The investigation of the Relationship between Capabilities of Networking of Science and Technology Parks in the Innovation and Business Performance of Park's Member Companies

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Associate Prof., Department of Management, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

2 Prof., Department of Materials Science and Engineering, School of Metallurgy and Materials Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

3 Assistant Prof., Department of Industrial Management, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

4 PhD Candidate, Department of Business Management, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Objective: Nowadays, the essence of knowledge-based companies is based on creativity and innovation and they are noticed for economic growth based on knowledge and technology, therefore, the affecting factors on the better performance and innovation of these companies are significant. The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of networking capabilities of the science and technology park on the performance of companies that are mediated by innovation.
Methods: This study is practical in terms of purpose and descriptive and surveys in terms of the data collection method. The questionnaires that are based on the standard questionnaire are used to collect data. The statistical population of the study are managers and employees of these companies that according to the rule of using structural equation modeling (SEM), 379 people are considered as the sample and filled out the questionnaire. For both the direct relations model and moderation model, data analysis was performed with the use of structural equation modeling.
Results: The results showed, networking capability has a positive and significant effect on the innovation of the located companies in the park and subsequently the innovation of the located companies on their performance. The mediating role of innovation in the relationship between networking and performance was confirmed but the direct effect of networking on the performance of companies was not.
Conclusion: The presented conceptual model in this study helps to develop this type of model in order to support the performance of located companies in the science and technology parks.

Keywords

References

Aghazadeh, H., Esfidani, M. R., Mohammadi, M., & Zadbar, H. (2018). Identification and Prioritization of Commercialization Services needed for Technology Units Located at Science and Technology Park of University of Tehran. Innovation Management Journal, 6(4), 137-161. (in Persian)
Aksoy, H. (2017). How do innovation culture, marketing innovation and product innovation affect the market performance of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Technology in Society, 51(4), 133-141.
Arnkil, R., Järvensivu, A., Koski, P., & Piirainen, T. (2010). Exploring quadruple helix outlining user-oriented innovation models. Final Report on Quadruple Helix Research for the CLIQ project, University of Tampere.
Azar, A., & Zarei Mahmoodabadi, M., Anvari Rostami, A. A. (2012). Balanced Performance Evaluation with Emphasis on the BSC Indicators (Case: Yazd Tile and Ceramic Companies). Journal of Operational Research In Its Applications (Applied Mathematics)-Lahijan Azad University, 9(32), 63-79. (in Persian)
Belderbos, R., Carree, M., Lokshin, B., & Sastre, J. F. (2015). Inter-temporal patterns of R&D collaboration and innovative performance. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(1), 123-137.
Bellavista, J., & Sanz, L. (2009). Science and technology parks: habitats of innovation: introduction to special section. Science and Public Policy, 36(7), 499-510.
Bolzani, D., Munari, F., Rasmussen, E., & Toschi, L. (2021). Technology transfer offices as providers of science and technology entrepreneurship education. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 46(2), 335-365.
Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. (2014). Developed democracies versus emerging autocracies: arts, democracy, and innovation in Quadruple Helix innovation systems. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 3(1), 1-23.
Colapinto, C., & Porlezza, C. (2012). Innovation in creative industries: from the quadruple helix model to the systems theory. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 3(4), 343-353.
Cooper, C. E., Hamel, S. A., & Connaughton, S. L. (2012). Motivations and obstacles to networking in a university business incubator. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(4), 433-453.
Das, T. K., & Teng, B. S. (2000). A resource-based theory of strategic alliances. Journal of management, 26(1), 31-61.
Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Innovation in innovation: The triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Social science information, 42(3), 293-337.
European Commission (2007). “Regional research-intensive clusters and science parks”, EC– DG RESEARCH, Brussels, available at: https://ec.europa.eu/research/regions/pdf/publications/ sc_park.pdf
European Commission (2013), Innovation Union Scoreboard 2013, Publications Office, Brussels, available at:https://doi.org/10.2769/72530.
Figlioli, A., & Porto, G. S. (2012). Financiamento de parques tecnológicos: um estudo comparativo de casos brasileiros, portugueses e espanhóis. Revista de Administração, 47(2), 290-306.
GEDI. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Index.
GERA. (2016). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. Retrieved from:  http://www.gemconsortium.org/report
Gezginci, E., & Öztaş, B. (2020). Yoğun Bakım Hemşirelerinin Örgütsel Yenilik Düzeylerinin İncelenmesi. JAREN, 6(3), 448-54.
Gilsing, V., & Nooteboom, B. (2006). Exploration and exploitation in innovation systems: The case of pharmaceutical biotechnology. Research Policy, 35(1), 1-23.
Govindaraju, C. (2010). R&D commercialization challenges for developing countries: The case of Malaysia. Available in: http://hdl.handle.net/10625/49230
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.
Heikkilä, A. M., Malmén, Y., Nissilä, M., & Kortelainen, H. (2010). Challenges in risk management in multi-company industrial parks. Safety science, 48(4), 430-435.
Hewitt-Dundas, N. (2006). Resource and capability constraints to innovation in small and large plants. Small Business Economics, 26(3), 257-277.
Ismail, A. I., Belli, R. F., Sohn, W., & Toussaint, L. (2002). Internal consistency and reliability of a questionnaire assessing organizational innovation in two schools of dentistry. Journal of dental education, 66(4), 469-477.
Johnston, A. (2021). Networks, SMEs, and the University: The Process of Collaboration and Open Innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Kakapour, S., & Rouzban, F. (2013). Quadruple helix pattern: A new approach to strengthening the relationship between industry and academia. Journal of Industry & University, 6(21-22), 49-59. (inPersian)
Leydesdorff, L.(2006). Knowledge–Based: Modeled, Measured, Simulated; Social Science, Business and Economics.
Leydesdorff, L. (2012). The triple helix, quadruple helix, and an N-tuple of helices: explanatory models for analyzing the knowledge-based economy? Journal of the knowledge economy, 3(1), 25-35.
Lin, B. W., Li, P. C., & Chen, J. S. (2006). Social capital, capabilities, and entrepreneurial strategies: a study of Taiwanese high-tech new ventures. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73(2), 168-181.
Lindelöf, P. and Löfsten, H. (2001). Science parks in Sweden–industrial renewal and development? R&d Management, 31(3), 309-322.
Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2007). The economics of university research parks. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23(4), 661-674.
Löfsten, H., & Lindelöf, P. (2005). R&D networks and product innovation patterns—academic and non-academic new technology-based firms on Science Parks. Technovation, 25(9), 1025-1037.
Madrid‐Guijarro, A., Garcia, D., & Van Auken, H. (2009). Barriers to innovation among Spanish manufacturing SMEs. Journal of small business management, 47(4), 465-488.
Mohaghar, A., & Ghasemi, R. (2011). A Conceptual Model for Cooperate Strategy and Supply Chain Performance by Structural Equation Modeling a Case Study in the Iranian Automotive Industry. European Journal of Social Sciences, 22(4), 519-530.
Monck, C., & Peters, K. (2009, November). Science parks as an instrument of regional competitiveness: measuring success and impact. In IASP 2009 Conference (pp. 25-27).
Moudi, M., & Hajihosseini, H. (2011). Science and technology parks, tools for a leap into future. Interdisciplinary journal of contemporary research in business, 3(8), 1168-1176.
Mousavi, S. A., Azar, A., Elahi, S., & Moghbel Baerz, A. (2013). Science and Technology Parks and Regional, Local, and Urban Economy: Identifying the Effective Contextual Factors in Assessing the Function of such New Organizations. Journal of Urban Economics and Management, 1(3), 45-55. (inPersian)
Nabipour, I. (2020). The Fifth Generation University: Based on the Quintuple Helix of Carayannis and Campbell. ISMJ, 23(2), 165-194. (inPersian)
Phan, P. H., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, M. (2005). Science parks and incubators: observations, synthesis and future research. Journal of business venturing, 20(2), 165-182.
Prajogo, D., & McDermott, C. M. (2014). Antecedents of service innovation in SMEs: Comparing the effects of external and internal factors. Journal of Small Business Management, 52(3), 521-540.
Radosevic, S., & Myrzakhmet, M. (2009). Between vision and reality: Promoting innovation through technoparks in an emerging economy. Technovation, 29(10), 645-656.
Raghavan, V. (2005). Advising and monitoring the planning of a technology park: guidelines for an ICT Park in Iran. Vienna: UNIDO.
Ratinho, T., & Henriques, E. (2010). The role of science parks and business incubators in converging countries: Evidence from Portugal. Technovation, 30(4), 278-290.
Razavi, S. M., Abdi, M., Amirnequiee, S., & Ghasemi, R. (2016). The impact of supply chain relationship quality and cooperative strategy on strategic purchasing. Journal of Logistics Management, 5(1), 6-15.
Razavi, S. M., Ghasemi, R., Abdullahi, B., & Shafie, H. (2012). Relationship between innovation and business sophistication: A secondary analysis of countries global competitiveness. European Journal of Scientific Research, 79(1), 29-39.
Roldan, L. B., Hansen, P. B., & Garcia-Perez-de-Lema, D. (2018). The relationship between favorable conditions for innovation in technology parks, the innovation produced, and companies’ performance. Innovation & Management Review.
Rothaermel, F. T., Agung, S. D., & Jiang, L. (2007). University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature. Industrial and corporate change, 16(4), 691-791.
Sá, C., & Lee, H. (2012). Science, business, and innovation: understanding networks in technology‐based incubators. R&D Management, 42(3), 243-253.
Saryazdi, A. H. GH., & Manteghi, M. (2013). Analyzing the Impacts of Yazd Science and Technology Park Policies on Its Resident Institutions' Technology Development Using System Dynamics. Innovation Management Journal, 2(2), 69-98. (inPersian)
Sharif, F. A., & Senin, A. A. (2020). Innovation policy and triple helix model in Malaysia context: a literature review. International Journal of Technological Learning, Innovation and Development, 12(2), 93-113.
Soderberg, M., Kalagnanam, S., Sheehan, N. T., & Vaidyanathan, G. (2011). When is a balanced scorecard a balanced scorecard? International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management.
Soetanto, D. P., & Jack, S. L. (2013). Business incubators and the networks of technology-based firms. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(4), 432-453.
Steffen, M. O., Oliveira, M., & Balle, A. R. (2017). Knowledge sharing among companies in a science and technology park. Business Information Review, 34(2), 101-108.
Sun, C. C. (2011). Evaluating and benchmarking productive performances of six industries in Taiwan Hsin Chu Industrial Science Park. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(3), 2195-2205.
Talebzadehhosseini, S. (2015). Measuring Sustainability Performance of Supply Chain Management Practices Using Fuzzy Inference (Doctoral dissertation, Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research, University of Regina).
Talebzadehhosseini, S., Garibay, I., Keathley-Herring, H., Al-Rawahi, Z. R. S., Garibay, O. O., & Woodell, J. K. (2019). Strategies to enhance university economic engagement: evidence from US universities. Studies in Higher Education, 1-20.
Vares, H., Parvandi, Y., Ghasemi, R., & Abdullahi, B. (2011). Transition from an efficiency-driven economy to innovation-driven: a secondary analysis of countries global competitiveness. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, 31, 124-132.
Vásquez-Urriago, Á. R., Barge-Gil, A., & Rico, A. M. (2016). Science and technology parks and cooperation for innovation: Empirical evidence from Spain. Research Policy, 45(1), 137-147.
Vedovello, C. A., Judice, V., & Maculan, A. M. (2006). Revisão crítica às abordagens a parques tecnológicos: alternativas interpretativas às experiências brasileiras recentes. INMR-Innovation & Management Review, 3(2), 103-118.
Volberda, H. W., Van Den Bosch, F. A., & Heij, C. V. (2013). Management innovation: Management as fertile ground for innovation. European Management Review. 10 (1): 1-15.
Warren, L., Patton, D., & Bream, D. (2009). Knowledge acquisition processes during the incubation of new high technology firms. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 5(4), 481-495.
Wu, Y., Welch, E. W., & Huang, W. L. (2015). Commercialization of university inventions: Individual and institutional factors affecting licensing of university patents. Technovation, 36, 12-25.
Ylinenpää, H. (2001). Science parks clusters and regional development. In European Small Business Seminar: 12/09/2001-14/09/2001.
Industrial Management Journal
Volume 13, Issue 2
2022
Pages 329-351

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics