آینده پژوهی استراتژی شرکت های دانش بنیان با رویکرد سناریو نگاری

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی با اصالت

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد مدیریت صنعتی، دانشکده مدیریت، اقتصاد و حسابداری، دانشگاه هرمزگان، هرمزگان، ایران.

2 نویسنده مسئول: استادیار، گروه مدیریت صنعتی، دانشکده مدیریت، اقتصاد و حسابداری، دانشگاه هرمزگان،هرمزگان،ایران

چکیده

توانایی تصور آنچه که احتمالاً اتفاق خواهد افتاد (آینده‌پژوهی) یکی از ویژگی‌های بسیار مهم شرکت‌های موفق می‌باشد. حال اگر این شرکت، شرکت دانش‌بنیان باشد که اساس رقابت و مزیت رقابتی آن‌ها بر مبنای دانش است بیشتر خواهد بود. ازاین‌رو در این پژوهش سعی شده است با آینده‌نگری مؤلفه‌های مزیت ساز رقابتی در شرکت‌های دانش‌بنیان، سناریوهای محتمل و درنتیجه استراتژی‌های مناسب برای این شرکت‌ها تدوین شود. این پژوهش ازنظر هدف کاربردی و ازنظر روش از نوع پیمایشی و در سطح اکتشافی است. جامعه آماری این پژوهش را 97 نفر از مدیران و خبرگان موجود در46 شرکت دانش‌بنیان مستقر در شهرک فناوری صنایع شیمیایی شیراز و هلدینگ دانش‌بنیان فتکو تشکیل دادند که با توجه به نوع و مراحل پژوهش ، تیم‌های 15 نفره ، 7 نفره و 6 نفره به‌صورت قضاوتی انتخاب شدند . در مرحله اول با بررسی ادبیات موضوع 4 دسته اصلی سیاسی- راهبردی، اقتصادی-مالی، اجتماعی – فرهنگی و فناوری انتخاب شد و سپس با استفاده مجدد از ادبیات موضوع و مصاحبه با خبرگان 30 مؤلفه شناسایی شد و آنگاه با استفاده از نظر تیم 15 نفره از خبرگان و به روش دلفی 26 مؤلفه مزیت ساز رقابتی نهایی شد. در مرحله دوم جهت تعیین تأثیرات متقابل مؤلفه‌ها، این مؤلفه‌ها وارد 2 پرسشنامه شد و یک تیم 7 نفره از خبرگان اقدام به تکمیل آن‌ها نمودند. یکی از این پرسشنامه‌ها جهت استفاده در تجزیه‌وتحلیل MICMAC و دیگری جهت استفاده در نرم‌افزار سناریو ویزارد تدوین شد. وجود سناریو در خروجی نرم‌افزار سناریو ویزارد و پایایی 95% پرسشنامه MICMAC اعتبار و سازگاری درونی این 2 پرسشنامه و داده‌های مربوطه را تضمین می‌کند. نتایج نرم‌افزار سناریو ویزارد 8 سناریوی قابل‌قبول (قوی) را ارائه داد که در این میان 3 سناریوی خوش‌بینانه، بدبینانه و محتمل‌ترین مورد تجزیه‌وتحلیل قرار گرفت. با دسته‌بندی مؤلفه‌های مزیت ساز در 4 دسته سیاسی/راهبردی، اقتصادی/مالی، اجتماعی/ فرهنگی و فناوری، نتایج سناریوهای سه‌گانه نیز در این دسته‌بندی ارائه شد. در مرحله آخر نیز از تیم 6 نفره ای برای تدوین اقدامات و سیاست‌های لازم استفاده شد که این تیم درنهایت 12 اقدام برای سناریوی خوش‌بینانه، 9 اقدام برای سناریوی محتمل و 4 اقدام برای سناریوی بدبینانه پیشنهاد دادند. درمجموع می‌توان گفت که در شرکت های دانش بنیان گسیل توان مدیریت دانش به سمت چهار مقوله تولید بیشتر، توسعه بازار، نتیجه گرایی پروژه و کیفیت بیشتر می تواند سناریوی مطلوب برای رسیدن به حداکثر استفاده از امکانات و فرصت ها را فراهم آورد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Futures studies of the strategy of knowledge-based companies with a scenario approach

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohammad Akbarpoor 1
  • Ali tizroo 2
1 Master's student in Industrial Management, Faculty of Management, Economics and Accounting, Hormozgan University, Hormozgan, Iran.
2 Corresponding author: Assistant Professor, Department of Industrial Management, Faculty of Management, Economics and Accounting, Hormozgan University, Hormozgan, Iran.
چکیده [English]

The ability to imagine what will probably happen is one of the most important characteristics of successful companies, and it will be even more so if this company is a knowledge-based company whose basis of competition and competitive advantage is based on knowledge. Therefore, in this research, an attempt has been made to formulate possible scenarios and, as a result, appropriate strategies for these companies, by looking ahead to competitive advantage components in knowledge-based companies. This research is applied in terms of purpose and in terms of method it is survey type and exploratory level. The statistical population of this research was made up of 97 managers and experts in 46 science-based companies located in Shiraz Chemical Industries Technology Town and Science-based Fatko Holding, which according to the type and stages of the research, groups of 15 people, 7 people and 6 people were selected judiciously. Investigating the literature of the first stage, 4 main political, strategic, economic, financial, socio-cultural and technological categories were selected by reviewing the subject literature, and then 30 components were identified by re-using the subject literature and interviewing experts, and then using the opinion of a group of 15 experts. And by Delphi method, 26 competitive advantage components were finalized. In the second stage, in order to determine the mutual effects of the components, these components were included in 2 questionnaires and a group of 7 experts completed them. One of these questionnaires was developed for use in MICMAC analysis and the other for use in Scenario Wizard software. The existence of the scenario in the output of the scenario wizard software and the reliability of 95% of the MICMAC questionnaire guarantees the validity and internal consistency of these 2 questionnaires and the relevant data.The results of the scenario wizard software provided 8 acceptable (strong) scenarios, among which 3 optimistic, pessimistic and most likely scenarios were analyzed. By categorizing the advantageous components into 4 political/strategic, economic/financial, social/cultural and technological categories, the results of the three scenarios were also presented in this category. In the last stage, a 6-person group was used to formulate the necessary measures and policies, and this group finally suggested 12 measures for the optimistic scenario, 9 measures for the probable scenario, and 4 measures for the pessimistic scenario. In general, it can be said that in knowledge-based companies, the distribution of knowledge management power towards the four categories of more production, market development, project result orientation and more quality can provide a favorable scenario to achieve the maximum use of facilities and opportunities.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Futures studies
  • knowledge management
  • knowledge-based companies
  • Scenario Planning
Abdollahi, B., Ghafoorian, F., Hasanshahi, A., (2014), Key success factors model of knowledge-based companies, The second national conference on entrepreneurship and management of knowledge-based businesses, Babolsar, https://civilica.com/doc/380391. (In Persian)
Agarwal, A., Shankar, R., Tiwari, M.K., (2007), Modeling agility of supply chain, Industrial Marketing Management, 36, 443-445.
Ahmadi joshaghani, A.,  Ismailian, Gh, R. (2014), Investigating and evaluating the effective factors in selecting appropriate strategies for formulating the strategy of knowledge-based companies, National Conference on Management and Information and Communication Technology, Tehran. https://civilica.com/doc/363603.
Alavi, M. and D. Leidner, 2001, Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems:  Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues. MIS Quarterly, 25 (6): 95-116
Alexandrov, A.V., Pullicino, P.M.,Meslin, E.M., Norris, J.W., (1996), Agreement on disease-specific criteria for do-not-resuscitate orders in acute stroke, Stroke 27, 232–237.
Amer, M., Daim, T. U., & Jetter, A. (2013). A review of scenario planning. Futures, 46, 23-40.
Assakul, pe. (2005). Methods of futures studies. Translations by Saeid Khaza'i. Tehran: Institute of Education and Defense Industry Research. Central futures study of defense science and technology. (In Persian)
Babakhanian, M., (2014), Identifying factors affecting the establishment of Reproductive companies case study: Reproductive companies based in science and technology park of Tehran province, National conference of new approaches in business management, Tabriz, Tabriz university and  Industrial Management Institute. (In Persian)
Bergsjö. Dag, Ćatić. Amer, Stenholm. Daniel (2019), Game-Based Learning of Knowledge Reuse in Engineering Education, Proceedings of the Design Society International Conference on Engineering Design 1(1):509-518, DOI:10.1017/dsi.2019.55.
Bolanos, R., Fontela, E., Nenclares, A., Paster, P., 2005, Using interpretive structural modeling in strategic decision making groups. Management Decision, vol. 43, vol6, pp.877−895.
Ceptureanu. Sebastian Ion (2016), Knowledge Cycles and Knowledge Management, International conference KNOWLEDGE-BASED ORGANIZATION 22(1), DOI: 10.1515/kbo-2016-0031.
Changiz, V., (2010), Identification and prioritization of critical success factors of knowledge management in Iranian SMEs: Anexperts’ view, African Journal of Business Management Vol. 4(6), pp. 915-924.
Chorev, S, Anderson, A.R,” (2006), Success in High-Tech Start-Ups; Critical Factors and Process”, Technovation Volume 26, Issue 2.
Coates, J. F. (2000). Scenario planning. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 65(1), 115-123.
Dalkey N and O Helmer (1963) An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Management Science, 9(3), 458–467.
Edvardsson, I.R., Oskarsson, G.K., (2010),  Knowledge management, competitive advantage, and value creation: A case study of Icelandic SMEs
Fabiana Dutra de Campos Souza; Djan, Magalhães Castro; Fabricio Ziviani; Fernando, Silva Parreiras, (2016), Knowledge Management System and Financial Performance: how this relation has been measured? Perspectivas em Ciência da Informação, v.21, n.2, p.188-214.
Fattah Zade, Y., Salehi, E., Khasto. M., (2021), Development of leading scenarios in the future of sustainable tourism development in Gilan province, Tourism and Development Scientific-Research Quarterly, 9(4). (In Persian)
Girdauskienė. Lina, Savaneviciene. Asta (2012), Influence of Formalization on Effective Knowledge Management in a Creative Organization, The International Journal of Knowledge Culture and Change Management Annual Review 11(6):11-28.
Godet, M. (2000). The art of scenarios and strategic planning: tools and pitfalls. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 65(1), 3-22.
Gorane, S. J. and R. Kant (2013). Modelling the SCM Enablers: an Integrated ISMfuzzy MICMAC Approach, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 25(2).
Grant, R.M., 1996, “Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm,” Strategic Management Journal (17), Winter Special Issue, , pp. 109–122.
Habibi, A., (2018), Practical training of SPSS software, Electronic publishing, Pars Madir website. (In Persian)
Habibi, Sarafrazi., A,  Izadyar, S., (2014), Delphi Technique Theoretical Framework in Qualitative Research, The International Journal Of Engineering And Science, 3(4), 8-13.
Hafezian, M., Salehi, M., Enayati, T., (2015), Factors affecting the infrastructure of academic incubators and its role in the establishment of academic breeding companies, Journal of Entrepreneurship Development, 4(4), 715-732.
Haji Poor, B., Motameni, A., Taebi, S.A.H., (2016), An overview of the concepts of commercialization with an emphasis on the place and role of science and technology parks in the development of the country. The 10th Congress of Pioneers of Progress, Tehran. (In Persian)
Holsapple CW, Singh M. (2001), The knowledge chain model: activities for competitiveness. Expert Systems with Applications, 20(1):77-98.
Hooshmand, H., Mir Afzal, S., Rezae Noor, J., (2014), Providing a model for evaluating knowledge management of knowledge-based organizations (The case study of Qom University), Journal of Growth of Technology, 10(38), 65-77. (In Persian)
Huang, L.S., Lai, C.P., (2012), An investigation on critical success factors for knowledge management using structural equation modeling, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 40 , 24 – 30.
Huss, W. R. (1988). A move toward scenario analysis. International Journal of Forecasting, 4(3), 377-388
Jetter, A. J. (2003). Educating the guess: strategies, concepts and tools for the fuzzy front end of product development. Paper presented at the Management of Engineering and Technology, 2003. PICMET'03. Technology Management for Reshaping the World. Portland International Conference on.
Julio César Acosta Prado & Mónica Longo-Somoza & André Luiz Fischer(2014), Knowledge spaces. Context for the development of an innovation capacity. An analysis from the knowledge management perspective, Rev. esc.adm.neg. No. 76, Pp. 44-63.
Kahn, H., & Wiener, A. J. (1967). Year 2000; a framework for speculation on the next thirty-three years.
Kammani. Abdullah, Date. Hema, Hundewale. Nisar, Safeena. Rahmath (2013), Technology Infrastructure for KM Capability, International Journal of Computer Theory and Engineering 5(1):183-187.
Kaplan, R. S.; Norton, D. P. 1992. The balanced scorecard – measures that drive performance, Harvard Business Review 70(1): 71–79.
Keshavars, S., Yaghoobi, N., Deghghati, A., (2021),  Evaluating the success factors of knowledge-based companies in Fars Science and Technology Park with the structural equation modeling approach, Journal of Science and technology policy, 11(1), 35-50. (In Persian)
Lawson, S. (2003). Examining the relationship between organizational culture and knowledge management (Doctoral dissertation, Nova southeastern university)
Linstone, H.A. and Turoff, M. (eds.) (1975) the Delphi Method Techniques and Applications, Massachusetts, Reading: Addison-Wesl
Litvaj. I , Stancekova. D (2014), Knowledge Management Embedment in Company, Knowledge Repositories, Knowledge Management Significance and Usage  in Company, Procedia Economics and Finance   23  ( 2015 )  833 – 838.
Lloyd, E. A., & Schweizer, V. J. (2014). Objectivity and a comparison of methodological scenario approaches for climate change research. Synthese, 191(10),  2049-2088.
Loughlin, K.G., Moore, L.F., (1979), Using Delphi to achieve congruent objectives and activities in a pediatrics department, J. Med. Educ. 54 101–106.
Mahdavi, H., Fathollah Bayati, M., Rasti Barzaki, M., (2008), Examining the success factors of knowledge-based companies, Journal of Growth of Technology, 16(4), 7-3. (In Persian)
Martino, J. P. (2003). A review of selected recent advances in technological forecasting. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 70(8), 719-733.
Moahmody, behzad. (2010). Statistics and its role in policy-making and decision-making from the perspective of scenario studies. Economic Research Department (Center for Strategic Research), Strategic Research Report No: 123. (In Persian(
Monacko, N.J, (2008), "knowledge management in universities", Journal of Academy of U.P.M university, malasian , 10(42).
Moreno. Valter, Cavazotte. Flavia (2015), Using Information Systems to Leverage Knowledge Management Processes: The Role of Work Context, Job Characteristics and Task-Technology Fit, Procedia Computer Science 55:360-369.
Nanoka, I. (1994). A Dynamic Theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization science, page 14-37.
Nasri, S.R., Jafari, S., (2021), Categorizing and prioritizing the critical success factors of knowledge-based companies using the Q method, Journal of Research progress: systems and strategies, 2(1), 133-162. (In Persian)
Nonaka, I., Takeuchi, H.(1995).The Knowledge Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Createthe Dynamicso fInnovation, Oxford University Press, New York, NY,
Okemwa Ezra Ondari. (2006), Knowledge Management in aResearch Organisation: International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI). Libri, 56: 63-72.
Putnam, J.W., Spiegel, A.N., Bruininks  R.H., (1995), Future directions in education and inclusion of students with disabilities: a Delphi investigation, Except. Child. 61, 553–576.
 Ravi, V., & Shankar, R. (2005). Analysis of interactions among the barriers of reverse logistics. Technological Forecasting and Social Changes, 72, 1011−1029.
Reeves M., Hance N., Sinha J., (2015), Your Strategy Needs a Strategy: How to Choose and Execute the Right Approach Harvard Business Review Press , New Yourk . 
Roohani Rad, S., Taebi S.A.H.,(2020), Examining the requirements for successful entry into the market for new knowledge-based companies  (Case study of Tehran information and communication technology companies), Journal of Technology Development Management , 8 (1), 185-220. (In Persian)
Ross, I., & Juwaheer, A. (2003). Service quality and store performance: some evidence from Greece. Managing Service Quality, 15(1), 24-50.
Rowen H., Toyoda A., (2002), From Keirestu to Startups: Japan‟s Push High Tech Entrepreneurship, Asia/Pacific Research Center, Encina Hall, Room E301, Stanford University, Stanford CA, 94306-6055.
Safai, N., Taleghaninia, F., Kiamanesh, A., (2017), Identifying and ranking the key success factors of knowledge management in knowledge-based companies (Case study: Tehran University Science and Technology Park), Journal of Growth of Technology, 13(50), 21-28. (In Persian)
Schweizer, V. J., & Kriegler, E. (2012). Improving environmental change research with systematic techniques for qualitative scenarios. Environmental Research Letters, 7(4), 044011.
Schweizer, V. J., & Kriegler, E. (2012). Improving environmental change research with systematic techniques for qualitative scenarios. Environmental Research Letters, 7(4), 044011.
Schweizer, V. J., & O’Neill, B. C. (2014). Systematic construction of global socioeconomic pathways using internally consistent element combinations. Climatic Change, 122(3), 431-445.
Seagle, E. Iverson, M., (2002) Characteristics of the turfgrass industry in 2020: a Delphi study with implications for agricultural education programs, J South. Agric. Educ. Res. 52 1–13.
Shaholi Kuhshuri, J., Askari, H. R., Nazari, R., Naghsh, A. R., (2021), Compilation of educational sport strategies in Iran based on scenario, Journal of Research in Educational sports, 8(21), 227-250. (In Persian)
Souza. Fabiano Dutra de Campos, Castro. Djan Magalhães, Ziviani. Fabricio. Parreiras, Fernando Silva (2016), Knowledge Management System and Financial Performance: how this relation has been measured?, Perspectivas em Ciência da Informação 21(2):188-214.
Stewart, J., C. O'Halloran, P. Harrigan, J.A. Spencer, J.R. Barton, S.J. Singleton, (1999),  Identifying appropriate tasks for the preregistration year: modified Delphi technique, Br. Med. J. 319, 224–229.
Tari, M., Moradi, M., Ebrahimipoor, M., (2016), Investigating factors affecting the growth and success of knowledge-based companies, Journal of Growth of Technology, 12(45), 36-44. (In Persian)
Tayyibi Abolhasani, S. A. H., Hajipoor, B., Mothmany, A., (2018), Determining the most important characteristics of successful Iranian knowledge-based companies, Journal of Organizational Resource Management Research, 8(1), 113-131. (In Persian)
Tingwei Gao, Yueting Chai, Yi Liu , (2018), A review of knowledge management about theoretical conception and designing approaches, International Journal of Crowd Science, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 42-51
Torghe, jafar. (2012). Proposed model for future scenario studies for the development of the university. The first National Conference on futures study. Tehran. (In Persian)
Turoff, M. (1972). An alternative approach to cross impact analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 3, 309-339.
Uden Lorna, Lu Wei, Ting I-Hsien  (2019), knowledge management in organizations, japan Commenced Publishing, ISSN 1865-0929 ISSN 1865-0937 (electronic), ISBN 978-3-319-62697-0 ISBN 978-3-319-62698-7 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-62698-7, Library of Congress Control Number: 2017945722
Varum, C. A., & Melo, C. (2010). Directions in scenario planning literature–A review of the past decades. Futures, 42(4), 355-369.
Viehland, D.V., (2000), Critical Success Factors for Developing an e-Business Strategy, Res. Lett. Inf. Math. Sci., 1, 1-7.
Von der Gracht, Heiko, (2012), Consensus measurement in Delphi studies Re-opinion and implications for future quality assurance, Technological Forecasting & Social Change 79,  1525–1536.
Weimer-Jehle, W. (2006). Cross-impact balances: A system-theoretical approach to cross-impact analysis. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, (73), 334-361.
Ying Zheng, Larissa Naylor, Susan Waldron, David. Oliver, (2019),  Knowledge management across the environment-policy interface in China: What knowledge is exchanged, why, and how is this undertaken? Environmental Science and Policy, 92, 66-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.09.021
Ziai, M., (2013), The importance of multiplicity and diversity of resources in the success of the process of creating research breeding companies, Specialized quarterly magazine of technology development, 8(32). (In Persian)