Towards developing a decision making tool for technology and knowledge priorities

• Autorzy: Takala J. , Tilabi S.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.24425/119532

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The main focus of this paper is to propose a method for prioritizing knowledge and technology factor of firms towards sustainable competitive advantage. The data has been gathered and analyzed from two high tech start-ups in which technology and knowledge play major role in company’s success. The analytical hierarchy model (AHP) is used to determine competitive priorities of the firms. Then knowledge and technology part of sense and respond questionnaire is used to calculate the variability coefficient i.e. the uncertainty caused by technology and knowledge factor. The proposed model is tested in terms of two start-ups. Based on the initial calculation of uncertainties, some improvement plan is proposed and the method is applied again to see if the uncertainty of knowledge and technology decreases. In both cases, the proposed model helped to have a clear and precise improvement plan and led in reduction of uncertainty.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

sense method; respond method; sustainable competitive advantage; SCA; knowledge and technology; KT; uncertainties; analytical hierarchy process; AHP

• Wydawca: Production Engineering Committee of the Polish Academy of Sciences ; Polish Association for Production Management
• Czasopismo: Management and Production Engineering Review
• Rocznik: 2018
• Tom: Vol. 9, No. 3
• Strony: 33--40
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 16 poz., rys., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Takala J.

• Sara Tilabi University of Vaasa, School of Technology and Innovations, Wolffinitie 34, 65200 Vaasa, Finland

autor

Tilabi S.

• Sara Tilabi University of Vaasa, School of Technology and Innovations, Wolffinitie 34, 65200 Vaasa, Finland

Bibliografia

• [1] Si S., Liu Y., Takala J., Sun S., Benchmarking and developing the operational competitiveness of Chinese state-owned manufacturing enterprises in a global context, J. Innovation and Learning, 7, 2, 202–222, 2010.
• [2] Porter M.E., Technology and competitive advantage, Journal of Business Strategy, 1980.
• [3] Takala J., Zucchetti P., Daneshpour H., Kunttu S., Välisalo T., Pirttimäki J., Kiiski P., The evaluation of investment decision making with knowledge & technology rankings and the sand cone model, Proceeding of International Conference on Innovation Management, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, ICIM2016, 2016
• [4] Oettmeier K., Hofmann E., Additive manufacturing technology adoption: an empirical analysis of general and supply chain-related determinants, Journal of Business Economics, 87, 1, 97–124, 2017.
• [5] Takala J., Uusitalo T., Resilient and proactive utilization of opportunities and uncertainties in service business, Proceedings of the University of Vaasa, Finland, University of Vaasa, Vaasa, 2012.
• [6] Quinn J.B., Managing strategic change, Sloan Management Review (pre-1986), 1, 21(4), 3, 1980.
• [7] Wernerfelt B., A resource-based view of the firm, Strategic Management Journal, 5, 2, 171–180, 1984.
• [8] Barney J., Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage, Journal of Management, 17, 1, 99–120, 1991.
• [9] Daft R.L., Organization theory and design, Masson: Gengage Learning, 2009.
• [10] Ranta J.-M., Takala J., A holistic method for finding out critical features of industry maintenance services, Int. J. Services and Standards, 3, 3, 312–325, 2007.
• [11] Bradley S.P., Nolan R.L., Sense and Respond Capturing Value in the Network Era, Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press, pp. 4–26, 1998, ISBN 087584-835-4.
• [12] Strauss B., Neuhauss P., The qualitative satisfaction model, International Journal of Service Industry Management, 8, 236–249, 1997.
• [13] Morone J., Strategic use of technology, California Management Review, 31, 4, 91–110, 1980.
• [14] Lubit R., Tacit Knowledge and knowledge management: the keys to sustainable competitive advantage, Organizational Dynamics, 29, 4, 164–178, 2001.
• [15] Takala J., Koskinen J., Liu Y., Tas M.S., Muhos M., Validating knowledge and technology effects to operative sustainable competitive advantage, Management and Production Engineering Review, 4, 3, 45–54, 2013.
• [16] Saaty T.L., The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resources allocation, New York: McGraw, p. 281, 1980.