EXAMINATION OF THE EFFECTS OF INTERNAL-TO-FIRM TRANSACTION COSTS AND IMITATION CAPABILITIES ON THE INNOVATION PERFORMANCE AND COMPETITIVENESS OF THE ELECTRIC/ELECTRONIC FIRMS
Palavras-chave:Imitation, Capability, Costs, Innovation, Performance, Competitiveness
The aim of the research is to examine both the innovation performance of the electric/electronic firms within the technopark sector, and in addition, the internal-to-firm transaction costs and imitation capability that affect relationships and competition between the variables. In general, products that firms offer to the market are affected by each other, and in this case, the imitation capabilities of firms come to the fore. However, in order to be successful in an innovative and competitive environment, it is necessary to effectively manage the internal-to-firm transaction costs. Within the scope of the study, a survey was given to the engineers working in the electrical/electronic firms that produce and innovate within the body of technopark in Istanbul. A face-to-face survey study was conducted since production was not interrupted in the firms working in technopark during the pandemic process and remote working conditions were not possible for the production sector. Randomly selected firms were visited and 501 employees were interviewed. Analyses were made using the SmartPLS 3.4 Program; a 5-point Likert scale was used for the survey; factor analysis was used to determine the suitability of the scale expressions; reliability/validity analyzes were used to determine the consistency of the scale; and correlation analysis was used to determine the degree of relationship between the variables. Finally, path analysis was used to test the hypotheses, and the same program was used to determine the mediation effect. The results of the analyses showed that the cost of intra-firm transaction and imitation capability have positive effects on innovation performance and the competitiveness of the firms.
AHMED, N.; AFZA, T. Capital structure, competitive intensity and firm performance: evidence from Pakistan. Journal of Advances in Management Research, v. 16, n. 5, p. 796-813, 2019. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/JAMR-02-2019-0018.
AL-JININI, D. K.; DAHIYAT, S. E.; BONTIS, N. Intellectual capital, entrepreneurial orientation, and technical innovation in small and medium‐sized enterprises. Knowledge and Process Management, v. 26, n. 2, p. 69-85, 2019.
ALARCÓN, D.; SÁNCHEZ, J. A.; DE OLAVIDE, U. Assessing convergent and discriminant validity in the ADHD-R IV rating scale: User-written commands for Average Variance Extracted (AVE), Composite Reliability (CR), and Heterotrait-Monotrait ratio of correlations (HTMT). Spanish STATA meeting, vol. 39, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, 2015.
AMARA, N.; LADRY, R.; DOLERAUX, D. Patterns Of Innovation In Knowledge Intensive Business Services. The Service Industries Journal, v. 29, n. 4, p. 407-430, 2009.
ANDREVSKI, G.; RICHARD, O. C.; SHAW, J. D.; FERRIER, W. J. Racial diversity and firm performance: The mediating role of competitive intensity. Journal of Management, v. 40, n. 3, p. 820-844, 2014.
ANDREWS, K. The Concept of Corporate Strategy. Homewood: Dow Jones-Irwin, 1971.
ANSOFF, H. I.; ANDREWS, K. The concept of corporate strategy. Revista de Ciencias Administrativas y Sociales, v. 19, n. 35, p. 167-169, 1987.
ANTONELLI, C.; CRESPI, F.; SCELLATO, G. Internal and external factors in innovation persistence. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, v. 22, n. 3, p. 256-280, 2013.
ANZOLA-ROMÁN, P.; BAYONA-SÁEZ, C.; GARCÍA-MARCO, T. Organizational innovation, internal R&D and externally sourced innovation practices: Effects on technological innovation outcomes. Journal of Business Research, v. 91, p. 233-247, 2018.
ARGYRES, N. S.; BIGELOW, L. Does transaction misalignment matter for firm survival at all stages of the industry life cycle? Management Science, v. 53, n. 8, p. 1332–1344, 2007.
ARGYRES, N. S.; ZENGER, T. Capabilities, transaction costs, and firm boundaries. Organization Science, v. 23, n. 6, p. 1643–1657, 2012.
ARROW, K. Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention. In: A Report of the National Bureau of Economic Research (org.). The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors. Massachusetts, 1962.
ARSHAD, A.; YAZDANIFARD, R. Investigative synopsis of Sony Inc.’s strategic management issues/failures and how to overcome them. International Journal of Management, Accounting and Economics, v. 4, n. 9, p. 917-936, 2017.
AUDRETSCH, D. B.; BELITSKI, M. The role of R&D and knowledge spillovers in innovation and productivity. European Economic Review, v. 123, p. 1-24, 2020.
BALDACCHINO, P. J.; CAMILLERI, A.; SCHEMBRI, B.; GRIMA, S.; THALASSINOS, Y. E. Performance evaluation of the board of directors in listed companies: A small state perspective. International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, v. 10, n. 1, p. 99-119, 2020.
BARNEY, J. Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, v. 17, n. 1, p. 99-120, 1991.
BARNEY, J. B.; LEE, W. Multiple considerations in making governance choices: Implications of transaction cost economics, real option theory, and knowledge-based theories of the firm. In: N. J. Foss & V. Mahnke (Eds.). Competence, governance, and entrepreneurship. New York, NY: Oxord University Press on Demand, 2000.
BELTRÁN, H. C.; GULC, A. Business culture of corporate giant – a case study of Google company. Akademia Zarządzania, v. 5, n. 1, p. 167-176, 2021.
BIABANI, M.; YAGHOOBNEZHAD, A.; LASHGARI, Z.; HEIDARPOOR, F. Disclosure and firm ranking based on the the Vigeo model of social responsibility and its relationship with financial performance criteria. International Journal of Finance & Managerial Accounting, v. 5, n. 20, p. 169-181, 2021.
BIEMANS, W. G. Managing innovation within networks. Routledge, 2018.
BORODIN, A.; SHASH, N.; PANAEDOVA, G.; FRUMINA, S.; MITYUSHINA, I. The impact of the publication of non-financial statements on the financial performance of companies with the identification of interpectoral features. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, v. 7, n. 2, p. 1666-1685, 2019.
BREZNIK, L.; LAHOVNIK, M. Dynamic capabilities and competitive advantage: Findings from case studies. Management: journal of contemporary management issues, v. 21 (Special issue), p. 167-185, 2016.
BUVIK, A.; JOHN, G. When does vertical coordination improve industrial purchasing relationships? Journal of Marketing, v. 64, n. 4, p. 52-64, 2000.
CHANDLER, A. D. Strategy and structure: Chapters in the history of the industrial enterprise, vol. 120. MIT press, 1990.
COASE, R. H. The nature of the firm. economica, v. 4, n. 16, p. 386-405, 1937.
COHEN, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd Edition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1988.
COOPER, R. G. The drivers of success in new-product development. Industrial Marketing Management, v. 76, p. 36-47, 2019.
CROSBY, M. Patents, innovation and growth. Economic Record, v. 76, n. 234, p. 255-262, 2000.
CROWLEY, F. Product and service innovation and discontinuation in manufacturing and service firms in Europe. European Journal of Innovation Management, v. 20, n. 2, p. 250-268, 2017. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-03-2016-0027.
DAMANPOUR, F.; GOPALAKRISHNAN, S. Organizational adaptation and innovation: The dynamics of adopting innovation types. In: The dynamics of innovation. Berlin: Springer, 1999.
DANNEELS, E. The process of technological competence leveraging. Strategic management journal, v. 28, n. 5, p. 511-533, 2007.
DE BEULE, F.; VAN BEVEREN, I. Does firm agglomeration drive product innovation and renewal? An application for Belgium. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie, v. 103, n. 4, p. 457-472, 2012.
DELIGÖNÜL, Z. S.; ÇAVUŞGIL, S. T. Does the comparative advantage theory of competition really replace the neoclassical theory of perfect competition? Journal of Marketing, v. 61, n. 4, p. 65-73, 1997.
EISENHARDT, K. M. Paradox, spirals, ambivalence: The new language of change and pluralism. Academy of Management Review, v. 25, p. 703-705, 2000.
ESTIASIH, S. P. Measurement of Cooperative Performance with the Balance Scorecard Analysis Approach. International Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting Research (IJEBAR), v. 5, n. 2, p. 180-195, 2021.
FERREIRA, J.; COELHO, A.; MOUTINHO, L. Dynamic capabilities, creativity and innovation capability and their impact on competitive advantage and firm performance: The moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation. Technovation, v. 92, p. 1-18, 2020.
GEYSKENS, I.; STEENKAMP, E. J. B.; KUMAR, N. Make, buy, or ally: A transaction cost theory meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, v. 49, n. 3, p. 519-543, 2006.
GODOE, H. Innovation regimes, R&D and radical innovations in telecommunications. Research Policy, v. 29, n. 9, p. 1033-1046, 2000.
GOLD, A. H.; MALHOTRA, A.; SEGARS, A. H. Knowledge management: an organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, v. 18, n. 1, p. 185-214, 2001.
GOURVILLE, J. T. The curse of innovation: A theory of why innovative new products fail in the marketplace. HBS Marketing Research Paper, v. 5-6, p. 1-36, 2005.
GRANT, R. Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: Organizational capability as knowledge creation. Organization Science, v. 7, p. 375-387, 1996.
GULBRANDSEN, B.; LAMBE, C. J.; SANDVIK, K. Firm boundaries and transaction costs: The complementary role of capabilities. Journal of Business Research, v. 78, p. 193-203, 2017.
GUO, L.; LI, H.; LI, P.; ZHANG, C. Transaction costs in construction projects under uncertainty. Kybernetes, v. 45, n. 6, p. 866-883, 2016.
HAIR JR, J. F.; SARSTEDT, M.; MATTHEWS, L. M.; RINGLE, C. M. Identifying and treating unobserved heterogeneity with FIMIX-PLS: part I–method. European Business Review, v. 28, n. 1, p. 63-76, 2016. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-09-2015-0094.
HAMEL G.; PRAHALAD C.K. Competing for the future. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1994.
HAMEL, G.; PRAHALAD, C. K. Strategy as stretch and leverage. Harvard business review, v. 71, n. 2, p. 75-84, 1993.
HASEEB, M.; HUSSAIN, H. I.; KOT, S.; ANDRONICEANU, A.; JERMSITTIPARSERT, K. Role of social and technological challenges in achieving a sustainable competitive advantage and sustainable business performance. Sustainability, v. 11, n. 14, 1-23, 2019.
HENDERSON, R.; COCKBURN, I. Scale, scope, and spillovers: The determinants of research productivity in drug discovery. The Rand journal of economics, v. 27, n. 1, p. 32-59, 1996.
HOLAHAN, P. J.; SULLIVAN, Z. Z.; MARKHAM, S. K. Product development as core competence: How formal product development practices differ for radical, more innovative, and incremental product innovations. Journal of Product Innovation Management, v. 31, n. 2, p. 329-345, 2014.
HUANG, D.; CHEN, S.; ZHANG, G.; YE, J. Organizational forgetting, absorptive capacity, and innovation performance. Management Decision, v. 56, n. 1, p. 87-104, 2018. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-03-2017-0200.
HULLAND, J. Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic management journal, v. 20, n. 2, p. 195-204, 1999.
IVANAJ, V.; FRANZIL, Y. M. Outsourcing logistics activities: a transaction cost economics perspective. In: XVème Conférence Internationale de Management Stratégique, Annecy (AIMS). Anais [...]. Genebra, 2006.
KAHN, K. B. Understanding innovation. Business Horizons, v. 61, n. 3, p. 453-460, 2018.
KANKAM-KWARTENG, C.; OSMAN, B.; DONKOR, J. Innovative low-cost strategy and firm performance of restaurants: The moderation of competitive intensity. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, v. 13, n. 3, p. 266-281, 2019. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-05-2018-0034.
KARINGITHI, M. G.; AOSA, E.; OGOLLAH, K.; NJIHIA, J. Strategy typology, organizational factors and performance of freight forwarding companies in Kenya. DBA Africa Management Review, v. 10, n. 1, p. 1-10, 2020.
KOOHANG, A.; PALISZKIEWICZ, J.; GOLUCHOWSKI, J. The impact of leadership on trust, knowledge management, and organizational performance: A research model. Industrial Management & Data Systems, v. 117, n. 3, p. 521-537, 2017. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-02-2016-0072.
LANDEWEERD, M.; SPIL, T.; KLEIN, R. The success of Google search, the failure of Google health and the future of Google plus. In: International Working Conference on Transfer and Diffusion of IT. Berlin: Springer, 2013.
LEE, R. P.; ZHOU, K. Z. Is product imitation good for firm performance? An examination of product imitation types and contingency factors. Journal of International Marketing, v. 20, n. 3, p. 1-16, 2012.
LEVINTHAL, D.; MARCH, J. Myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, v. 14, p. 95-112, 1993.
LI, H.; ARDITI, D.; WANG, Z. Factors that affect transaction costs in construction projects. Journal of construction engineering and management, v. 139, n. 1, p. 60-68, 2013.
LI, H.; ARDITI, D.; WANG, Z. Determinants of transaction costs in construction projects. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, v. 21, n. 5, p. 548-558, 2015.
LONKAR, S.; GUPTE, R. New Product Development and Innovation for Sustainable Profitable Businesses of Indian Small and Medium Scale Industries (SMEs) and Startups. Indian Journal of Public Health Research & Development, v. 8, n. 4, p. 993-1000, 2017.
MANOGNA, R. L.; MISHRA, A. K. Does investment in innovation impact firm performance in emerging economies? An empirical investigation of the Indian food and agricultural manufacturing industry. International Journal of Innovation Science, v. 13, n. 2, p. 233-248, 2021. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-07-2020-0104.
MARINHO, A.; SILVA, R. G.; SANTOS, G. Why most university-industry partnerships fail to endure and how to create value and gain competitive advantage through collaboration–a systematic review. Quality Innovation Prosperity, v. 24, n. 2, p. 34-50, 2020.
MATHUR, N.; TIWARI, S. C.; RAMAIAH, T. S.; MATHUR, H. Capital structure, competitive intensity and firm performance: an analysis of Indian pharmaceutical companies. Managerial Finance, v. 47, n. 9, p. 1357-1382, 2021. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/MF-01-2020-0009.
MEYER, M. W.; GUPTA, V. The performance paradox. Research in Organizational Behaviour, v. 16, p. 309-369, 1994.
MILES, J. Tolerance and variance inflation factor. Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online, 2014.
MOTHE, C.; THI, T. U. N. The link between non‐technological innovations and technological innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, v. 13, n. 3, p. 313-332, 2010. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/14601061011060148.
NGUYEN, T. H. H.; NTIM, C. G.; MALAGILA, J. K. Women on corporate boards and corporate financial and non-financial performance: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. International Review of Financial Analysis, v. 71, p. 1-24, 2020.
NITZL, C.; ROLDAN, J. L.; CEPEDA, G. Mediation analysis in partial least squares path modeling: Helping researchers discuss more sophisticated models. Industrial management & data systems, v. 116, n. 9, p. 1849-1864, 2016. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-07-2015-0302.
ODURO, S.; NYARKU, K. M. Incremental innovations in Ghanaian SMEs: propensity, types, performance and management challenges. Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation, v. 14, n. 1-2, p. 10-21, 2018.
PALAZZESCHI, L.; BUCCI, O.; DI FABIO, A. Re-thinking innovation in organizations in the industry 4.0 scenario: New challenges in a primary prevention perspective. Frontiers in psychology, v. 9, n. 30, p. 1-6, 2018.
PENROSE, E. G. The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. New York: Wiley, 1959.
PORTER, M. E. Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors. New York: Free Press, 1980.
PRAJOGO, D. I.; AHMED, P. K. Relationships between innovation stimulus, innovation capacity, and innovation performance. R&D Management, v. 36, n. 5, p. 499-515, 2006.
RINDFLEISCH, A.; HEIDE, J. B. Transaction cost analysis: Past, present, and future applications. Journal of marketing, v. 61, n. 4, p. 30-54, 1997.
RINGLE, C. M.; SARSTEDT, M.; MITCHELL, R.; GUDERGAN, S. P. Partial least squares structural equation modeling in HRM research. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, v. 31, n. 12, p. 1617-1643, 2020.
RIVA, G.; MARSAN, P. A.; GRASSI, C. (Eds.). Active ageing and healthy living: a human centered approach in research and innovation as source of quality of life (Vol. 203). IOS press, 2014.
SARDI, A.; SORANO, E.; FERRARIS, A.; GARENGO, P. Evolutionary paths of performance measurement and management system: the longitudinal case study of a leading SME. Measuring Business Excellence, v. 24, n. 4, p. 495-510, 2020. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/MBE-01-2020-0016.
SCHNAARS, S. Managing imitation strategies. New York: The Free Press, 1994.
SCHOENFELD, H. M. W. The present state of performance evaluation in multinational companies. In: Managerial accounting and analysis in multinational enterprises. De Gruyter, 2019.
SCHUMPETER, J. A. The theory of economic development. Cambridge, M. A.: Harvard University Press, 1934. Disponível em: http://books.google.com.tr/books/about/The_Theory_of_Economic_ Development.html?id=-OZwWcOGeOw C&redir_esc=y. Acesso em: 05 ago. 2021.
SENGE, P. M. The fifth discipline: Mastering the five practices of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday, 1990.
SHELANSKI, H. A.; KLEIN, P. G. Empirical research in transaction cost economics: a review and assessment. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, v. 11, n. 2, p. 335-361, 1995.
SÖNMEZ ÇAKIR, F. Kısmi En Küçük Kareler Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi (PLS-SEM) SmartPLS 3.2. Uygulamaları. Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi, 2020.
TAOUAB, O.; ISSOR, Z. Firm performance: Definition and measurement models. European Scientific Journal, v. 15, n. 1, p. 93-106, 2019.
TEECE, D. J.; PISANO, G.; SHUEN, A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, v. 18, n. 7, p. 509-533, 1997.
TIDD, J. Innovation management in context: Environment, organization and performance. International Journal of Management Reviews, v. 3, n. 3, p. 169-183, 2001.
VON HIPPEL, E. Democratizing innovation. The MIT Press, 2006.
WERNERFELT, B. Adaptation, specialization, and the theory of the firm: Foundations of the resource-based view. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
WERNERFELT, B. An information based theory of microeconomics and its consequences for corporate strategy. Strategic Management Journal, v. 5, n. 2, p. 171-180, 1984.
WILLIAMSON, O. The vertical integration of production: Market failure considerations. American Economic Review, v. 61, p. 112-127, 1971.
WILLIAMSON, O. E. Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications, a Study in the Economics of Internal Organization. New York: Free Press, 1975.
WILLIAMSON, O. E. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting. New York: Free Press, 1985.
WILLIAMSON, O. E. Transaction cost economics: The comparative contracting perspective. Journal of economic behavior & organization, v. 8, n. 4, p. 617-625, 1987.
WU, W. P. Dimensions of social capital and firm competitiveness improvement: The mediating role of information sharing. Journal of management studies, v. 45, n. 1, p. 122-146, 2008.
YANG, J.; ZHANG, F.; JIANG, X.; SUN, W. Strategic flexibility, green management, and firm competitiveness in an emerging economy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, v. 101, p. 347-356, 2015.
ZHANG, W.; HOU, L.; JIAO, R. J. Multidimensional Performance Evaluation of Company’s Competitiveness by Developing Smart Connected Products. In: IIE Annual Conference. Proceedings, p. 1492-1497, Institute of Industrial and Systems Engineers (IISE), 2019.
ZHAO, S.; JIANG, Y.; PENG, X.; HONG, J. Knowledge sharing direction and innovation performance in organizations: do absorptive capacity and individual creativity matter?. European Journal of Innovation Management, v. 24, n. 2, p. 371-394, 2020. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-09-2019-0244.
Copyright (c) 2022 Zafer Adiguzel, Kudret Celtekligil, Fatma Sonmez Cakir
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
• Os autores mantêm os direitos autorais e concedem à revista o direito de primeira publicação com o trabalho licenciado sob a Licença Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
• Os autores são estimulados a publicar e distribuir seu trabalho online (ex.: em repositórios institucionais ou na sua página pessoal), pois isso pode aumentar o impacto e a citação do trabalho publicado.