Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Teknoparklar Özelinde Firmaların İş Birlikçi Ağlarının İnovasyon Performansları Üzerine Etkisi

Year 2023, Volume: 3 Issue: 1, 73 - 100, 30.04.2023

Serkan Uyar Fahri Sakarya Ali Kılıç

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, işbirliği ağlarının firmaların yenilik performansı üzerinde olumlu bir etkisinin olup olmadığını incelemek ve hangi işbirliği türünün yenilik üzerinde göreceli olarak daha fazla etkiye sahip olduğunu anlamaktır. İstanbul'da bulunan teknoparklardaki firmaların işbirlikçi ağ sıklığını ve yenilik performansını ölçmek için bir anket geliştirilmiştir. Araştırmanın amaçlarına ulaşmak için tek yönlü varyans analizi ve regresyon analizi gibi nicel yöntemler kullanılmıştır. Sonuç olarak, teknopark bünyesinde yer alan işbirliği ağlarının firmaların inovasyon performansı üzerinde pozitif ve anlamlı bir etkiye sahip olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Teknopark bünyesinde faaliyet gösteren aktörlere ve araştırmacılara gelecek araştırmalarına yön verecek önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

Keywords

üniversite sanayi iş birliği inovasyon teknopark inovasyon performansı iş birlikçi ağlar

References

  • Adler, P.S., & Shenhar, A, (1990), Adapting Your Technological Base: The Organizational Challenge, Sloan Management Review, 25, 25-37.
  • Ahuja, G. (2000), Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study, Administrative science quarterly, 45(3), 425-455.
  • Alegre, J., Lapiedra, R., & Chiva, R. (2006). A measurement scale for product innovation performance, European Journal of Innovation Management.
  • Baptista, R. (1996), Research Round Up: Industrial Clusters and Technological Innovation, Business Strategy Review, 7(2) 59–64.
  • Basile, A. (2011), Networking System and Innovation Outputs: The Role of Science and Technology Parks, International Journal of Business and Management, 6(5), 3-15.
  • Beckman, C.M., Haunschild, P.R. and Phillips, D.J. (2004), Friends or Strangers? Firm Specific Uncertainty, Market Uncertainty, and Network Partner Selection, Organization Science, 15(3), 259-275.
  • Berg, S. V., Duncan, J., & Friedman, P. (1982), Joint Venture Strategies and Corporate Innovation, Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain.
  • Bigliardi, B., Dormio, A. I., Nosella, A., & Petroni, G. (2006), Assessing Science Parks' Performances: Directions from Selected Italian Case Studies. Technovation, 26(4), 489-505.
  • Blomkvist, K., Kappen, P. & Zander, I. (2017), Gone are the Creatures of Yesteryear? On the Diffusion of Technological Capabilities in the ‘Modern’ MNC, Journal of World Business. 52(1), 1-16.
  • Blomqvist, K., & Levy, J. (2006), Collaboration Capability–a Focal Concept in Knowledge Creation and Collaborative Innovation in Networks, International Journal of Management Concepts and Philosophy, 2(1), 31-48.
  • Bruque, S., & Moyano, J. (2007), Organisational Determinants of Information Technology Adoption and Implementation in SMEs: The Case of Family and Cooperative Firms, Technovation, 27(5), 241-253.
  • Chan, K. Y. A., Oerlemans, L. A., & Pretorius, M. W. (2010), Knowledge Flows and Innovative Performances of NTBFs in Gauteng, South Africa: An Attempt to Explain Mixed Findings in Science Park Research, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 66, 138-152.
  • Chesbrough, H., 2003, In: Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital, American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95-S120.
  • D’este, P., & Patel, P. (2007), University-Industry Linkages in the UK: What are the Factors Determining the Variety of Interactions with Industry?, Research Policy, 36, 1295-1313.
  • Das, T.K., & Teng, B.S. (2000), A Resource-Based Theory of Strategic Alliances, Journal of Management, 26(1), 31-61.
  • Doloreux, D., (2004), Regional Networks of Small and Medium Sized Enterprises: Evidence from the Metropolitan Area of Ottawa in Canada, European Planning Studies 12(2), 173–189.
  • Dosi, G.(1988), The Nature of the Innovative Process, Technical Change and Economic Theory. Edquist, C. (1997), Systems of Innovation Approaches—Their Emergence and Characteristics, in: C. Edquist (Ed.) Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations, pp. 1– 35. London: Pinter.
  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1999), The Future Location of Research and Technology Transfer, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 24(2-3), 111-123.
  • Franco, M., Haase, H. & Barbeira, M. (2015), Measuring Knowledge Sharing in Inter- Organisational Networks: Evidence from the Healthcare Sector. International Journal of Knowledge Management Studies, 6(2), 101-122.
  • Frenken, K. (2000). A Complexity Approach to Innovation Networks, The Case of the Aircraft Industry (1909–1997), Research Policy, 29(2000) 257–272.
  • Frishammar, J., and Å. S. Hörte (2005), “Managing External Information in Manufacturing Firms: The Impact on Innovation Performance,” Journal of Product Innovation Management 22(3), 251–266.
  • Fukugawa, N., 2006, Determining Factors in Innovation of Small Firm Networks: A Case of Cross Industry Groups in Japan, Small Business Economics 27 (2–3), 181–193.
  • Gunday, G., Ulusoy, G., Kilic, K., & Alpkan, L. (2011), Effects of Innovation Types on Firm Performance, International Journal of Production Economics, 133(2), 662-676.
  • Hagedoorn, J. & Cloodt, M. (2003), Measuring Innovative Performance: Is There an Advantage in Using Multiple Indicators?, Research policy, 32(8), 1365-1379.
  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. (2006), Multivariate Data Analysis, Uppersaddle River.
  • Hall, B.H., Link, A., & Scott, J.T. (2001), Barriers Inhibiting Industry from Partnering with University: Evidence from the Advanced Technology Program, Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1), 87-98.
  • Hanel, P., & St-Pierre, M. (2006), Industry–University Collaboration by Canadian Manufacturing Firms, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(4), 485-499.
  • Hassink, R. (2001), Towards Regionally Embedded Innovation Support Systems in South Korea? Case Studies from Kyongbuk-Taegu and Kyonggi, Urban Studies, 38(8), 1373-1395.
  • Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. (2009), The Uppsala Internationalization Process Modelrevisited: From Liability of Foreignness to Liability of Outsidership, Journal of International Business, 40(9), 1411–1431.
  • Kalenov, O., & Kukushkin, S. (2018), Techno-Park Assistance in Mining Regions’ Integration into the Innovative Economy, In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol. 41, p. 04025). EDP Sciences.
  • Kang, I. (1996), Chancen und Grundlagen für eine endogene Regionalentwicklung in Südkorea: Fallstudie Provinz Chungbuk (Doctoral dissertation, PhD thesis, Dortmund University).
  • Keeble, D. (1997), Small Firms, Innovation and Regional Development in Britain in the 1990s. Regional Studies, 31(3) 281–294.
  • Larsson, S., Malmberg, A. (1999), Innovations, Competitiveness and Local Embedd- Edness. Geografiska Annaler Series B: Human Geography 81 (1), 1–18.
  • Lin, J. L., Fang, S. C., Fang, S. R., & Tsai, F. S. (2009), Network Embeddedness and Technology Transfer Performance in R&D Consortia in Taiwan, Technovation, 29(11), 763-774.
  • Löfsten, H., & Lindelöf, P. (2002), Science Parks and the Growth of New Technology- based Firms—Academic-Industry Links, Innovation and Markets. Research policy, 31(6), 859-876.
  • Lundvall, B. A. (1992), National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning, Pinter, London.
  • Malairaja, C., & Zawdie, G.. (2008), Science Parks and University-Industry Collaboration in Malaysia. Technology Analysis&Strategic Management, 20, 727-739.
  • Marchiori, D., & Franco, M. (2020), Knowledge Transfer in the Context of Inter- Organizational Networks: Foundations and Intellectual Structures, Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 5(2), 130-139.
  • Markman, G. D., Phan, P. H., Balkin, D. B., & Gianiodis, P. T. (2005), Entrepreneurship and University-based Technology Transfer, Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 241-263.
  • OECD & SourceOECD (Online service) (2007), Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators in a Changing World: Responding to Policy Needs, OECD.
  • OECD, E. (2005), Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data, Paris 2005, Sp, 46. Perkmann, M., & Walsh, K. (2008), Engaging the Scholar: Three Forms of Academic Consulting and Their Impact on Universities and Industry, Research Policy, 37, 1884- 1891.
  • Phillimore, J. (1999), Beyond the Linear View of Innovation in Science Park Evaluation An Analysis of Western Australian Technology Park, Technovation, 19(11), 673-680.
  • Porter, M.E. (1990), Competitive Advantage of Nations. London: MacMillan. Quintas, P., et al. (1996), The Sciencepark Evaluation Handbook, Technopolis, Milton Keynes.
  • Radosevic, S., & Myrzakhmet, M. (2009), Between Vision and Reality: Promoting Innovation Through Technoparks in an Emerging Economy, Technovation, 29(10), 645-656.
  • Rodan, S., & Galunic, C. (2004), More than network structure: How Knowledge Heterogeneity Influences Managerial Performance and Innovativeness, Strategic Management Journal, 25(6), 541-562.
  • Rosenkopf, L., & Almeida, P. (2003), Overcoming Local Search Through Alliances and Mobility, Management Science, 49(6), 751-766.
  • Sakarya, F., KILIÇ, A., & Eren, H. (2016), Factors Effecting Absorptive Capacity Of The Firms: Technopark Firms Sample, Social Sciences, 11(4), 288-311.
  • Seo, J. (2006), The Korean Techno-Parks as the Hub of Sub-National Innovation System: Case of Daegu Techno-Park. Paper prepared for the National Workshop on Sub-National Innovation Systems and Technology Building Policies to Enhance Competitive SMEs, December 21-22, 2006, Kathmandu, Nepal.
  • Toreli, M. (2013), Dunyada ve Türkiye’de Teknoparklar, 236-246, Retrieved from http://arsiv.mmo.org.tr/pdf/10684.pdf
  • Van Looy, B., Ranga, M., Callaert, J., Debackere, K. & Zimmermann, E. (2004), Combining Entrepreneurial and Scientific Performance in Academia: Towards a Compounded and Reciprocal Matthew-effect?. Research Policy, 33(2004), 425-441. Watts, D. J. 1999, Networks, Dynamics, and the Small-world Phenomenon, Amer. J. Sociol. 105 493–528.

The Effect Of Firm’s Collaboration Networks On Their Innovation Performance In The Context Of Technoparks

Year 2023, Volume: 3 Issue: 1, 73 - 100, 30.04.2023

Serkan Uyar Fahri Sakarya Ali Kılıç

Abstract

The main purpose of this study is to examine whether collaboration networks have a positive effect on innovation performance of firms, and to understand which collaboration type has the more relative effect on innovation. A survey was developed to measure collaborative network frequency and innovation performance of firms in technoparks which are in Istanbul. For achieving the objectives of the research, quantitative methods such as the one-way analysis of variance and regression analysis were used. As a result, it has been identified that collaboration networks within technopark have a positive and significant effect on innovation performance of the firms. Recommendations were presented for actors operating within technoparks and for researchers to guide their future researches.

Keywords

innovation university and industry collaboration technopark innovation performance collaboration network

References

  • Adler, P.S., & Shenhar, A, (1990), Adapting Your Technological Base: The Organizational Challenge, Sloan Management Review, 25, 25-37.
  • Ahuja, G. (2000), Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study, Administrative science quarterly, 45(3), 425-455.
  • Alegre, J., Lapiedra, R., & Chiva, R. (2006). A measurement scale for product innovation performance, European Journal of Innovation Management.
  • Baptista, R. (1996), Research Round Up: Industrial Clusters and Technological Innovation, Business Strategy Review, 7(2) 59–64.
  • Basile, A. (2011), Networking System and Innovation Outputs: The Role of Science and Technology Parks, International Journal of Business and Management, 6(5), 3-15.
  • Beckman, C.M., Haunschild, P.R. and Phillips, D.J. (2004), Friends or Strangers? Firm Specific Uncertainty, Market Uncertainty, and Network Partner Selection, Organization Science, 15(3), 259-275.
  • Berg, S. V., Duncan, J., & Friedman, P. (1982), Joint Venture Strategies and Corporate Innovation, Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain.
  • Bigliardi, B., Dormio, A. I., Nosella, A., & Petroni, G. (2006), Assessing Science Parks' Performances: Directions from Selected Italian Case Studies. Technovation, 26(4), 489-505.
  • Blomkvist, K., Kappen, P. & Zander, I. (2017), Gone are the Creatures of Yesteryear? On the Diffusion of Technological Capabilities in the ‘Modern’ MNC, Journal of World Business. 52(1), 1-16.
  • Blomqvist, K., & Levy, J. (2006), Collaboration Capability–a Focal Concept in Knowledge Creation and Collaborative Innovation in Networks, International Journal of Management Concepts and Philosophy, 2(1), 31-48.
  • Bruque, S., & Moyano, J. (2007), Organisational Determinants of Information Technology Adoption and Implementation in SMEs: The Case of Family and Cooperative Firms, Technovation, 27(5), 241-253.
  • Chan, K. Y. A., Oerlemans, L. A., & Pretorius, M. W. (2010), Knowledge Flows and Innovative Performances of NTBFs in Gauteng, South Africa: An Attempt to Explain Mixed Findings in Science Park Research, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 66, 138-152.
  • Chesbrough, H., 2003, In: Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital, American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95-S120.
  • D’este, P., & Patel, P. (2007), University-Industry Linkages in the UK: What are the Factors Determining the Variety of Interactions with Industry?, Research Policy, 36, 1295-1313.
  • Das, T.K., & Teng, B.S. (2000), A Resource-Based Theory of Strategic Alliances, Journal of Management, 26(1), 31-61.
  • Doloreux, D., (2004), Regional Networks of Small and Medium Sized Enterprises: Evidence from the Metropolitan Area of Ottawa in Canada, European Planning Studies 12(2), 173–189.
  • Dosi, G.(1988), The Nature of the Innovative Process, Technical Change and Economic Theory. Edquist, C. (1997), Systems of Innovation Approaches—Their Emergence and Characteristics, in: C. Edquist (Ed.) Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations, pp. 1– 35. London: Pinter.
  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1999), The Future Location of Research and Technology Transfer, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 24(2-3), 111-123.
  • Franco, M., Haase, H. & Barbeira, M. (2015), Measuring Knowledge Sharing in Inter- Organisational Networks: Evidence from the Healthcare Sector. International Journal of Knowledge Management Studies, 6(2), 101-122.
  • Frenken, K. (2000). A Complexity Approach to Innovation Networks, The Case of the Aircraft Industry (1909–1997), Research Policy, 29(2000) 257–272.
  • Frishammar, J., and Å. S. Hörte (2005), “Managing External Information in Manufacturing Firms: The Impact on Innovation Performance,” Journal of Product Innovation Management 22(3), 251–266.
  • Fukugawa, N., 2006, Determining Factors in Innovation of Small Firm Networks: A Case of Cross Industry Groups in Japan, Small Business Economics 27 (2–3), 181–193.
  • Gunday, G., Ulusoy, G., Kilic, K., & Alpkan, L. (2011), Effects of Innovation Types on Firm Performance, International Journal of Production Economics, 133(2), 662-676.
  • Hagedoorn, J. & Cloodt, M. (2003), Measuring Innovative Performance: Is There an Advantage in Using Multiple Indicators?, Research policy, 32(8), 1365-1379.
  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. (2006), Multivariate Data Analysis, Uppersaddle River.
  • Hall, B.H., Link, A., & Scott, J.T. (2001), Barriers Inhibiting Industry from Partnering with University: Evidence from the Advanced Technology Program, Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1), 87-98.
  • Hanel, P., & St-Pierre, M. (2006), Industry–University Collaboration by Canadian Manufacturing Firms, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 31(4), 485-499.
  • Hassink, R. (2001), Towards Regionally Embedded Innovation Support Systems in South Korea? Case Studies from Kyongbuk-Taegu and Kyonggi, Urban Studies, 38(8), 1373-1395.
  • Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. (2009), The Uppsala Internationalization Process Modelrevisited: From Liability of Foreignness to Liability of Outsidership, Journal of International Business, 40(9), 1411–1431.
  • Kalenov, O., & Kukushkin, S. (2018), Techno-Park Assistance in Mining Regions’ Integration into the Innovative Economy, In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol. 41, p. 04025). EDP Sciences.
  • Kang, I. (1996), Chancen und Grundlagen für eine endogene Regionalentwicklung in Südkorea: Fallstudie Provinz Chungbuk (Doctoral dissertation, PhD thesis, Dortmund University).
  • Keeble, D. (1997), Small Firms, Innovation and Regional Development in Britain in the 1990s. Regional Studies, 31(3) 281–294.
  • Larsson, S., Malmberg, A. (1999), Innovations, Competitiveness and Local Embedd- Edness. Geografiska Annaler Series B: Human Geography 81 (1), 1–18.
  • Lin, J. L., Fang, S. C., Fang, S. R., & Tsai, F. S. (2009), Network Embeddedness and Technology Transfer Performance in R&D Consortia in Taiwan, Technovation, 29(11), 763-774.
  • Löfsten, H., & Lindelöf, P. (2002), Science Parks and the Growth of New Technology- based Firms—Academic-Industry Links, Innovation and Markets. Research policy, 31(6), 859-876.
  • Lundvall, B. A. (1992), National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning, Pinter, London.
  • Malairaja, C., & Zawdie, G.. (2008), Science Parks and University-Industry Collaboration in Malaysia. Technology Analysis&Strategic Management, 20, 727-739.
  • Marchiori, D., & Franco, M. (2020), Knowledge Transfer in the Context of Inter- Organizational Networks: Foundations and Intellectual Structures, Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 5(2), 130-139.
  • Markman, G. D., Phan, P. H., Balkin, D. B., & Gianiodis, P. T. (2005), Entrepreneurship and University-based Technology Transfer, Journal of Business Venturing, 20(2), 241-263.
  • OECD & SourceOECD (Online service) (2007), Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators in a Changing World: Responding to Policy Needs, OECD.
  • OECD, E. (2005), Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data, Paris 2005, Sp, 46. Perkmann, M., & Walsh, K. (2008), Engaging the Scholar: Three Forms of Academic Consulting and Their Impact on Universities and Industry, Research Policy, 37, 1884- 1891.
  • Phillimore, J. (1999), Beyond the Linear View of Innovation in Science Park Evaluation An Analysis of Western Australian Technology Park, Technovation, 19(11), 673-680.
  • Porter, M.E. (1990), Competitive Advantage of Nations. London: MacMillan. Quintas, P., et al. (1996), The Sciencepark Evaluation Handbook, Technopolis, Milton Keynes.
  • Radosevic, S., & Myrzakhmet, M. (2009), Between Vision and Reality: Promoting Innovation Through Technoparks in an Emerging Economy, Technovation, 29(10), 645-656.
  • Rodan, S., & Galunic, C. (2004), More than network structure: How Knowledge Heterogeneity Influences Managerial Performance and Innovativeness, Strategic Management Journal, 25(6), 541-562.
  • Rosenkopf, L., & Almeida, P. (2003), Overcoming Local Search Through Alliances and Mobility, Management Science, 49(6), 751-766.
  • Sakarya, F., KILIÇ, A., & Eren, H. (2016), Factors Effecting Absorptive Capacity Of The Firms: Technopark Firms Sample, Social Sciences, 11(4), 288-311.
  • Seo, J. (2006), The Korean Techno-Parks as the Hub of Sub-National Innovation System: Case of Daegu Techno-Park. Paper prepared for the National Workshop on Sub-National Innovation Systems and Technology Building Policies to Enhance Competitive SMEs, December 21-22, 2006, Kathmandu, Nepal.
  • Toreli, M. (2013), Dunyada ve Türkiye’de Teknoparklar, 236-246, Retrieved from http://arsiv.mmo.org.tr/pdf/10684.pdf
  • Van Looy, B., Ranga, M., Callaert, J., Debackere, K. & Zimmermann, E. (2004), Combining Entrepreneurial and Scientific Performance in Academia: Towards a Compounded and Reciprocal Matthew-effect?. Research Policy, 33(2004), 425-441. Watts, D. J. 1999, Networks, Dynamics, and the Small-world Phenomenon, Amer. J. Sociol. 105 493–528.
There are 50 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Serkan Uyar 0000-0002-0772-2669

Fahri Sakarya 0000-0002-2371-2276

Ali Kılıç 0000-0003-2777-0876

Publication Date April 30, 2023
Submission Date March 6, 2023
Published in Issue Year 2023 Volume: 3 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Uyar, S., Sakarya, F., & Kılıç, A. (2023). The Effect Of Firm’s Collaboration Networks On Their Innovation Performance In The Context Of Technoparks. Akademik Açı, 3(1), 73-100.