بررسی نقش واسط دوسوتوانی مدیریت در رابطه بین قصد استراتژیک و استراتژی رقابت همکاری با نقش تعدیل گر اشتراک دانش

نوع مقاله : مقاله مستخرج از رساله دکتری

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری سیاست‌گذاری بازرگانی، گروه مدیریت، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه گیلان

2 دانشیار گروه مدیریت دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی دانشگاه گیلان

چکیده

استراتژی رقابت – همکاری  پدیده‌ای است که حاصل  پیگیری هم‌زمان همکاری و رقابت بین شرکت‌ها است و امروزه به‌طور فزاینده‌ای در مطالعات مدیریت راهبردی محبوب شده است؛ این در حالی است که صنایع با فناوری بالا به دلیل اینکه نیاز به تخصص و تکنولوژی بالا دارند  که ممکن است هر کسب‌وکار به‌طور کامل از آن برخورد نباشد نیاز مبرمی به همکاری و به اشتراک‌گذاری این تخصص و تکنولوژی دارند تا علاوه بر اینکه رقابت می‌کنند با همکاری بتوانند مزیت رقابتی بی‌همتایی ایجاد نمایند. با توجه به مطالب گفته‌شده اتخاذ استراتژی مبتنی بر رقابت همکاری در صنایع با فناوری بالا بیش‌ازپیش پررنگ‌تر می‌شود. هدف از این پژوهش بررسی نقش واسط دوسوتوانی مدیریت در رابطه بین اهداف استراتژیک و استراتژی رقابت همکاری با نقش تعدیل گر اشتراک دانش می‌باشد.
پژوهش حاضر به لحاظ هدف کاربردی و ازنظر روش انجام کار، از نـوع پیمایشـی اسـت. جامعه آماری پژوهش را 109 نفر از مدیران فعال در صنایع با فناوری بالا که تجربه رقابت – همکاری را داشته‌اند تشکیل می‌دهند که با روش نمونه گیری غیر احتمالی در دسترس انتخاب گردیده اند. ابزار پژوهش پرسشنامه می‌باشد که روایی صوری و محتوایی آن با استفاده از نظر خبرگان و روایی سازه با استفاده از تحلیل عاملی تأییدی مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. ضریب آلفای کرونباخ همه متغیرها نیز بیشتر از 7/0 بدست آمد که نشان از تأیید پایایی ابزار است. داده‌های به دست آمده ببا استفاده از روش مدلیابی معادلات ساختاری و نرم افزار َ[AMOS مورد تجزیه وتحلیل قرار گرفت
یافته‌های پژوهش نشان داد، قصد استراتژیک بر دوسوتوانی مدیریت و استراتژی رقابت همکاری تأثیر مثبت و معنی‌داری دارند و دوسوتوانی مدیریت بر استراتژی رقابت همکاری تأثیر معنی‌داری دارد. از نتایج دیگر اینکه دوسوتوانی مدیریت در رابطه بین قصد استراتژیک و استراتژی رقابت همکاری نقش میانجی ایفا می‌کند. علاوه بر این اشتراک دانش در رابطه بین قصد استراتژیک با دوسوتوانی مدیریت و قصد استراتژیک با استراتژی رقابت همکاری نقش تعدیل گر دارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Studying the Mediating Role of Management Ambidexterity Between Strategic Intent and Cooperation Competition Strategy with the Moderating Role of Knowledge Sharing

نویسندگان [English]

  • farshad ghaderi 1
  • Ismail Malekakhlagh 2
1 PhD Student in Business Policy, Department of Management, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Guilan
2 Associate Professor, Department of Management, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Guilan
چکیده [English]

Coopetition strategy is a phenomenon that is the result of the simultaneous pursuit of cooperation and competition between companies, and nowadays it has become increasingly popular in strategic management studies; However, since high-tech industries require expertise and high technology, which any business may not fully possess, are in urgent need of cooperation and sharing of this expertise and technology so that in addition to competing, they can create a unique competitive advantage with cooperation. Therefore, the adoption of a strategy based on competition and cooperation in high-tech industries becomes more and more prominent. This research aims to study the role of management ambidexterity between strategic goals and the cooperation competition strategy with the moderating role of knowledge sharing.
This study is applied in terms of purpose and survey in terms of the method of doing the work. The statistical population consists of 109 active managers in high-tech industries who have experienced competition-cooperation, and who were selected by the non-probability sampling method. The research tool is a questionnaire whose form and content validity were examined using experts' opinions and construct validity using confirmatory factor analysis. Cronbach's alpha coefficient of all variables was more than 0.7, which shows the reliability of the tool. The obtained data were analyzed using the structural equation modeling method and AMOS software.
The findings of the research showed that strategic intent has a positive and significant effect on the management ambidexterity and the cooperation competition strategy, and management ambidexterity has a significant effect on the strategy of competition and cooperation. Furthermore, the result shows that management ambidexterity plays a moderating role between strategic intent and the cooperation competition strategy.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Cooperation Competition Strategy
  • Management Ambidexterity
  • Knowledge Sharing
  • Strategic Intent

مراجع

  1. Raza-Ullah T. Experiencing the paradox of coopetition: A moderated mediation framework explaining the paradoxical tension–performance relationship. Long Range Planning. 2020 Feb 1; 53 (1):101863.
  2. Cheng Y, Fan T. Production coopetition strategies for an FV automaker and a competitive NEV automaker under the dual-credit policy. Omega. 2021 Jan 4:102391.
  3. Zollo M, Winter SG. Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization science. 2002 Jun; 13 (3):339-51.
  4. Padula G, Dagnino GB. Untangling the rise of coopetition: the intrusion of competition in a cooperative game structure. International Studies of Management & Organization. 2007 Jul 1; 37 (2):32-52.
  5. O’Shannassy TF. Strategic intent: The literature, the construct and its role in predicting organization performance. Journal of Management & Organization. 2016 Sep; 22 (5):583-98.
  6. Yami S, Castaldo S, Dagnino B, Le Roy F, editors. Coopetition: winning strategies for the 21st century. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2010.
  7. Zhang W, Jiang Y, Zhang W. Capabilities for Collaborative Innovation of Technological Alliance: A Knowledge-Based View. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 2019 Sep 18.
  8. نظری, محسن, کمره ای, محمود, حیدری, علی, قادری عابد, امیر حسین. ارائه مدل مفهومی استراتژی رقابت همکارانه در بخش ارتباطات ثابت و سیار ایران: مطالعه چندموردی. مدیریت بازرگانی، 11(3)، 1398.
  9. Velu C. Evolutionary or revolutionary business model innovation through coopetition? The role of dominance in network markets. Industrial Marketing Management. 2016 Feb 1; 53:124-35.
  10. Ritala P, Golnam A, Wegmann A. Coopetition-based business models: The case of Amazon. Com. Industrial marketing management. 2014 Feb 1; 43(2):236-49.
  11. McCardle JG, Rousseau MB, Krumwiede D. The effects of strategic alignment and competitive priorities on operational performance: The role of cultural context. Operations Management Research. 2019 Jun; 12(1):4-18.
  12. Seepana C, Paulraj A, Huq FA. The architecture of coopetition: Strategic intent, ambidextrous managers, and knowledge sharing. Industrial Marketing Management. 2020 Nov 1; 91:100 -13.
  13. Khamseh HM, Jolly D, Morel L. The effect of learning approaches on the utilization of external knowledge in strategic alliances. Industrial Marketing Management. 2017 May 1; 63:92-104.
  14. Makhashen YB, Rafi-ul-Shan PM, Bashiri M, Hasan R, Amar H, Khan MN. Exploring the role of ambidexterity and coopetition in designing resilient fashion supply chains: a multi-evidence-based approach. Journal of Enterprise Information Management. 2020 Apr 24.
  15. Felício JA, Caldeirinha V, Dutra A. Ambidextrous capacity in small and medium-sized enterprises. Journal of Business Research. 2019 Aug 1; 101:607-14.
  16. Gnyawali DR, Ryan Charleton T. Nuances in the interplay of competition and cooperation: Towards a theory of coopetition. 2018 Jun; 18(1):5-21
  17. Bengtsson M, Kock S, Lundgren-Henriksson EL, Näsholm MH. Coopetition research in theory and practice: Growing new theoretical, empirical, and methodological domains. Industrial Marketing Management. 2016 Aug 1; 57:4-11.
  18. Estrada I, Dong JQ. Learning from experience? Technological investments and the impact of coopetition experience on firm profitability. Long Range Planning. 2020 Feb 1; 53(1):101866.
  19. O’Shannassy TF. Strategic intent: The literature, the construct and its role in predicting organization performance. Journal of Management & Organization. 2016 Sep; 22(5):583-98.
  20. Velu C. Evolutionary or revolutionary business model innovation through coopetition? The role of dominance in network markets. Industrial Marketing Management. 2016 Feb 1; 53:124-35.
  21. Ryals LJ, Davies IA. Where's the strategic intent in key account relationships? Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing. 2013 Jan 28.
  22. Hayes AF. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford publications; 2017 Dec 13.
  23. Gast J, Gundolf K, Harms R, Collado EM. Knowledge management and coopetition: How do cooperating competitors balance the needs to share and protect their knowledge? Industrial marketing management. 2019 Feb 1; 77:65-74.
  24. Mom TJ, Fourné SP, Jansen JJ. Managers’ work experience, ambidexterity, and performance: The contingency role of the work context. Human Resource Management. 2015 Dec; 54(S1):s133-53.
  25. Mom TJ, Van Den Bosch FA, Volberda HW. Understanding variation in managers' ambidexterity: Investigating direct and interaction effects of formal structural and personal coordination mechanisms. Organization Science. 2009 Aug; 20(4):812-28.
  26. Strese S, Meuer MW, Flatten TC, Brettel M. Examining cross-functional coopetition as a driver of organizational ambidexterity. Industrial Marketing Management. 2016 Aug 1; 57:40-52.
  27. Raza-Ullah T, Bengtsson M, Kock S. The coopetition paradox and tension in coopetition at multiple levels. Industrial marketing management. 2014 Feb 1; 43(2):189-98.
  28. Eisenhardt KM, Furr NR, Bingham CB. CROSSROADS—Microfoundations of performance: Balancing efficiency and flexibility in dynamic environments. Organization science. 2010 Dec; 21(6):1263-73.
  29. Raza-Ullah T. Experiencing the paradox of coopetition: A moderated mediation framework explaining the paradoxical tension–performance relationship. Long Range Planning. 2020 Feb 1; 53(1):101863.
  30. Soekijad M, Andriessen E. Conditions for knowledge sharing in competitive alliances. European management journal. 2003 Oct 1; 21(5):578-87.
  31. Lawson B, Petersen KJ, Cousins PD, Handfield RB. Knowledge sharing in interorganizational product development teams: The effect of formal and informal socialization mechanisms. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 2009 Mar; 26(2):156-72.
  32. Fan YW, Ku E. Customer focus, service process fit and customer relationship management profitability: the effect of knowledge sharing. The Service Industries Journal. 2010 Feb 1; 30(2):203-23.
  33. Estrada I, Faems D, de Faria P. Coopetition and product innovation performance: The role of internal knowledge sharing mechanisms and formal knowledge protection mechanisms. Industrial Marketing Management. 2016 Feb 1; 53:56-65.
  34. Czakon W, Klimas P, Mariani M. Behavioral antecedents of coopetition: A synthesis and measurement scale. Long Range Planning. 2020 Feb 1; 53(1):101875.
  35. Bengtsson M, Raza-Ullah T. A systematic review of research on coopetition: Toward a multilevel understanding. Industrial Marketing Management. 2016 Aug 1; 57:23-39.
  36. Ritala P. Coopetition strategy–when is it successful? Empirical evidence on innovation and market performance. British Journal of Management. 2012 Sep; 23(3):307-24.
  37. Ritala P, Hurmelinna‐Laukkanen P. Incremental and radical innovation in coopetition— the role of absorptive capacity and appropriability. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 2013 Jan; 30(1):154-69.
  38. Zollo M, Winter SG. Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization science. 2002 Jun; 13(3):339-51.
  39. Wu J. Cooperation with competitors and product innovation: Moderating effects of technological capability and alliances with universities. Industrial Marketing Management. 2014 Feb 1; 43(2):199-209.
  40. Gnyawali DR, Park BJ. Co-opetition between giants: Collaboration with competitors for technological innovation. Research policy. 2011 Jun 1; 40(5):650-63.
  41. Bacon E, Williams MD, and Davies G. Coopetition in innovation ecosystems: A comparative analysis of knowledge transfer configurations. Journal of Business Research. 2020 Jul 1; 115:307-16.
  42. Yamakawa Y, Yang H, Lin ZJ. Exploration versus exploitation in alliance portfolio: Performance implications of organizational, strategic, and environmental fit. Research Policy. 2011 Mar 1; 40(2):287-96.
  43. Luo Y. A coopetition perspective of global competition. Journal of world business. 2007 Jun 1; 42(2):129-44.
  44. Johnson JL, Sohi RS. The influence of firm predispositions on interfirm relationship formation in business markets. International Journal of Research in Marketing. 2001 Dec 1; 18(4):299-318.
  45. Jarzabkowski P, Lê J, Balogun J. The social practice of coevolving strategy and structure to realize mandated radical change. Academy of management journal. 2019 Jun; 62(3):850-82.
  46. Døving E, Gooderham PN. Dynamic capabilities as antecedents of the scope of related diversification: the case of small firm accountancy practices. Strategic management journal. 2008 Aug; 29(8):841-57.
  47. O’Reilly III CA, Tushman ML. Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator's dilemma. Research in organizational behavior. 2008 Jan 1; 28:185-206.
  48. Raisch S, Birkinshaw J. Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of management. 2008 Jun; 34(3):375-409.
  49. O'Reilly III CA, Tushman ML. Organizational ambidexterity in action: How managers explore and exploit. California management review. 2011 Aug; 53(4):5-22.
  50. Bouncken RB, Fredrich V. Business model innovation in alliances: Successful configurations. Journal of Business Research. 2016 Sep 1; 69(9):3584-90.
  51. Makhashen YB, Rafi-ul-Shan PM, Bashiri M, Hasan R, Amar H, Khan MN. Exploring the role of ambidexterity and coopetition in designing resilient fashion supply chains: a multi-evidence-based approach. Journal of Enterprise Information Management. 2020 Apr 24.
  52. Lundgren-Henriksson EL, Kock S. Coopetition in a headwind–The interplay of sensemaking, sensegiving, and middle managerial emotional response in coopetitive strategic change development. Industrial Marketing Management. 2016 Oct 1; 58: 20-34.
  53. Bouncken RB, Kraus S. Innovation in knowledge-intensive industries: The double-edged sword of coopetition. Journal of Business research. 2013 Oct 1; 66(10):2060-70.
  54. Gnyawali DR, Madhavan R, He J, Bengtsson M. The competition–cooperation paradox in inter-firm relationships: A conceptual framework. Industrial Marketing Management. 2016 Feb 1; 53:7-18.
  55. Jorde TM, Teece DJ. Competition and cooperation: Striking the right balance. California management review. 1989 Apr; 31(3):25-37.
  56. Luo X, Slotegraaf RJ, Pan X. Cross-functional “coopetition”: The simultaneous role of cooperation and competition within firms. Journal of Marketing. 2006 Apr; 70(2):67-80.
  57. Yamakawa Y, Yang H, Lin ZJ. Exploration versus exploitation in alliance portfolio: Performance implications of organizational, strategic, and environmental fit. Research Policy. 2011 Mar 1; 40(2):287-96.
  58. Mahnke V, Pedersen T, Venzin M. The impact of knowledge management on MNC subsidiary performance: the role of absorptive capacity. MIR: Management International Review. 2005 Jan 1:101-19.
  59. Simsek Z, Heavey C, Fox BC. (Meta-) framing strategic entrepreneurship. Strategic Organization. 2017 Nov; 15(4):504-18.
  60. Nielsen BB. The role of knowledge governance in strategic alliances. International journal of strategic change management. 2010 Jan 1; 2(2-3):102-27.
  61. Easterby‐Smith M, Prieto IM. Dynamic capabilities and knowledge management: an integrative role for learning? British journal of management. 2008 Sep; 19(3):235-49.
  62. Hamel G, Prahalad CK. Strategic intent. Harvard Business Press; 2010.
  63. Hartmann, Nathaniel, Christopher R. Plouffe, Phanasan Kohsuwan, and Joseph A. Cote. "Salesperson influence tactics and the buying agent purchase decision: Mediating role of buying agent trust of the salesperson and moderating role of buying agent regulatory orientation focus." Industrial Marketing Management 87 (2020): 31-46.
  64. Bierly III PE, Damanpour F, Santoro MD. The application of external knowledge: organizational conditions for exploration and exploitation. Journal of Management Studies. 2009 May; 46(3):481-509.
  65. Rui H, Yip GS. Foreign acquisitions by Chinese firms: A strategic intent perspective. Journal of World Business. 2008 Mar 1; 43(2):213-26.
  66. Bacon E, Williams MD, Davies G. Coopetition in innovation ecosystems: A comparative analysis of knowledge transfer configurations. Journal of Business Research. 2020 Jul 1; 115: 307-16.
  67. Devarakonda SV, Reuer JJ. Knowledge sharing and safeguarding in R&D collaborations: The role of steering committees in biotechnology alliances. Strategic Management Journal. 2018 Jul; 39(7):1912-34.
  68. Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic management journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.
  69. Simsek Z. Organizational ambidexterity: Towards a multilevel understanding. Journal of management studies. 2009 Jun; 46(4):597-624.
  70. Norman PM. Knowledge acquisition, knowledge loss, and satisfaction in high technology alliances. Journal of Business Research. 2004 Jun 1; 57(6):610-9.
  71. Chiambaretto P, Massé D, Mirc N. “All for One and One for All?”-Knowledge broker roles in managing tensions of internal coopetition: The Ubisoft case. Research Policy. 2019 Apr 1; 48(3):584-600.
  72. Bodwell W, Chermack TJ. Organizational ambidexterity: Integrating deliberate and emergent strategy with scenario planning. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2010 Feb 1; 77(2):193-202.
  73. Bodwell W, Chermack TJ. Organizational ambidexterity: Integrating deliberate and emergent strategy with scenario planning. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2010 Feb 1; 77(2):193-202.
  74. Grant RM, Baden‐Fuller C. A knowledge accessing theory of strategic alliances. Journal of management studies. 2004 Jan; 41(1):61-84.
  75. Bendig D, Enke S, Thieme N, Brettel M. Performance implications of cross-functional coopetition in new product development: the mediating role of organizational learning. Industrial Marketing Management. 2018 Aug 1; 73:137-53.
  76. Wang Q, Bradford K, Xu J, Weitz B. Creativity in buyer–seller relationships: The role of governance. International Journal of Research in Marketing. 2008 Jun 1; 25(2):109-18.
  77. Aiken LS, West SG, Reno RR. Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage; 1991.
  78. Mi J. Blue ocean strategy. Wiley Encyclopedia of Management. 2015 Jan 5:1.
نشریه علمی راهبردهای بازرگانی
دوره 18، شماره 17
شهریور 1400
صفحه 99-120

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار