ارائه مدلی جهت اندازه‌گیری قابلیت یادگیری بین سازمانی (مورد مطالعه: زنجیره‌تأمین ساپکو)

نوع مقاله: مدیریت سازمانی(چالشهای کسب وکار -اخلاق و مسولیت اجتماعی -تحول سازمانی - عملکرد سازمانی -ریسک)

نویسندگان

1 استادیار گروه مدیریت صنعتی، دانشکده علوم اداری و اقتصاد، دانشگاه ولی‌عصر (عج)، رفسنجان، ایران

2 دانش آموخته کارشناسی ارشد مدیریت صنعتی، دانشگاه دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری، دانشگاه تهران، ایران

چکیده

هدف این مقاله ارائه مدلی مفهومی برای اندازه‌گیری قابلیت یادگیری بین سازمانی در زنجیره‌تأمین ساپکو می‌باشد. با بررسی ادبیات پژوهش و مطالعات مشابه مجموعه‌ای از سنجه‌های قابلیت یادگیری بین سازمانی شناسایی گردید. سپس با انجام مصاحبه نیمه‌ساختار یافته با خبرگان دانشگاهی و مدیران صنعت مورد مطالعه، برخی از سنجه‌ها حذف و برخی نیز تعدیل گردید. در نهایت 41 گویه در سه بُعد کیفیت روابط، تمایل به یادگیری و استفاده از سیستم‌های بین سازمانی به عنوان گویه‌های ارزیابی قابلیت یادگیری بین سازمانی تعیین شد. در مرحله بعد جهت ارزیابی برازش مدل بر اساس مدل ارایه شده، پرسشنامه مذکور با طیف لیکرتی 5 گزینه‌ای بین کارشناسان و مدیران فنی و غیر فنی زنجیره‌تأمین شرکت ساپکو که بالغ بر 220 نفر می‌باشند، توزیع شد. بعد از تکمیل و جمع‌آوری پرسشنامه‌ها تعداد 202 پرسشنامه به دست آمد. جهت ارزیابی برازش مدل از تحلیل عاملی تأییدی استفاده شد. نتایج حاصل از تحلیل عاملی تأییدی نشان داد مدل پژوهش از برازش مناسب برخوردار است و مؤلفه تمایل به یادگیری با بار عاملی (89/0) بیشترین تأثیر و بعد کیفیت روابط بین سازمانی به با بار عاملی(64/0) کمترین تأثیر را در تببین سازه یادگیری بین سازمانی دارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

A Conceptual Model to Measure the Inter-organizational Learning Capability (Case study: SAPCO Supply Chain)

نویسندگان [English]

  • abbas shoul 1
  • Saeid Sadeghi Darvazeh 2
1 1. Assistant Prof., Dep of Industrial Management, Faculty of Administrative Sciences and Economy, Vali-e-Asr University, Rafsanjan, Iran
2 MA in Industrial Management, Faculty of Management and Accounting, University of Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

The purpose of the present study is to propose a conceptual model to measure the Inter-organizational Learning Capability SAPCO supply chain. By reviewing the literature and similar studies, a collection of inter-organizational learning capabilities measures was identified. Subsequently, by conducting a semi-structured interview with academic experts and industry managers, we removed some measures and modified others. Finally, 41 items were determined in three dimensions of relationship quality, learning orientation, and application of inter-organizational systems as inter-organizational learning capability evaluation questions. In the next step, a 5 point Likert scale questionnaire was distributed among experts and technical and non-technical managers of the SAPCO supply of 220 employees. After completion and collection of questionnaires, 202 questionnaires were obtained. To evaluate the fit of the model, we used a confirmatory factor analysis. The results of confirmatory factor analysis showed that the research model has suitable fit. The component of learning orientation with factor load (0.89) had the highest impact and the inter-organizational relationship quality with factor load (0.64) had the least impact on explaining of inter-organizational learning construct. Based on the proposed model, the inter-organizational learning level for the SAPCO supply chain obtained 3.63 (from 1-5). Keyword: Inter-organizational Learning, Inter-organizational relationship quality, learning orientation, inter-organizational systems.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • SCM
  • Inter-organizational Learning
  • Inter-organizational relationship quality
  • learning orientation
  • inter-organizational systems

Argote, L., McEvily, B., & Reagans, R. (2003). Managing knowledge in organizations: An integrative framework and review of emerging themes. Management science, 49(4), 571-582.
Chopra, S., & Meindl, P. (2007). Supply chain management. Strategy, planning & operation. In Das summa summarum des management (pp. 265-275). Gabler.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation', Administration Science Quarterly 35, 128–152. CrossRef Google Scholar.
Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of management review23(4), 660-679.
Easterby‐Smith, M., Lyles, M. A., & Tsang, E. W. (2008). Inter‐organizational knowledge transfer: Current themes and future prospects. Journal of management studies, 45(4), 677-690.
Ebashari, A & Hosseini, Y (2012). Modeling of structural equations, Agah Publishment. [Persian]
Flint, D. J., Larsson, E., Gammelgaard, B., & Mentzer, J. T. (2005). Logistics innovation: a customer value‐oriented social process. Journal of business logistics, 26(1), 113-147.
Fornell, C., Johnson, M. D., Anderson, E. W., Cha, J., & Bryant, B. E. (1996). The American customer satisfaction index: nature, purpose, and findings. The Journal of Marketing, 7-18.
Fynes, B., De Burca, S., & Mangan, J. (2008). The effect of relationship characteristics on relationship quality and performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 111(1), 56-69.
Gluch, P. & Johansson, K. & Räisänen, C. (2013). Knowledge sharing and learning across community boundaries in an arena for energy efficient buildings. Journal of Cleaner Production, 48, 232-240.
Golden, W., & Powell, P. (1999). Exploring inter-organisational systems and flexibility in Ireland: a case of two value chains. International journal of agile management systems, 1(3), 169-176.
Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge‐based theory of the firm. Strategic management journal, 17(S2), 109-122.
Greve, H. R. (2003). Organizational learning from performance feedback: A behavioral perspective on innovation and change. Cambridge University Press.
Hult, G. T. M., Ketchen, D. J., & Arrfelt, M. (2007). Strategic supply chain management: Improving performance through a culture of competitiveness and knowledge development. Strategic management journal28(10), 1035-1052.
Holmqvist, M. (2009). Complicating the organization: a new prescription for the learning organization?. Management Learning40(3), 275-287.
Holmqvist, M. (2004). Experiential learning processes of exploitation and exploration within and between organizations: An empirical study of product development. Organization science15(1), 70-81.
Inkpen, A. C. (1997). An examination of knowledge management in international joint ventures. Cooperative Strategies: North American Perspectives, 337-369.
Kaminsky, D. A., Marcy, T. W., Bachand, M., & Irvin, C. G. (2005). Knowledge and use of office spirometry for the detection of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease by primary care physicians. Respiratory care50(12), 1639-1648.
Ketchen, D. J., & Hult, G. T. M. (2007). Bridging organization theory and supply chain management: The case of best value supply chains. Journal of operations management, 25(2), 573-580.
Kuei, C. H., & Madu, C. N. (2001). Identifying critical success factors for supply chain quality management (SCQM). Asia Pacific Management Review, 6(4), 409-423.
Lane, C. (2001). Organizational learning in supplier networks. Handbook of organizational learning and knowledge, 699-715.
Larsson, R., Bengtsson, L., Henriksson, K., & Sparks, J. (1998). The interorganizational learning dilemma: Collective knowledge development in strategic alliances. Organization science9(3), 285-305.Levinson, N. S., & Asahi, M. (1995).
Levinson, N. S., & Asahi, M. (1995). Cross-national alliances and interorganizational learning. Organizational Dynamics24(2), 50-63.
Li, Y. H., & Huang, J. W. (2012). Ambidexterity's mediating impact on product development proficiency and new product performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 41(7), 1125-1132.
Manuj, I., Omar, A., & Pohlen, T. L. (2014). Inter‐Organizational Learning in Supply Chains: A Focus on Logistics Service Providers and Their Customers. Journal of Business Logistics, 35(2), 103-120.
Mariotti, F. (2012). Exploring interorganizational learning: a review of the literature and future directions. Knowledge and process Management, 19(4), 215-221.
Martilla, J. A., & James, J. C. (1977). Importance-performance analysis. The journal of marketing, 77-79.
Muthusamy, S. K., & White, M. A. (2005). Learning and knowledge transfer in strategic alliances: a social exchange view. Organization Studies, 26(3), 415-441.
Nafukho, F. M., Graham, C. M., & Muyia, M. H. (2009). Determining the relationship among organizational learning dimensions of a small-size business enterprise. Journal of European Industrial Training, 33(1), 32-51.
Naudé, P., & Buttle, F. (2000). Assessing relationship quality. Industrial marketing management, 29(4), 351-361.
Ojha, D., Shockley, J., & Acharya, C. (2016). Supply chain organizational infrastructure for promoting entrepreneurial emphasis and innovativeness: The role of trust and learning. International Journal of Production Economics179, 212-227.
Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). Gain more insight from your PLS-SEM results: The importance-performance map analysis. Industrial Management & Data Systems116(9), 1865-1886.
Sáenz, M. J.  & Knoppen , D. & Tachizawa, E. M. (2017). Building manufacturing flexibility with strategic suppliers and contingent effect of product dynamism on customer satisfaction. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management.
Saenz, M. J., Revilla, E., & Knoppen, D. (2014). Absorptive capacity in buyer–supplier relationships: empirical evidence of its mediating role. Journal of Supply Chain Management50(2), 18-40.
Shoul, A. &  Mazooie  Nasrabadi, E. (2017). The Effect of Total Quality Management on Innovation: Explaining the Intermediary Role of Inter-Organization Learning, Quarterly Journal of Management Studies (Improvement and Development), 26(84), 125-152. [Persian]
Simchi-Levi, D., Simchi-Levi, E., & Kaminsky, P. (1999). Designing and managing the supply chain: Concepts, strategies, and cases. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Sinkula, J. M. (1994). Market information processing and organizational learning. The Journal of Marketing, 35-45.
Sitkin, S. B., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Schroeder, R. G. (1994). Distinguishing control from learning in total quality management: A contingency perspective. Academy of management review, 19(3), 537-564.
Slack, N. (1994). The importance-performance matrix as a determinant of improvement priority. International Journal of Operations & Production Management14(5), 59-75.
Stevenson, M., & Spring, M. (2009). Supply chain flexibility: an inter-firm empirical study. International Journal of Operations & Production Management29(9), 946-971.
Su, Q., Song, Y. T., Li, Z., & Dang, J. X. (2008). The impact of supply chain relationship quality on cooperative strategy. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 14(4), 263-272.
Tsang, E. W. (2002). Acquiring knowledge by foreign partners from international joint ventures in a transition economy: learning‐by‐doing and learning myopia. Strategic management journal, 23(9), 835-854.
Uzzi, B., & Gillespie, J. J. (2002). Knowledge spillover in corporate financing networks: Embeddedness and the firm's debt performance. Strategic Management Journal, 23(7), 595-618.
West, P., & Burnes, B. (2000). Applying organizational learning: lessons from the automotive industry. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 20(10), 1236-1252.
Yang, J. (2014). Supply chain agility: Securing performance for Chinese manufacturers. International Journal of Production Economics150, 104-113.
Yang, S. M., Fang, S. C., Fang, S. R., & Chou, C. H. (2014). Knowledge exchange and knowledge protection in interorganizational learning: The ambidexterity perspective. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(2), 346-358.
Yang, Y., Secchi, D., & Homberg, F. (2018). Are organisational defensive routines harmful to the relationship between personality and organisational learning?. Journal of Business Research85, 155-164.
Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of management review27(2), 185-203.
Zhang, S. R., & Wang, W. P. (2012). Inter-firm Networks, Organizational Learning and Knowledge Updating: An Empirical Study. Physics Procedia24, 1238-1242.