ارائه چارچوب اندازه گیری سازه بازارپذیری به عنوان عاملی مهم از زیست بوم تجاری سازی نانوفناوری: یک مطالعه آمیخته

نوع مقاله : مدیریت استراتژیک (برنامه­‌ها، تحلیل‌های استراتژیکی تولید، استراتژی‌های بازاریابی و مدیریت بازار، کسب­وکار، سرمایه گذاری، منابع انسانی، مالی، رقابت، . . . )

نویسندگان

1 دانش آموخته دکتری کارآفرینی گرایش کسب و کار ، دانشگاه رازی، کرمانشاه، ایران

2 نویسنده مسئول، استادیار گروه مدیریت و کارآفرینی، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه رازی، کرمانشاه، ایران

3 استادیار گروه مدیریت و کارآفرینی، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه رازی، کرمانشاه، ایران

10.22080/jem.2021.18829.3205

چکیده

مطالعه حاضر به دنبال شناسایی ابعاد بازارپذیری و طراحی چارچوب اندازه گیری آن به عنوان یک سازه مهم در سنجش موفقیت زیست بوم تجاری سازی است. با توجه به نبود چارچوب نظری مرتبط با سازه بازارپذیری به طور کلی و برای زیست بوم تجاری سازی فناوری‌های نوظهور در یک کشور در حال توسعه به طور خاص، تعریف سازه‌ای مناسب برای سنجش میزان بازارپذیری در زمینه مورد نظر اهمیت قابل توجهی دارد. برای این منظور لازم است ابتدا ابعاد سازه شناسایی و تعریف شود و سپس با توجه به داده‌های واقعی اعتبار یابی شود. برای شناسایی ابعاد سازه بازار پذیری از روش تحلیل مضمون که روشی کیفی است استفاده شد و 14 مصاحبه با بازیگران اصلی دو پروژه تجاری سازی تحلیل شد. برای اعتباریابی و ارزیابی معیارهای کیفیت سازه از بخش معیارهای کیفیت مدل اندازه‌گیری روش حداقل مربعات جزئی استفاده شد و داده‌های پیمایشی به دست آمده از 51 پروژه تجاری‌سازی استفاده شد.یافته های پژوهش نشان داد که سه بعد ساختار، اندازه و آمادگی بازار ابعاد کلیدی چارچوب سازه بازارپذیری در زمینه زیست بوم تجاری سازی فناوری های نوظهور هستند. بخش کمی نیز نشان داد که شاخص‌های هر بعد دارای کیفیت قابل قبولی هستند و نشانگر مناسبی برای بعد مربوط هستند. همچنین اندازه‌گیری دو بعد اندازه و آمادگی بازار به صورت مستقیم و بعد ساختار بازار به صورت معکوس است. در نهایت در مطالعه حاضر سازه بازارپذیری با سه بعد اصلی و 6 شاخص شناسایی مورد تایید قرار گرفت.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Identifying and Building the Marketability Construct of Nanotechnology Commercialization Ecosystem: a Mixed-Method Approach

نویسندگان [English]

  • Syyedhamzeh Nejadhussein 1
  • Nader Naderi 2
  • Sohrab Delangizan 3
1 Entrepreneurship Department, , Faculty of Sociology , Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran
2 Corresponding author, Assistant professor, Faculty of Sociology , Razi UUniversity, Kermanshah, Iran
3 Associate professor, Faculty of Sociology , Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran
چکیده [English]

The present study seeks to identify the dimensions of marketability and design its measurement framework as an important construct in assessing the success of the commercialization ecosystem. Given the lack of a theoretical framework related to marketability in general and the commercialization ecosystem of emerging technologies in a developing country in particular, the definition of an appropriate construct for assessing marketability is pivotal. For this purpose, firstly, it is necessary to identify and build the dimensions of the construct and then validate it according to the actual data. To identify the dimensions of the marketability construct, a thematic analysis method, which is a qualitative method, was used and 14 interviews with the main actors of two commercialization projects were analyzed. The construct assessed and validated using the partial least square assessment model section regarding the survey data obtained from 51 commercialization projects. The research findings showed that the three dimensions of marketability construct including market/industry structure, market size, and market readiness. The quantitative part also showed that the indicators of each dimension have been validated and reliable.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Nanotechnology
  • Marketability
  • Commercialization Ecosystem
  • Thematic Network
  • Partial Least Squares
Abedi Ja’fari, H., Taslimi, M., Faghihi, A., Sheikhzade, M. (2011). Thematic Analysis and Thematic Networks: A Simple and Efficient Method for Exploring Patterns Embedded in Qualitative Data Municipalities). Strategic Management Thought, 5(2), 151-198. [In Persian]
Ahmadi, H., O'Cass, A. (2016). The role of entrepreneurial marketing in new technology ventures first product commercialization. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 24(1): 47–60.
Attride-Stirling, J. (1999). Thematic networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 1(3): 385–405.
Azarmi, D. (2016). Factors Affecting Technology Innovation and Its Commercialization in Firms. Modern Applied Science, 10(7), 36-48.
Belford, S., Headley, T., & Otsuga, D. (2014). Overview and Analysis of Input, Throughput, and Output Factors Affecting Technology Transfer Impact. Technology Transfer and Entrepreneurship, 1(2): 104–116.
Caerteling, J. S., Halman, J. M., Doree, A. G. (2008). Technology Commercialization in Road Infrastructure: How Government Affects the Variation and Appropriability of Technology. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(2): 143–161.
Chang, Ha-Joon.(1993). The Political Economy of Industrial Policy. London: Palgrave Macmillan
Cho, J., & Lee, J. (2013). Development of a new technology product evaluation model for assessing commercialization opportunities using Delphi method and fuzzy AHP approach. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(13): 5314–5330.
Choi, H. (2017). Technology Analysis & Strategic Management Ready-steady-go for emerging technologies in post catch-up countries: a longitudinal network analysis of nanotech in Korea. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 29(8): 946–959. doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2016.1260103
Clark, V. L. P., & Creswell, J. W. (2015). Understanding Research, New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.
Datta, A., Reed, R., & Jessup, L. (2013). Commercialization of innovations: an overarching framework and research agenda. American Journal of Business, 28(2): 147–191. doi.org/10.1108/AJB-08-2012-0048
Faustino, J. (2012). Development Entrepreneurship A Model for Transformative Institutional Change. The Asia Foundation. https://asiafoundation.org/resources/pdfs/OccasionalPaperNo12.pdf
Frattini, F., De Massis, A., Chiesa, V., Cassia, L., & Campopiano, G. (2012). Bringing to market technological innovation: What distinguishes success from failure regular paper. International Journal of Engineering Business Management, 4(15): 1–11. doi.org/10.5772/51605
Ganguli, P., & Jabade, S. (2012). Nanotechnology Intellectual Property Rights: Research, Design, and Commercialization, London: Taylor & Francis Group.
Given, L. (2008). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. California: Sage Publication, Inc.
Hair, J. F., Black C. W., Babin, J. B., Anderson, E. R. (2019). Multivariate Data Analysis, Eighth Edition. Hampshire: Cengage Learning, EMEA
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., & Ringle, C. M. (2014). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), Los Angeles: SAGE Publication, Inc.
Harsh, M., Woodson, T. S., Cozzens, S., Wetmore, J. M., Soumonni, D., & Cortes, R. (2018). The role of emerging technologies in inclusive innovation: the case of nanotechnology in South Africa. Science and Public Policy, 45(5): 597–607. doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scx079
Hashmi, A. R., van Biesebroeck, J. (2016). The Relationship between Market Structure and Innovation in Industry Equilibrium: A Case Study of the Global Automobile Industry. Review of Economics and Statistics, 98 (1):192–208. doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00494
Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2017). Partial Least Squares PathModeling: Updated Guidelines. In H. Latan & R. Noonan (Eds.), Partial Least Squares Path Modeling (pp. 19–40), Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Iran Nanotechnology Innovation Council. (2018). Expanding Nanotechnology usage document in 2024 horizon. Tehran: Iran Nanotechnology Innovation Council. [In Persian]
Jantunen, A., Puumalainen, K., Saarenketo, S. and Kyläheiko, K. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, dynamic capabilities and international performance. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 3: 223-243.
Jung, M., Lee, Y. & Lee, H. (2015). Classifying and prioritizing the success and failure factors of technology commercialization of public R & D in South Korea: using classification tree analysis. Journal of Technology Transfer, 40: 877–898. doi.org/10.1007/s10961-014-9376-5
Karaca-Mandic, P., Town, R. J., Wilcock, A. (2017). The Effect of Physician and Hospital Market Structure on Medical Technology Diffusion. Health services research, 52 (2): 579–598. doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12506
Khalil Zadeh, N., Khalilzadeh, M., Mozafari, M., Vasei, M., & Amoei Ojaki, A. (2017). Challenges and Difficulties of Technology Commercialization- A Mixed-Methods Study of an Industrial Development Organization. Management Research Review, 40(7): 745–767. doi.org/10.1108/MRR-08-2016-0192
Kim, M., Park, H., Sawng, Y., Park, S. (2019). Bridging the Gap in the Technology Commercialization Process: Using a Three-Stage Technology–Product–Market Model. Sustainability, 11: 1–16.  doi.org/10.3390/su11226267
Kobos, P. H., Malczynski, L. A., La Walker, T. N., Borns, D. J., Klise, G. T. (2018). Timing is everything: A technology transition framework for regulatory and market readiness levels. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 137 (December): 211–225. doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.052
Latif N.S.A., Abdullah A., Jan N.M., Thaheer A.S.M. (2016). Market Orientation Conception on Commercialization of University Research Products with Moderating Effect of Organizational Culture. In: Pyeman J., Wan Rashid W., Hanif A., Syed Mohamad S., Tan P. (eds) Proceedings of the 1st AAGBS International Conference on Business Management 2014 (AiCoBM 2014). Springer, Singapore.
Li, H., Shen, Q., Bart, Y. (2018). Local Market Characteristics and Online-to-Offline Commerce: An Empirical Analysis of Groupon. Management Science, 64 (4):1860–1878. doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2666
Lin, J-H., Wang, M-Y. (2015). Complementary assets, appropriability, and patent commercialization: Market sensing capability as a moderator. Asia Pacific Management Review, 20 (3): 141–147. doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2014.12.013
Livingston, C. A., Fabre, K. M., & Tagle, D. A. (2016). Facilitating the commercialization and use of organ platforms generated by the microphysiological systems (Tissue Chip) program through public-private partnerships. Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal, 14: 207–210. doi.org/10.1016/j.csbj.2016.04.003
Menna, A. & Walsh, P. R. (2019). Assessing environments of commercialization of innovation for SMEs in the global wine industry: A market dynamics approach. Wine Economics and Policy, 8 (2):191–202. doi.org/10.1016/j.wep.2019.10.001
Meyerson, B., & DiChristina, M. (2016, June 23). Emerging Technologies 2016 report. Retrieved 2016, from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/06/top-10-emerging-technologies-2016
Mohammadpour. A. (2014). Qualitative research method. Tehran: Jameshenasan. [In Persian]
Mohan, S. R., & Rao, A. R. (2003). Early Identification of Innovative and Market Acceptable Technologies - A Model for Improving Technology Transfer Capabilities of Public Research Institutes. Journal of Scientific & Industrial Research, 62(September): 865–875.
Morris, E. M. (2016). The Irrelevance of Nanotechnology Patents. LAW REVIEW, 49(2):501–551.
Neuendorf, Kimberly A. (2002). The Content Analysis Guidebook, California: Sage publication, Inc. 
Ramli, N. A., Latan, H., & Nartea, G. V. (2018). Why Should PLS-SEM Be Used Rather Than Regression? Evidence from the Capital Structure Perspective. In N. K. Avkiran & C. M. Ringle (Eds.), Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (p. 243).
Riwthong, S., Schreinemachers, P., Grovermann, C., Berger, T. (2017). Agricultural commercialization: Risk perceptions, risk management and the role of pesticides in Thailand. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 38 (3): 264–272. doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2016.11.001
Roosta, A., Venous, D., Ebrahimi, A. (2019). Marketing management. Tehran: Samt. [In Persian]
Sabatier, M., & Chollet, B. (2017). Is there a first mover advantage in science? Pioneering behavior and scientific production in nanotechnology. Research Policy, 46 (2):522-533. doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.01.003
Sakhdari, K. (2020). A framework for measurability of “opportunity” construct in entrepreneurship studies using the meta-synthesis approach. Journal of Entrepreneurship Development, 13(2), 235-254. [In Persian]]
Shakeel, S. R., Takala, J., & Zhu, L. D. (2017). Commercialization of renewable energy technologies: A ladder building approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 78(October): 855–867. doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.005
Shane, S. A. (2005). Finding Fertile Ground: Identifying Extraordinary Opportunities for New Ventures, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Suzuki, K. (2020). Competition, patent protection, and innovation with heterogeneous firms in an endogenous market structure. Journal of Public Economic Theory, 22 (3): 729-750. doi.org/10.1111/jpet.12415
Taheri, M. & van Geenhuizen, M. (2016). Teams' boundary-spanning capacity at university: Performance of technology projects in commercialization. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 111(October): 31–43. doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.06.003
Tsuzuki, T. (2013). Nanotechnology Commercialization, Boca Raton: Taylor & Francis Group.
WIPO. (2020). patent scope. Retrieved from WIPO: https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/result.jsf?_vid=P10-KA5DGZ-41573
Zhang, Z., Jin, J., & Guo, M. (2017). Catch-up in nanotechnology industry in China from the aspect of process-based innovation. Asian Journal