource Management, 52(5), 715-739. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21561
  36. Magni, M., Proserpio, L., Hoegl, M., & Provera, B. (2009). The role of team behavioral integration and cohesion in shaping individual improvisation. Research Policy, 38(6), 1044-1053. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2009.03.004
  37. March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization science, 2(1), 71-87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
  38. Mbengue, A., & Sané, S. (2013). Organizational learning capability: theoretical analysis and empirical study in the context of official development aid project teams. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration, 30(1), 26-39. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjas.1238
  39. McGrath, R. G. (2010). Business models: A discovery driven approach. Long range planning, 43(2), 247-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.005
  40. Mirvis, P. H. (1998). Variations on a theme—Practice improvisation. Organization science, 9(5), 586-592. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.9.5.586
  41. Muiruri Gachanja, I, Irura,N.N. & Kigabane,L.M. (2020)Influence of organizational learning on innovation output in manufacturing firms in Kenya. Science Direct, International Journal of Innovation Studies, 4 (2020)16-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijis.2020.02.001
  42. Nisula, A. M. (2015). The relationship between supervisor support and individual improvisation.
  43. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 36(5), 473-488. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-07-2013-0098
  44. Nunnally, J. C. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X004010007
  45. Amanda, M.Potter, Mark&Morrison,Robert,L. (2018) Organizational Learning in the Public Sector: Culture, Politics and Performance. Public Integrity Routledge):1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10999922.2018.1445411
  46. Sánchez-Franco, M. J., Martínez-López, F. J., & Martín-Velicia, F. A. (2009). Exploring the impact of individualism and uncertainty avoidance in Web-based electronic learning: An empirical analysis in European higher education. Computers & Education, 52(3), 588-598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.11.006
  47. Santos-Vijande, M. L., López-Sánchez, J. Á., & Trespalacios, J. A. (2012). How organizational learning affects a firm's flexibility, competitive strategy, and performance. Journal of Business Research, 65(8), 1079-1089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.09.002
  48. Sawyer, K. (1992). Improvisational creativity: An analysis of jazz performance. Creativity Research Journal, 5(3), 253-263. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419209534439
  49. Sawyer, R. K. (2015). How organizational innovation emerges through improvisational processes.DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198728313.003.0008
  50. Raghu, G., Barbara, S., Ann, L. and Haridimos, T. (Eds.). (2015). The Emergence of Novelty in Organizations, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 180-215.
  51. Schildt, H. A., Maula, M. V., & Keil, T. (2005). Explorative and exploitative learning from external corporate ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), 493-515. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00095.x
  52. Singh, R. K., Garg, S. K., & Deshmukh, S. G. (2009). The competitiveness of SMEs in a globalized economy: Observations from China and India. Management Research Review, 33(1), 54-65. DOI: 10.1108/01409171011011562
  53. Sirén, C. A., Kohtamäki, M., & Kuckertz, A. (2012). Exploration and exploitation strategies, profit performance, and the mediating role of strategic learning: Escaping the exploitation trap. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 6(1), 18-41. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1126
  54. Spender, J. C. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strategic management journal, 17(S2), 45-62. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250171106
  55. Srite, M. (1999). The influence of national culture on the acceptance and use of information technologies: An empirical study. AMCIS 1999 Proceedings, 355.
  56. Sternberg, R. J. (2004). Successful intelligence as a basis for entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(2), 189-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00006-5
  57. Tamayo-Torres, J., Gutierrez-Gutierrez, L., & Ruiz-Moreno, A. (2014). The relationship between exploration and exploitation strategies, manufacturing flexibility and organizational learning: An empirical comparison between Non-ISO and ISO certified firms. European Journal of Operational Research, 232(1), 72-86. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2013.06.040
  58. Valaei, N., Rezaei, S., & Ismail, W. K. W. (2017). Examining learning strategies, creativity, and innovation at SMEs using fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis and PLS path modeling. Journal of Business Research, 70, 224-233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.016
  59. Vanhaverbeke,W., Beerkens, B., Gilsing, V., & Duysters, G. (2004). Explorative and exploitative learning strategies in technology-based alliance networks. Academy of Management Best Conference Paper, 2004, J1–J6. DOI: 10.5465/AMBPP.2004.13857567
  60. Vera, D., Nemanich, L., Vélez-Castrillón, S., & Werner, S. (2016). Knowledge-based and contextual factors associated with R&D teams’ improvisation capability. Journal of Management, 42(7), 1874-1903. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314530168
  61. Vera, D., & Crossan, M. (2005). Improvisation and innovative performance in teams. Organization Science, 16(3), 203-224. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0126
  62. Vinzi, V. E., Chin, W. W., Henseler, J., & Wang, H. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of partial least squares: Concepts, methods and applications. Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32827-8
  63. Wang, C. H., & Hsu, L. C. (2014). Building exploration and exploitation in the high-tech industry: The role of relationship learning. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 81, 331-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.04.008
  64. Woodman, R. W. (2008). Creativity and organizational change: Linking ideas and extending theory. Handbook of organizational creativity, 283-300. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-52878-6_64
  65. Zhou, J., & George, J. M. (2001). When job dissatisfaction leads to creativity: Encouraging the expression of voice. Academy of Management journal, 44(4), 682-696. https://doi.org/10.5465/3069410
  66. Yaqun, yi. Chen,Yu.Li, Dan(2022) Stakeholder ties, organizational learning and business model innovation: A business ecosystem perspective Technovation ELSEVIER Blumington, Indiana,USA114(2022)102445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102445
  67. Zhang, Xiaobin.Zhaofang,Chu, Lei,. Ren. Jianguo,Xing. (2023) Open innovation and sustainable competitive advantage: The role of organizational learning. Technological Forecasting and Social Change Elsevier 186(2023) 122114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122114
مطالعات مدیریت صنعتی
دوره 22، شماره 73
تیر 1403
صفحه 287-322
فایل ها
هم رسانی
ارجاع به این مقاله
آمار