مطالعات مدیریت کسب و کار هوشمند

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری، کارآفرینی بین‌المللی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد قزوین، قزوین.ایران.

2 عضو هیئت‌علمی، گروه آموزشی توسعه کارآفرینی، دانشکده کارآفرینی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران ایران (نویسنده مسوول m_azizi@ut.ac.ir)

3 عضو هیئت‌علمی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد قزوین، قزوین.ایران.

چکیده

 
در دنیای پرتلاطم کسب‌وکار، کارآفرینی شرکتی قدم نهادن در بازاری با عدم قطعیت بالاست. ازاین‌رو می‌بایست شرکت‌ها به شناخت درستی از قابلیت‏ها در محیط پویا برسند تا بتوانند با کمترین ضرر به کسب سود در بلندمدت دست یابند. ازاین‌رو، پژوهش حاضر باهدف بررسی تأثیر قابلیت‌های پویا بر کارآفرینی شرکتی در صنعت ارتباطات صورت گرفته است. این پژوهش ازنظر هدف کاربردی و برحسب گردآوری اطلاعات توصیفی- همبستگی است، جامعه آماری پژوهش شامل 350 نفر از مدیران، روسا، کارشناسان ارشد دو شرکت همراه اول و ایرانسل ایران بوده است. جمع‏آوری داده‌ها بر اساس پرسشنامه محقق ساخته انجام گرفت. برای تجزیه‌وتحلیل داده‌ها و بررسی فرضیه‏ها از روش مدل‌سازی معادلات ساختاری استفاده شد. درنهایت، یافته‏ها نشان از تأثیر مثبت قابلیت‌های پویا بر کارآفرینی شرکتی داشته است و این نتیجه حاصل شد که قابلیت‌های ادراک محیط، یادگیری، یکپارچه‌سازی، هماهنگی، بازآرایی بر کارآفرینی شرکتی تأثیر مثبت و معناداری دارند. همچنین پویایی محیط تأثیر قابلیت‌های پویا را بر کارآفرینی شرکتی تعدیل می‏کند. این بدین‌صورت است که هرچه پویایی محیط بالاتر باشد رابطه دو متغیر قابلیت‌های پویا و کارآفرینی شرکتی قوی‏تر است. چراکه این پویایی مکانیسم مفیدی برای پاسخ به نیروهای رقابتی جدید است. شرکت‌هایی که در محیط‏های با پویایی بالا فعالیت می‌کنند نوآورتر، ریسک‏پذیر و پیشگام‌تر از شرکت‌هایی هستند کمتر با عدم اطمینان و فشارهای خارجی مواجه هستند.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Impact of Dynamic Capabilities on Corporate Entrepreneurship in the Communications Industry

نویسندگان [English]

  • Jamaleldin Ebrahimi 1
  • Mohammad Azizi 2
  • Katayoun Pourmehdi 3

1 Phd student, International entrepreneurship, Islamic Azad university, Qazvin Branch, Qazvin.Iran.

2 Faculty member, Department of Entrepreneurship Development, Faculty of Entrepreneurship, University of Tehran, Tehran.Iran.(Corresponding Author: m_azizi@ut.ac.ir)

3  Faculty Member, Islamic Azad university, Qazvin Branch Qazvin Iran.

چکیده [English]

 
In the turbulent world of business,  Corporate entrepreneurship is a step into a market with high uncertainty. Therefore, companies need to have a good understanding of capabilities in a dynamic environment so that they can achieve the long-term profit with minimal loss. So, This study aimed to investigate the impact of dynamic capabilities on corporate entrepreneurship in the Communications Industry. This research in terms of its purpose, is applicable and in terms of data collection is descriptive and correlation research. The statistical population of the study was included of 350 managers, chief executives, senior experts of Hamrah Aval company and Irancell company. Also, for collecting data, a researcher-made questionnaire was used. Structural equation modeling was used to analyze the data and hypotheses. Finally, the finding of research show that the positive effect of dynamic capabilities on corporate entrepreneurship, and it was concluded that environmental perception capabilities, learning capabilities, integration capabilities, coordination capabilities, reorganization capabilities has a positive and significant effect on corporate entrepreneurship. Also, the environmental dynamism moderates the impact of dynamic capabilities on corporate entrepreneurship.In this way, whatever the amount of environmental dynamism increase, the relationship between the two variables of dynamic capability and corporate entrepreneurship will be stronger. Because this dynamics is a useful mechanism for responding to new competitive forces. Companies operating in highly dynamic environments are more innovative, risk-taking and proactive than those with less uncertainty and external pressures.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Corporate entrepreneurship
  • dynamic capabilities
  • environmental dynamics
منابع
ابارشی، احمد؛ حسینی، سیدیعقوب.(1391). مدل‌سازی معادلات ساختاری، جامعه شناسان، 336.
فربد، ابراهیم. (1397). مدل سازی معادلات ساختاری در داده های پرسشنامه ای به کمک نرم افزار 24Amos، مهرگان قلم،236.
Ahsan, M., & Fernhaber, S. A. (2019). Multinational Enterprises: Leveraging a Corporate International Entrepreneurship Lens for New Insights Into Subsidiary Initiatives. Journal of International Management25(1), 51-65.
Ambad, S. N. A., & Wahab, K. A. (2016). The relationship between corporate entrepreneurship and firm performance: evidence from Malaysian large companies. International Journal of Business and Society17(2), 259.
Ambrosini, V., & Bowman, C. (2009). What are dynamic capabilities and are they a useful construct in strategic management?. International journal of management reviews11(1), 29-49.
Aramand, M., & Valliere, D. (2012). Dynamic capabilities in entrepreneurial firms: A case study approach. Journal of International Entrepreneurship10(2), 142-157.
Burgers, J. H., & Covin, J. G. (2016). The contingent effects of differentiation and integration on corporate entrepreneurship. Strategic Management Journal37(3), 521-540.
Chen, Y., Wang, Y., Nevo, S., Benitez-Amado, J., & Kou, G. (2015). IT capabilities and product innovation performance: The roles of corporate entrepreneurship and competitive intensity. Information & Management52(6), 643-657.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. psychometrika16(3), 297-334.
Cuervo, A. (2005). Individual and environmental determinants of entrepreneurship. The International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal1(3), 293-311.
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they?. Strategic management journal21(10‐11), 1105-1121.
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they?. Strategic management journal21(10‐11), 1105-1121.
Felin, T., Foss, N. J., Heimeriks, K. H., & Madsen, T. L. (2012). Microfoundations of routines and capabilities: Individuals, processes, and structure. Journal of Management Studies49(8), 1351-1374.
Hang, M. (2016). Media Corporate Entrepreneurship: Issues and Challenges. In Media Corporate Entrepreneurship (pp. 3-8). Springer, Singapore.
Hanna, N. B., Zahn, E., & Abdelaziz, H. H. (2018). Analyzing Entrepreneurship Cognition as the Micro-foundation of Dynamic Capabilities. In ECIE 2018 13th European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship (p. 112). Academic Conferences and publishing limited.
Hartmann, J., & Vachon, S. (2018). Linking environmental management to environmental performance: The interactive role of industry context. Business Strategy and the Environment27(3), 359-374.
Heavey, C., Simsek, Z., Roche, F., & Kelly, A. (2009). Decision comprehensiveness and corporate entrepreneurship: The moderating role of managerial uncertainty preferences and environmental dynamism. Journal of Management Studies46(8), 1289-1314.
Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2003). The dynamic resource‐based view: Capability lifecycles. Strategic management journal24(10), 997-1010.
Inan, G. G., & Bititci, U. S. (2015). Understanding organizational capabilities and dynamic capabilities in the context of micro enterprises: a research agenda. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences210, 310-319.
Jonathan, O. A. (2015). Corporate entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities in selected pharmaceutical firms in Nigeria. International Journal of Management (IJM), 6(9).
Katkalo, V. S., Pitelis, C. N., & Teece, D. J. (2010). Introduction: On the nature and scope of dynamic capabilities. Industrial and Corporate Change19(4), 1175-1186.
Knight, G. A., Rialp, J., & Rialp, A. (2014). International entrepreneurship: a review and future directions. In The Routledge Companion to International Entrepreneurship (pp. 27-48). Routledge.
Kottemann, J. E., & Boyer-Wright, K. M. (2009). Human resource development, domains of information technology use, and levels of economic prosperity. Information Technology for Development15(1), 32-42.
Kriz, K., & Qureshi, S. (2009). The role of policy in the relationship between ICT adoption and economic development: a comparative analysis of Singapore and Malaysia. Policy, ICT Adoption, and Economic Development.
Kuratko, D. F. (2018). 10. The challenge of corporate entrepreneurial leadership. Research Handbook on Entrepreneurship and Leadership, 219.
Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of management Review21(1), 135-172.
M. Rodriguez, C., A. Wise, J., & Ruy Martinez, C. (2013). Strategic capabilities in exporting: an examination of the performance of Mexican firms. Management Decision51(8), 1643-1663.
MacInerney-May, K. (2012). The value of dynamic capabilities for strategic management (Doctoral dissertation, Universität zu Köln).
Madsen, E. L. (2012). Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities-an empirical testing. International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning, 8(4), 317-332.
Morris, M. H., & Kuratko, D. F. (2002). Corporate entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial development within organizations. South-Western Pub.
Morris, M. H., Kuratko, D. F., & Covin, J. G. (2010). Corporate entrepreneurship & innovation. Cengage Learning.
Moukas, A., Kaskavelis, C., Kontarinis, D., Nassiakou, M., Tsakalos, K., Giannakis, K., & Dendris, N. (2012). U.S. Patent No. 8,099,318. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Naldi, L., Achtenhagen, L., & Davidsson, P. (2015). International Corporate Entrepreneurship among SME s: A Test of S tevenson's Notion of Entrepreneurial Management. Journal of Small Business Management53(3), 780-800.
Nunnally, J. (1978). C.(1978). Psychometric theory.2nd end. New Yourk: McGraw- Hill.
Ortiz‐de‐Urbina‐Criado, M., Montoro‐Sânchez, Â., & Romero‐Martînez, A. M. (2011). Domestic and international corporate entrepreneurship through alliances. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration28(3), 317-327.
Pandit, D., Joshi, M. P., Sahay, A., & Gupta, R. K. (2018). Disruptive innovation and dynamic capabilities in emerging economies: Evidence from the Indian automotive sector. Technological Forecasting and Social Change129, 323-329.
Raman, A. (2015). Corporate entrepreneurship: A strategic and structural perspective. International Journal of Business and Administration Research Review2(9), 131-133.
Roundy, P. T., & Fayard, D. (2019). Dynamic capabilities and entrepreneurial ecosystems: the micro-foundations of regional entrepreneurship. The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 28(1), 94-120.
Sakhdari, K., & Farsi, J. Y. (2016). Business partners and corporate entrepreneurship in developing countries. International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development15(1), 61-77.
Schilke, O. (2014). On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: The nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism. Strategic management journal35(2), 179-203.
Seidl, D., & Whittington, R. (2014). Enlarging the strategy-as-practice research agenda: Towards taller and flatter ontologies. Organization Studies35(10), 1407-1421.
Stevenson, H. H., & Jarillo, J. C. (1990). Stevenson 1990 A Paradigm of Entrepreneurship. pdf. Strategic Management Journal11, 17-27.
Tajeddini, K., & Mueller, S. (2018). Moderating Effect of Environmental Dynamism on the Relationship between a Firm’s Entrepreneurial Orientation and Financial Performance. Entrepreneurship Research Journal.
Takahashi, A. R. W., Bulgacov, S., & Giacomini, M. M. (2017). Dynamic capabilities, operational capabilities (educational-marketing) and performance. Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios19(65), 375.
Takahashi, A. R. W., Bulgacov, S., Bitencourt, C. C., & Kaynak, H. (2017). Expanding the dynamic capabilities view: Special contributions. Revista de Administração de Empresas57(3), 209-214.
Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic management journal28(13), 1319-1350.
Teece, D. J. (2016). Dynamic capabilities and entrepreneurial management in large organizations: Toward a theory of the (entrepreneurial) firm. European Economic Review86, 202-216.
Tenenhaus, M., Amato, S., & Esposito Vinzi, V. (2004, June). A global goodness-of-fit index for PLS structural equation modelling. In Proceedings of the XLII SIS scientific meeting(Vol. 1, pp. 739-742).
Usman, O., Claudia, A., & Nafilah, S. (2019). The Influence of ICT, Innovation of SMES, Internet, Networking, Entrepreneurship to the Development of the Creative Economy. Innovation of SMES, Internet, Networking, Entrepreneurship to the Development of the Creative Economy (January 3, 2019).
Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schröder, G., & Van Oppen, C. (2009). Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS quarterly, 177-195.
Zahra, S. A. (1991). Predictors and financial outcomes of corporate entrepreneurship: An exploratory study. Journal of business venturing6(4), 259-285.
Zahra, S. A. (2008). Being entrepreneurial and market driven: implications for company performance. Journal of strategy and management1(2), 125-142.
Zahra, S. A., & Garvis, D. M. (2000). International corporate entrepreneurship and firm performance: The moderating effect of international environmental hostility. Journal of business venturing15(5-6), 469-492.
Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of management review27(2), 185-203.
Zahra, S. A., Neck, H. M., & Kelley, D. J. (2004). International corporate entrepreneurship and the evolution of organizational competence: A knowledge-based perspective. In Advances in entrepreneurship, firm emergence and growth (pp. 145-171). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Zahra, S. A., Sapienza, H. J., & Davidsson, P. (2006). Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: A review, model and research agenda. Journal of Management studies43(4), 917-955.