6. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
6.4 Limitations and Future Research
This study has numerous limitations. The first one is the use of the same respondent for both independent and dependent variables. Statistically, common-method bias does not seem to be a major issue. However, the study is
84
potential to have upwardly biased results. Future studies should use multiple methods of measurement to alleviate any bias.
Second, although cases in Taiwan provide a good opportunity for testing the phenomena of extending large-scale business and industry learning in a different culture, the generalizability of the study is limited. Therefore, the questionnaire should be simultaneously responded by foreign bicycle firms in future research.
Third, three network indicators that are considered critical to network position are examined, but other network model such as discrete core-periphery may also affect the outcomes of industrial exploration.
Fourth, even though care has been taken to identify the sales/purchasing manager to answer the survey, counting on the self-report of the single informant may lead to perceptual and common method biases. In words, in the future research, researchers should offer more opportunities for each firm’s general manager and human resource manager to assist the related research.
Fifth, in social network theory, relationships usually designate to some specific domains. As for researcher, they focus on board ties (family members, friendship…etc) and business ties. This research merely stresses on three types of relationships. Therefore, it may be possible to have other linkages (relationships) between different actors.
Sixth, in the future, this study is worthy to take a longitudinal survey. Merely conducting cross-sectional surveys will be difficult to draw the issue of how capabilities are created over a run of several years. On the other hand, “state changes”
over a longer period of time can add more understanding of how to leverage and
85
extend learning capabilities and to maintain businesses’ relationship quality for company’s competitive advantage.
Finally, more importantly, examination of other organizational capabilities (e.g., innovative R&D capabilities or marketing capabilities) and buyer-seller interconnectedness can enhance our understanding of the embeddedness of network capabilities and the importance of mutual dependence in creating new capabilities that are even more immobile.
86
Reference
Amsden, W.-W. C. a. A. H. (2003). Beyond Late Development Taiwan's Upgrading
Policies: Taipei: Linking books.
Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration Networks, Structural Holes, and Innovation: A Longitudinal Study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 425-455.
Argyris. (1967). Today's Problems with Tomorrow's Organizations. Journal of
Management Studies, 1, 31-55.
B, F. (1988). Prototype Analysis of the Concepts of Love and Commitment. J Pers
Soc Psychol, 55(4), 537.
Babin, B. J. & Griffin, M. (1998) The nature of satisfaction: an updated examination and analysis, Journal of Business Research, 41, pp. 127–136.
Bengtsson, M., & Kock, S. (1999). Cooperation and competition in relationships between competitors in business networks. Journal of Business & Industrial
Marketing, 14(3), 178.
Bossard, J. H. S. (1945). The Law of Family Interaction. The American Journal of
Sociology, 50(4), 292-294.
Burt, R. S. (2000). The Network Structure of Social Capital. Research in
Organizational Behavior, 22, 345-423.
Cangelosi, V. E., and Dill, W. R. (1965). Organizational Learning: Observations toward a Theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 10, 175-203.
Caves, R. E., & Porter, M. E. (1977). From Entry Barriers to Mobility Barriers:
Conjectural Decisions and Contrived Deterrence to New Competition. Quarterly
87
Journal of Economics, 91(2), 241-261.
Cheng Ho, H. (2007). Pedaling to the Top - Bicycle Industrial History of Taiwan.
Kaohsiung National Science and Technology Museum.
Child, J. (2001) Learning through strategic alliances, in: M. Dierkes et al. (Eds) Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge (Oxford University Press).
Chin-Yen, L., & Tsung-Hsien, K. (2007). The Mediate Effect of Learning and Knowledge on Organizational Performance. Industrial Management & Data
Systems, 107(7), 1066-1083.
Chinho, L., & Shofang, C. (2006). Exploring TQM's impact on the causal linkage between manufacturing objective and organizational performance. Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, 17(4), 465-484.
Chu, Wan-wen. (1997). Causes of Growth: a Study of Taiwan's Bicycle Industry.
Cambridge Journal of Economics, 21, 55-72.
Chyan, Y., Yau-De, W., & Han-Jen, N. (2007). Does Industry Matter in Attributing Organizational Learning to its Performance?: Evidence from the Taiwanese Economy. Asia Pacific Business Review, 13(4), 547-563.
Coleman, J. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Crosby, L. A., Evans, K. A., & Cowles, D. (1990). Relationship Quality in Services Selling: An Interpersonal Influence Perspective. Journal of Marketing, 54(3), 68.
Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., & White, R. E. (1999). An Organizational Learning Framework: From Intuition to Institution. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 522-537.
88
Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., White, R. E., & Djurfeldt, L. (1995). Organizational Learning: Dimensions for a Theory. International Journal of Organizational
Analysis (1993 - 2002), 3(4), 337-360.
Daft, R. L., & Weick, K. E. (1984). Toward a Model of Organizations as Interpretation Systems. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 284-295.
Day, R. L. (1984). Modeling Choices among Alternative Responses to Dissatisfaction.
Advances in Consumer Research, 11(1), 496-499.
De Soto, C. B. (1960). Learning a Social Structure. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 60, 417-421.
Delantey, J. T., & Huselid, M. A. (1996). The impact of human resource management practices on perceptions of organizational performance. Academy of
Management Journal, 39(4), 949.
DiBella, A. J., Nevis, E. C., & Gould, J. M. (1996). Understanding Organizational Learning Capability. Journal of Management Studies, 33(3), 361-379.
Doney, P. M., & Cannon, J. P. (1997). An examination of the nature of trust in buyer-seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 61(2), 35-51.
Dwyer, F. R., Schurr, P. H., & Oh, S. (1987). Developing Buyer-Seller Relationships.
Journal of Marketing, 51(2), 11-27.
Easton, G. (1992). Industrial Networks: A review, in Industrial Networks: A New View
of Reality: Routledge, London.
Feser, E. J. (2002). Tracing the Sources of Local External Economies. Urban Studies,
39(13), 2485-2506.
89
Fiol, C. M., & Lyles, M. A. (1985). Organizational Learning. Academy of
Management Review, 10(4), 803-813.
Ford, D. (1980). The Development of Buyer-Seller Relationships in Industrial Markets. European Journal of Marketing, 14(5/6), 339.
Fransman, M. (1986). International Competitiveness, Technical Change and the State:
the Machine Tool Industry in Taiwan and Japan. World Development 14(12), 1375-1396.
Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in Social Networks: Conceptual Clarification.
Social Networks, 1, 215-239.
Gadde, L.-E., Huemer, L., & Hakansson, H. (2003). Strategizing in Industrial Networks. Industrial Marketing Management, 32(5), 357-364.
Garbarino, E., & Johnson, M. S. (1999). The Different Roles of Satisfaction, Trust, and Commitment in Customer Relationships. Journal of Marketing, 63(2), 70-87.
Garcia-Morales VJ, Llorens-Montes FJ, Verdu-Jover AJ. 2007. Influence of personal mastery on organizational performance through organizational learning and innovation in large firms and SMEs. Technovation 27(9): 547-568
Garcia-Morales, V. J., Ruiz-Moreno, A., & Javier Llorens-Montes, F. (2007). Effects of Technology Absorptive Capacity and Technology Proactivity on Organizational Learning, Innovation and Performance: An Empirical Examination. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 19(4), 527-558.
Garvin, D. A. (1993). Building a learning organization. Harvard Business Review,
90
71(4), 78-91.
Galvin, P. a., & Morkel, A. (2001). The Effect of Product Modularity on Industry Structure: the Case of the World Bicycle Industry. Industry and Innovation, 8(1), 31-47.
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. The American Journal of
Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.
Gulati, R., Nohria, N. and Zaheer, A. (Eds) (2000) ‘Strategic networks’. Strategic
Management Journal, Special Issue, 21, 3, 203–215.
Hakansson, H., & Ford, D. (2002). How should Companies Interact in Business Networks? Journal of Business Research, 55(2), 133-139.
Hansen, M. T. (1999). The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 44(1), 82-111.
Harary, F., Norman, R.Z. and Cartwright, D. (1965). Structural Models: An
Introduction to the Theory of Directed Graphs. New York: Wiley.
Henders, B. Positions in Industrial Network--Marketing Newsprint in the U.K.
Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. University of Uppsala, Sweden.
Herriott, S. R., Levinthal, D., & March, J. G. (1985). Learning from Experience in Organizations. American Economic Review, 75(2), 298-302.
Hedberg, B. & Wolff, R. (2001) Organizing, learning, and strategizing: from construction to discovery, in: M. Dierkes et al. (Eds) Handbook of Organizational Learning & Knowledge (Oxford University Press).
91
Hu, H.-D. Y. a. M.-C. (2008). Strategic Entrepreneurship and the Growth of the Firm:
the Case of Taiwan’s Bicycle Industry. Global Business and Economics Review,
10(1), 11-34.
Hsin Hsin, C. (2007). Critical Factors and Benefits in the Implementation of Customer Relationship Management. Total Quality Management & Business
Excellence, 18(5), 483-508.
Huat Low, B. K. (1997). Managing Business Relationships and Positions in Industrial Networks. Industrial Marketing Management, 26(2), 189-202.
Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatureas. Organization Science, 2(1), 88-115.
Ivens, B. S., & Pardo, C. (2007). Are Key Account Relationships Different? Empirical Results on Supplier Strategies and Customer Reactions. Industrial Marketing
Management, 36(4), 470-482.
Kaplan, R. S. & Norton, D. P. (1992) The Balanced Scorecard – measures that drive performance, Havard Business Review, 70(1), pp. 71–79.
Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. R. (2005). The Balanced Scorecard: Measures That Drive Performance. (Cover story). Harvard Business Review, 83(7/8), 172-180.
Kilduff, M. a. T., Wenpin. (2003). Social Networks and Organizations. London:
SAGE Publications.
Krackhardt, D. a. K., Martin. (1999). Whether Close or Far: Social Distance Effects on Perceived Balance in Friendship Networks. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 76(5), 770-782.
92
Kumar, N., Scheer, L. K., & Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M. (1995). The Effects of Supplier Fairness on Vulnerable Resellers. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(1), 54-65.
Levitt, B. M., J. (1988). Organizational Learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 319-340.
Lopez, S. P., Peon, J. M. M., & Ordas, C. J. V. (2005). Human Resource Practices, Organizational Learning and Business Performance. Human Resource
Development International, 8(2), 147-164.
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organization learning (Vol. 2):
Organization Science.
Marshall, A. (1890/1961). Principles of Economics: An Introductory Volume. London:
Macmillan.
Moorman, C., Deshpande, R., & Zaltman, G. (1993). Factors Affecting Trust in Market Research Relationships. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 81-101.
Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20.
Nooy, W. D., Mrvar, A., and Batagelj, V. (2005). Exploratory Social Network Analysis
with Pajek. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Parkhe, A. (1991). Interfirm Diversity, Organizational Learning, and Longevity in Global Strategic Alliances Journal of International Business Studies, 22, 579-601.
Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational
93
Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116-145.
Rauyruen, P., & Miller, K. E. (2007). Relationship Quality as a Predictor of B2B Customer Loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 60(1), 21-31.
Reichheld, F. F., & Sasser Jr, W. E. (1990). Zero Defections: Quality Comes to Services. Harvard Business Review, 68(5), 105-111.
Reinhardt, R. et al. (2001) Intellectual capital and knowledge management:
perspectives on measuring knowledge, in: M. Dierkes et al. (Eds). Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge (Oxford University Press).
Roberts, K., Varki, S., & Brodie, R. (2003). Measuring the Quality of Relationships in Consumer Services: an Empirical Study. European Journal of Marketing, 37(1/2), 169-196.
Rosenberg, L. J., & Czepiel, J. A. (1983). A Marketing Approach for Customer Retention. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 1(2), 45-51.
Rudolph, B. (1998). Kundenzufriedenheit im Industriegüterbereich [Customer
Satisfaction in the Industrial Sector]: Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline. New York: Doublcday.
Sheth JN, P. A., editors. (2000). Handbook of Relationship Marketing. CA: Sage Publishing.
Shrivastava, P. (1983). A Typology of Organizational Learning Systems. Journal of
Management Studies, 20(1), 7-28.
94
Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. (1995). Market Orientation and the Learning Organization. Journal of Marketing, 59(3), 63-74.
Simon, H. A. (1991). Bounded Rationality and Organizational Learning (Vol. 2).
Smith, J. B. (1998). Buyer-Seller Relationships: Similarity, Relationship Management, and Quality; ABSTRACT. Psychology & Marketing, 15(1), 3-21.
Stata, R. (1989). Organizational Learning : The Key to Management Innovation.
Sloan Management Review 30(3), 63.
Tsai, W. (2001). Knowledge Transfer in Intraorganizational Networks: Effects of Network Position and Absorptive Capacity on Business Unit Innovation and Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 996-1004.
Tsai, T.-S. L. H.-J. (2005). The Effects of Business Operation Mode on Market Orientation, Learning Orientation and Innovativeness Industrial Management &
Data Systems 105(3), 325 - 348
Ulaga, W., & Eggert, A. (2006). Relationship Value and Relationship Quality.
European Journal of Marketing, 40(3/4), 311-327.
Watkins, K. E., and Marsick, W. I. (1993). Scuipting the leaming organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Werner, H. (1997). Relationales beschaffungsverhalten. Ausprägungen und
determinanten [Relational purchasing behavior: Forms and determinants]:
Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.
Wilkinson, I., & Young, L. (2002). On Cooperating Firms, Relations and Networks.
Journal of Business Research, 55(2), 123-132.
95
Wilson, D. T. (1995). An Integrated Model of Buyer-Seller Relationships. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, 23(4), 335-345.
Yi-Ling, W. (2006). Vehicle Industry Yearbook. Hsinchu: Ministry of Economic Affairs, R.O.C.
96
Appendix
Part 1 : Organizational Learning
Please indicate the condition of your company (1=strongly disagree to 7=strongly agree) with the following statements.
Strongly
KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION (Lopez, Peon, & Ordas, 2005)
A. EXTERNAL ACQUISITION OF KNOWLEDGE
1. Cooperation agreements with other companies,
universities, technical colleges, etc., are fomented.
2. The organization attends bicycle fairs/exhibitionsregularly.
3. The company has acquired much new and relevant knowledge (e.g. technological knowledge or customer needs ) provided competitive advantage.
B. INTERNAL ACQUISITION OF KNOWLEDGE
4. New ideas and approaches on work performance areexperimented continuously.
5. Organizational systems and procedures support
innovation.
KNOWLEDGE DISTRIBUTION
6. All members are informed about firm’s positioning,
future development and belief.
7. Meetings are periodically held to inform all the
employees about the latest innovations in the company.
8. There are within the organization individuals who take part in several teams or divisions or who regularly share important information.
KNOWLEDGE INTERPRETATION
97
9. All the members of the organization share the same aim
to which they feel committed.
10. Teamwork is a very common practice in the company.
11. The company offers other opportunities to learn so as to make individuals aware of other people or departments’
duties. (visits to other parts of the organization, internal training programs, etc.)
ORGANIZATIONAL MEMORY
12. The company has databases to stock its experiences and
knowledge so as to be able to use them later on.
13. The company has up-to-date databases of its clients.
14. There is easier access for all employees to the organization’s data basis and documents through some kind of network (Lotus Notes, Intranet, etc.)
15. The codification and knowledge administration system
makes work easier for the employees.
Part 2 : Relational Quality
Please indicate the condition of your company (1=very high to 7=very low) with the following statements.
Very
1. Our firm believes in information business partners
(suppliers/purchasers) provide us.
2. Business partners (suppliers/purchasers) are truly
interested in our firm’s success.
3. Our firm will consider the benefits of the customers.
98
SATISFACTION ( Rudolph, 1998)
A. ECNOMIC SATISFACTION
4. The quality of the supplier's products is better.
5. The supplier’s order handling is efficient.
B. SOCIAL SATISFACTION
6. Our firm considers the suppliers to be friendliness.
7. The suppliers of our firm treat us as a vital person.
COMMITMENT (Werner, 1997)
8. We are ready to invest more time, money, and manpower as usual into this relationship with specific business partners as long as possible.
9. Our firm is loyal to do business with business partners
who have high commitment.
10. Our firm can accurately provide products/services
according to the contract.
Part 3 : Network Position
Please select the companies which have a business relationship with your company, and indicate the type of relationship as well as the communication frequency with the company. Only list firms settling in Taiwan.
Firm Type of relationship
Communication frequency of business (very low=1, very high=7)
Buyer/Supplier Competitor Other 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
GIANT
MERIDA
99
IDEAL
PACIFIC-CYCLE
TAIWAN HODAKA
FAIRLY BIKE
ACOCA
KENSTONE
SOUTHERN CROSS
DECATHLON
MING CYCLE
WHEELER
TAIOKU
DODSUN
YUH-JIUN
KHS
SAN GROUND
SANFA BICYCLE
ALEXRIMS
CST
DAH KEN
FORMULA
ENGINEERING
HSIN LUNG
JAGWIRE
JOY
KENDA RUBBER
100
101
SPINNER
FU LUONG HI-TECH
UNITED
J.D. COMPONENTS
SUN RACE
GOLDEN SUN
ZHANG STAR
SHIH YE
CHUAN WEI
TA YA CHAIN
RST
CHIN HAUR
VISCOUNT
LINKER METAL
FERMAX
ADGROUP
COMPOSITE-TECH
ALLOY-TECH
FRITZ JOU
HWA FONG
Part 4 : Organizational Performance
Please indicate present performance of your company with the following statements.
Financial performance (Delantey & Huselid, 1996)
102
In comparison to major competitors in the industry…
(2002~2007)
0~5% 6~10% 11~15% 16~20% 20~25%1.
How about average sales growth of your firm.2.
How about average market share of your firm.3. How about long-term profit potential of your firm.
Non-financial performance
(Delantey & Huselid, 1996) & (Kaplan & Norton, 2005)During the past five years, your company has…
(2002~2007)
0~5 6~20 21~50 51~100 100~4. Numbers of patents
5. Numbers of new products/manufacturing process
In comparison to major competitors in the industry…
Low 1 2 3 4 High 56. How about the quality of your products/services.
7. How about the expansion in products/services
offerings.
8. How about customer satisfaction of your firm.
After the implementation of organizational learning…
Low 1 2 3 4 High 59. Employees’ certification will increase.
10.