• 沒有找到結果。

綠色新產品開發成功的前因與結果模式之建構與實證研究---以台灣地區電機電子產業為例

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "綠色新產品開發成功的前因與結果模式之建構與實證研究---以台灣地區電機電子產業為例"

Copied!
48
0
0

加載中.... (立即查看全文)

全文

(1)

行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫 成果報告

綠色新產品開發成功的前因與結果模式之建構與實證研究

─以台灣地區電機電子產業為例(第 2 年)

研究成果報告(完整版)

計 畫 類 別 : 個別型 計 畫 編 號 : NSC 98-2410-H-151-004-MY2 執 行 期 間 : 99 年 08 月 01 日至 100 年 07 月 31 日 執 行 單 位 : 國立高雄應用科技大學企業管理系 計 畫 主 持 人 : 黃義俊 共 同 主 持 人 : 陳榮方 計畫參與人員: 碩士班研究生-兼任助理人員:施麗婷 碩士班研究生-兼任助理人員:李懿庭 助教-兼任助理人員:邱妙惠 報 告 附 件 : 出席國際會議研究心得報告及發表論文 處 理 方 式 : 本計畫涉及專利或其他智慧財產權,2 年後可公開查詢

中 華 民 國 100 年 10 月 25 日

(2)

行政院國家科學委員會補助專題研究計畫

■成 果 報 告

□期中進度報告

綠色新產品開發成功的前因與結果模式之建構與實證研究─以台灣地區電

機電子產業為例

The models building and empirical research about the antecedents and

consequences of green new product development success-The case of

Electric and Electronic Industries in Taiwan

計畫類別:■ 個別型計畫

□ 整合型計畫

計畫編號:

98-2410-H-151-004-MY2

執行期間:

2009 年 8 月 1 日至 2011 年 7 月 31 日

第二年(

2010 年 8 月 1 日至 2011 年 7 月 31 日

人:黃義俊 國立高雄應用科技大學企業管理系 副教授

共同主持人:陳榮方 國立高雄應用科技大學企業管理系 副教授

計畫參與人員:邱妙惠 國立高雄應用科技大學企業管理系 助教

:施麗婷 國立高雄應用科技大學企管系碩士生

:李懿庭 國立高雄應用科技大學企管系碩士生

成果報告類型(依經費核定清單規定繳交):□ 精簡報告■ 完整報告

本成果報告包括以下應繳交之附件:

□赴國外出差或研習心得報告一份

□赴大陸地區出差或研習心得報告一份

■出席國際學術會議心得報告及發表之論文各一份

□國際合作研究計畫國外研究報告書一份

處理方式:除產學合作研究計畫、提升產業技術及人才培育研究計

畫、列管計畫及下列情形者外,得立即公開查詢

□涉及專利或其他智慧財產權,□一年■二年後可公開查詢

執行單位:國立高雄應用科技大學企管系

一百 年 十 月 二十一 日

(3)

Green creativity and performance from Taiwanese high-tech sectors: The

moderating role of family involvement

摘要: 引進資源基礎理論的觀點,本研究驗證綠色創造力對績效影響的模式。本文提出一 種新的能耐觀點- 綠色創造力。同時,本研究進一步實證家族企業如何調節綠色創造力 與績效的關係。從128份台灣高科技產業(電機、電子和資訊公司)的有效樣本中,研究 發現綠色創造力顯著正向影響綠色新產品績效。再者,家族企業顯著正向調節綠色創造 力與綠色新產品績效。 關鍵詞:綠色創造力、綠色新產品績效、家族企業。 Abstract:

Drawing on the natural-resource-based view of the firm, this study examines a model of the influence of green creativity on performance. This paper proposes a novel concept of capability, green creativity. Meanwhile, this work further documented how a family firm moderates the relationship between green creativity and performance. This study adopts data from 128 Taiwan’shigh-tech sectors (electrical, electronic, and information companies). The findings reveal that green creativity is positively and significantly related to green new product performance. Moreover, family firms have positively and significantly moderated the relationship between a firm’sgreen creativity and green new product performance.

Keywords:

Green creativity, green new product performance, family firms.

This paper has been submitted to family business review and second round

revised in progress.

(4)

Green creativity and performance from Taiwanese high-tech sectors: The

moderating role of family involvement

Introduction

The increasing pressures from the governments and customers are challenging businesses to go beyond regulatory compliance and to adopt proactive environmental strategies (Bansal, 2003; Hart 1995; Porter and van der Linde 1995; Sharma, 2000). Such growing emphasis on proactive strategies brings the development of green new product under the spot light of managers as non-conventional, green products provide options for family firms to satisfy the operating constraints resulting from governments and societal awareness of environmental degradation while creating new economic value for shareholder.

Developing green innovations require product developers to integrate the consideration of environmental issues in the product design (Hart, 1995). This integration process usually involves the use of new materials, components, and even manufacturing processes (Christmann, 2000; Hart 1995; Porter and van der Linde 1995; Sharma, 2000; Sharma and Vredenburg, 1998; Shrivastava, 1995). For example, hybrid cars and all-electric cars are partially or fully powered by highly efficient batteries with very sizable storage capacity to sustain cruise distances comparable to their gasoline-powered counterparts. Because of differences in power plants, designers of hybrid and all-electric automobiles need to find creative ways to design heir products so that they can achieve performance expectations and maintain the cost at a reasonable level.

A family firm’s ability to be creative in new product innovation can be a valuable resourceand a key sourceoforganization’scompetitiveadvantage(Barney 1991;Huntand Morgan 1995). A creative family firm that provides unique and meaningful products and programs will meet the changing needs of consumers by generating highly innovative and superior products and programs in the market, and can lead to abnormal economic returns by meeting unique market demands in meaningful ways (Cooper 1979; Barney 1991; Hunt and Morgan 1995). It has been accepted that creative product design and development can enable a firm to effectively differentiate its products from others offered by competitors (Andrews and Smith 1996; Song and Montoya-Weiss 2001; Song and Parry 1997, 1999). However, despite anecdotal observations such as the success of hybrid cars, there are few empirical studies suggesting the relationship between a family firm’s ability to develop creative, environmental friendly products and the performance of family firms.

Family firms are business organizations controlled and managed by a dominant coalition of family shareholders. These organizations may be reluctant to change and tend follow more conservative strategies after (Shepherd and Zahra 2003). In adittion, with large block-holdings, the controlling family enjoys almost unchallenged discretion over the use of

(5)

thefirm’sassets, if a family firm intends to maintain the status quo, it may have different attitudes towards investing in green creativity from non-family firms (Craig and Dibrell 2006; Huang, Ding and Kao 2009). Despite recent efforts in the environmental strategies of family firms, there are very few empirical studies in this field (Sharma and Sharma, 2011).

The objective of this paper is to fill the gap. Drawing on the theory of the natural-resource-based view of the firm, we examine the impact of green creativity on the performance of green innovations developed by family firms using data from family firms from Taiwan. In addition, we also examine the level of family involvement and its impact on the relationship between green creativity and performance.

This research has several contributions. First, it bridges the creativity literature with family business studies by suggesting a role of family involvement in the creativity-performance relationship. Second, the new scale developed in this study, green creativity, provides a valid and reliable tool for the future research of sustainability and new product development. Third, corporate sustainability in the emerging economies is often a serious policy concern that inadequately represented in academic research (Child and Tsai, 2005; Peng and Lin, 2008). Our study provides empirical evidence in the emerging economy context and can be generalized to similar studies in other emerging economies. In the next section, we will review the literature and develop two hypotheses. Section 3 and 4 will describe the methodology and the result of the research. Section five offers discussions and conclusion.

2. Literature review

2.1 An overview of the natural-resource-based view

Resource-based view proposes that a firm is a bundle of resources, which include all of the organizational assets. As no two organizations share identical bundle of resources, a firm can create long-term sustainable competitive advantage by developing valuable, rare, inimitable, and un-substitutable resources (Barney, 1991; Wernerfelt, 1984) to address the needs of target markets.

Organizational resources can be tangible or intangible. The examples of the former include financial, physical, and the employees of a firm. The latter could include technology and reputation oftheorganization.An intangibleresourcemay also referto an organization’s ability to utilize resources for select tasks such as new product development and creativity. Thecapability issometimesdefined asan organization’sability to deploy resources(Amit and Shoemaker, 1993). Although the boundary of resource and capability are not always clearly defined (Chan, 2005), it has been accepted that unique and imperfectly imitable capabilities are valuable for generating abnormal economic returns of a firm (Makadok,

(6)

2001).

However, the competitive advantage stemmed from select resources or capabilities do not last forever. Major changes in competitive environment and the significant shift of customer tastes can make the once valuable resources obsolete or even become a source of competitive disadvantage. For example, the emergence of digital photography reduces the relevance of photographic film technology, a source of competitive advantage for Eastman Kodak. To avoid the erosion of competitive advantage, firms cope to the environmental changes and the shifted taste of customers by developing new resources and capabilities. Overcommitted to an old irrelevant bundle of resources may hinder corporate efforts to acquire new resources or capabilities.

Building on the resource based views, Hart (1995) maintains that the changes of environmental regulations and the increasing customer awareness of natural (biophysical) environments challenge managers to respond to the expectation of sustainability. A firm can improve its environmental performance by investing in pollution prevention machineries or facilities. This “end of pipeline” approach allows firms to satisfy the legal requirement without changing the existing business processes (Jones and Klassen, 2001). However, the investment in pollution equipment plays a limited role in creating sustainable competitive advantage for a firm because competitors can acquire similar equipments and facilities to accomplish similar level of improvement in environmental performances.

Despite the prevalence of end-of pipeline approach in the before the 90s, an increasing number of firms choose to adopt a proactive approach to reduce pollution while developing valuable organizational resources (Bansal, 2003; Cordano and Frieze, 2000; Sharma, 2000; Wijen and Duysters, 2005). The proactive approach of environmental management goes beyond regulatory compliance and requires organizations to develop new capabilities to pursue their environmental objectives (Aragon-Correa and Sharma, 2003; Hart, 1995; Sharma and Vredenburg, 1998). Because the changing environmental imperative imposes new constraints, firms need to adapt to the characteristics and limitations of natural resources through the extensive use of both tangible and intangible resources to create new capabilities and competencies (Lee and Rhee, 2005). The organizational capability to be green (Hart, 1995) is a firm's knowledge of relevant environmental issues and the organizational competence to use such knowledge. The green capability enables managers to find innovative alternatives to existing business operations and generate superior economic returns for the firms (Chen, 2005; Judge and Douglas, 1998; Menguc and Ozanne, 2005; Russo and Fouts, 1997; Sharma and Vredenburg, 1998).

2.2 Green creativity and new product performance

(7)

Although innovation activities are affected by many organizational factors such as strategy, structure, and resources (Fagerberg, Mowery and Nelson 2005), valuable innovations are often the successful implementation of creative ideas generated by individuals or teams within an organization (Amabile, Conti, Coon, Lazenby and Herron, 1996). Using the terminology of the resource-based view, creativity is a capability of an organization and a key source of sustainable competitive advantage (Barney 1991; Hunt and Morgan 1995). A creative product effectively differentiates itself from competing products in terms of uniqueness, quality, cost effectiveness, and technical performance (Andrews and Smith 1996; Song and Montoya-Weiss 2001; Song and Parry 1997, 1999).

The construct of creativity consists of two distinct dimensions: novelty and meaningfulness to target customers (Amabile, 1983; Im and Workman, 2004). The former refers to the extent of which an innovation is perceived as uniquely different from competitors. The latter is defined as the appropriateness and usefulness perceived by the target customers (Amabile, 1983). Both dimensions must be included in the concept of creativity, because the target audience may view an idea as weird or bizarre if they are novel or unique but carry no meaning for the customers. In the context of green new product development, a creative idea would also have to demonstrate clear environmental friendliness in addition to novelty and meaningfulness previously identified in conventional product development research.

Companies can apply the green environmental ideas into the designs and packaging of the products to increase the advantages of product differentiation (Shrivastava 1995). Besides, when a company pioneers in the new green product markets, this organization may enjoy the first mover advantages to sell their environmental technologies or services, and even to create new markets (Hart 1995; Peattie 1992; Porter and van der Linde 1995). The introduction of TOYOTA Prius exemplifies that being the first to offer a creative green product giving TOYOTA a competitive edge in the competitive auto market (Esty and Winston, 2006).

An increasing number of studies are suggesting that the success of TOYOTA Prius is not a special case. There is now a growing recognition that environmentally-friendly product strategies gain better customer endorsements and therefore, contribute to long-term profits (Sharma, Iyer, Mehrotra, and Krishnan, 2010). Manufacturers demonstrated higher sense of environmental responsibility enjoy higher profit after tax and market shares than their competitors in Australia (Mengus and Ozanne, 2005). Research on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in China also found that green products and green environmental practices improve environmental and financial performance (Chan, 2005).

Research focuses on family business and innovation suggest that the characteristics of family play a significant role in new product innovation of their firms (Alpay, Bodur, Yılmaz,

(8)

Çetinkaya, and Arıkan,2008). Family business owners who value creativity are likely to encourage and to commit to creativity in the family firm (Abetti, 2007). Although family firms may have adopted different strategies and have different view about the importance of new product innovation, those commit to develop an innovative capacity are likely to benefit from innovation as their non-family peers. Therefore, in the context of green new product development, we hypothesize:

Hypothesis 1: Green creativity improves the green new product performance of family firms.

2.3 The moderating effect of family involvement

H1 predicts that the green creativity will improve the performances of green new products developed by family firms. However, the level of creativity and the level of emphasis on creative are not uniform among family firms. We argue that the family firms with more family involvement in management are more likely to enjoy higher performance benefit from green creativity than others because high family involvement shows commitment from owners and enables project transitions from development to mass production.

Although the coupling of family wealth and the performance of family firm motivate family business owners to get involved in business decision making, an elevated level of family involvementin managementshowsowners’commitmentto theirbusinesses(Sharma and Irving, 2005). Additionally the family firms to commit to protect the surrounding natural environment from pollution or other long-term damages due to their deep roots in the surrounding communities (Gallo, 2004; Berrone, Cruz, Gomez-Mejia and Kintana, 2010). Committed family business owners are more likely to enforce such family values in the processes of innovation development and implementation.

Besides commitment, the process to transition a creative innovation to functional departments plays a significant role in the performance of new product (Cooper, 1979). While the development team is responsible for delivering a novel, meaningful, and environmental friendly product solution for the environmental challenges faced by a family firm, the functional departments such as purchasing, manufacturing, and marketing are responsible for mass producing and distributing the green new products (Wijen and Duysters, 2005). In other words, the success of green new product stems from good coordination and cooperation between design and implementation. The strong family ties shared by family members working in the TMT facilitate communications and problem solving (Chrisman, Chua and Steier, 2005), thus provide a platform to effectively transition creative designs to the assembly line.

(9)

managers, we hypothesize the following moderation effect:

Hypothesis 2: The relationship between green creativity and green new product performance is moderated by family involvement.

3. Methods

3.1 Participants and procedures

To test our hypotheses, we compiled a list of high-technology, small and medium sized manufacturing firms that had developed multiple new products and had introduced green new products within the two years preceding data collection. We followed the approach developed by Sethi, Smith and Park (2001) to identify knowledgeable individuals about a recent green new product innovation project in their organizations.

This research surveys both project leader/manager and the vice president of marketing from a participating firm to obtain information about the creativity of green innovation and the performance of green innovation respectively. Project leaders often hold position titles such as NPD team leader or the manager of advertising/marketing or R&D department (Tu, 2010). Project leaders are asked to rate green new product creativity of the project they managed. In addition, vice presidents (or managers) of marketing were surveyed because of their organizational knowledge and access to strategic and financial information (Moorman and Miner 1997). Therefore the vice presidents (or managers) of marketing are survey for the performances of the innovation projects rated by the project leaders.

We surveyed a random sample from a national registry of Taiwanese companies from the electrical, electronic, and information industries. We targeted these industries because of their documented innovativeness (Kammerer; 2009; Tu, 2010) and the significance to the local economy (Huang and Wu, 2010; Tu, 2010). We also limit our sample pool to firms whose capitalization are greater than five Million US dollars for two reasons. First, larger firms are more likely to have the resources to develop multiple new products (De Luca and Atuahene-Gima 2007). Second, more established organizations are more likely to take an active role in natural environmental management (Aragon-Correa, 1998).

Based on the selection criteria, 1000 questionnaires were mailed. Three weeks following the first mailing, nonrespondents were reminded by telephoned and were encouraged to complete and return the questionnaire. Two weeks following the calls, a second mailing was sent to nonrespondents. After two rounds of follow-ups, this study received 134 responses, of which 128 were considered valid and usable. The 12.8 percent response rate was comparable to other recent survey-based marketing studies (Im and Workman, 2004; and Tu, 2010).

(10)

We perform t-tests on major constructs between early and late respondents. The results suggest no significant nonresponse bias (Armstrong and Overton, 1997). Multicollinearity diagnostic tests (Belsley, Kuh and Welsch, 1980; and Chatterjee and Price, 1991) confirmed that no serious multicollinearity exists for further analysis.

3.2 Measures

We modify scales developed in previous studies to measure Green Creativity and Green New Product Performance following the recommendations of Churchill (1979) and Gerbing and Anderson (1988). We performed a series of pretests, including exploratory qualitative interviews (N=15), a research panel review (N = 6), and a pilot study (N=36), to validate the new scale green creativity and to ensure the appropriateness of the survey administration.

We also examined the convergent validity of the constructs as recommended by the prior studies (Bagozzi and Yi 1988; and Bagozzi, Yi and Phillips 1991). The result shows that all indicators are significantly and positively loaded on the subjective latent constructs. Thus, all measurement constructs have good convergent validity with all indicators. Following Fornell and Lacker (1981), we also examine the the average variance extracted indication (AVE) of these two constructs. AVE presents the amount of variance captured by the construct in relation to the amount of variance due to measurement error. In this study, all AVEs are greater than 0.5 that indicating the variance of the composite scales due to measurement error is greater the trait trying to measure (Fornell and Lacker 1981). This exhibits the robust construct validity for this study. The reliability and AVE of the measures and representative items are shown in Table 1.

Insert Table 1 about here

3.2.1 Green creativity

Green creativity is conceptualized as perceived novelty, meaningfulness, and environmental friendliness of a new product (Amabile et al., 1996; Im and Workman Jr. 2004; Ramus and Steger 2000). We modify the scale of creativity developed by Im and Workman (2004) to measure Green Creativity. The Im-Workman creativity scale includes the dimensions of product novelty and meaningfulness identified by Amabile (1983) yet does not capture environmental friendliness. Drawing on the literature of sustainability management, we incorporate questions about environmental friendliness into the Im-Workman creativity scale for the purpose of this research. This modified scale of creativity includes thirteen items. An exploratory factor analysis was performed on all thirteen items using principle component analysis (Varimax method). Results produced a single factor solution showing uni-dimensionality of the green creativity green creativity construct showed (K-M-O statistic=0.746; Barlett statistic=1177.94, p=0.000, Cronbach’sα=0.867), accounting for

(11)

76.775% of the variance (See Table 1). Green new product creativity was measured using a seven-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).

3.2.2 Green new product (GNP) performance

Following Im and Workman (2004), this research adopts relative sales, return on investment, market share, and profitability as measures of new product performance. We modify this measure by adding a question about environmental performance of the new product (Pujari, Wright and Peattie, 2003) to the existing new product performance scale. The green new product performance scale consists of seven questions using Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).

An exploratory factor analysis was performed on all seven GNP performance questions, using principle component analysis (Varimax method). Results produced a single factor solution showing uni-dimensionality of the GNP performance construct showed (K-M-O statistic=0.844; Barlett statistic=900.73, p=0.000, Cronbach’s α=0.87), accounting for 76.184% of the variance (See Table 1) Though a large number of studies have shown multidimensionality of GNP performance, it is not unique to see a single unifying performance factor. This finding is similar to a work on new product performance by Tu (2010) combining market measures, financial measures, customer-based measures into a single performance factor.

3.2.3 Family involvement

Following Zahra, Neubaum and Larraneta (2007), family involvement was measured using the number of family members on the top management team of the business.

3.2.4 Control variables

This study included five control variables that commonly believed to influence the outcome of NP activities in the high-technology industry: the industry, age, size, R&D strength, and market potential as control variables. There were significant differences in the green innovation performance between the information technology industry and the electronics industries in Taiwan (Chen, Lai and Wen, 2006). Therefore we introduce dummy variables to control the industries of our sample firms. We include the age of firms as control variables. The age was calculated as the difference between 2010 and the founding year of the organization. As an organization grows older, corporate efforts to adopt new innovation may be hindered by corporate inertia (Egri and Herman, 2000; and Huang et al., 2009). We additionally controlled for the size of firms since larger organizations are more likely to have more resource availability to adopt new innovations (De Luca and Atuahene-Gima, 2007) and to take an active role in environmental management (Aragon-Correa, 1998). Following Child (1972), the size of firm is calculated as the log value of number of employees. Moreover, we

(12)

controlled theR&D strength ofafirm becausean organization’sresourcesand capabilitiesto develop new product would have profound impact on the performance of new product (Li and Calantone, 1998). We adopted the R&D expenditure in dollars relative to sales used in Li and Calantone (1998) to measure the R&D strength. Finally, we used market potential to control the impact of competitive environment on new product performance (Han, Kim and Srivastava, 1998; and Im and Workman, 2004). Following Im and Workman (2004), this study defines market potential as the potential demand of the new product in a market, which is measured asafirm’spercentage of revenues generated from exporting.

4. Results

4.1 Descriptive statistics and correlation analyses

Table 2 displays the means and standard deviations of variables, and intercorrelations among all the variables. The results show that green new product performance has significantly positive correction with market potential, green creativity, and family involvement.

Place Table 2 about here

4.2 Regression analysis

We use the industry, age, size, R&D strength, and market potential as control variables. In Table 3, Model A, the result shows that market potential has positively and significantly influence on green new product performance, this implies that the greater the potential demand of the green new product, the higher the green new product performance. Model A also indicates that green creativity has positively and significantly correlated with green new product performance. This result supports hypotheses 1.

Insert Table 3 about here

4.3 Moderating effect

To test our hypotheses 2, we used moderated regression analysis. Following Aiken and West (1991) and Jaccard and Turrisi (2003), we centered (x = 0) the green creativity’ variables when performing our moderated regression analysis to minimize the effects of any multicollinearity among variables comprising our interaction terms. Table 3 summarizes our results. Model B test our family business hypothesis. The introduction of family business moderator significantly increases the adjusted R2 Model A to Model B (△R2 Adj. =.023,

p<0.05).

According to Model C, the family involvement positively and significantly moderates the relationship between the green creativity and green new product performance. Hypothesis 2

(13)

is also supported.

5. Discussions and Conclusion

The concept of creativity has been widely defined in the field of psychology and organizational behaviors as well as in marketing (Amabile et al., 1996; Im and Workman, 2004; Woodman, Sawyer and Griffin, 1993). However, there was little study explore creativity about environmental or green issues. Therefore, this study investigated the relationship between green creativity and green new product performance. Meanwhile, we also examined whether a family firm moderates the relationship between green creativity and green new product performance. The findings showed that the construct of green creativity, composed of novelty, meaningfulness and environmental friendliness, is positively and significantly green new product performance. Our results support the argument that new product success (creativity) is related to changes in market share (Baker and Sinkula, 2005). In addition, our results that sound environmental practice is associated with environmental and financial performance (Chen, 2005; Mengus and Ozanne, 2005).

Moreover, our study also supported that a family firm positively and significantly moderated the relation between meaningfulness and environmental friendliness of green new product and green new product performance separately, which is similar to the findings of Craig and Dibrell’s(2006)study showed that family firms can better deliver environmentally friendly firm policy related to enhanced firm innovation and improved financial performance than non-family firms based on a US sample set. Meanwhile, we found that a family firm positively but not significantly moderated the relation between novelty of green new product and green new product performance. The inconsistencies may result from weaker corporate governance mechanism of emerging markets, which may lead a family to pay less attention to market stakeholders, and thus invest less in green product innovation (Huang et al., 2009).

This study contributes to the academy of research in several important ways. First, this study integrated the literatures of creativity management and green product innovation to build up the model of this research. From the resource-based view, creativity is a capability embedded with thefirm,and akey sourceoforganization’scompetitiveadvantage(Barney, 1991; Hunt and Morgan, 1995), moreover, creativity can result in product differentiation, which isan essentialdeterminantofafirm’sperformance (Andrews and Smith, 1996; Song and Montoya-Weiss, 2001; Song and Parry, 1997, 1999), but there is little research explore the issues of green creativity. Second, in order to examine Hart’s (1995) theory of natural-resource-based view, this study proposes a novel concept of capability, green creativity, and defines it as comprising three components: novelty, meaningfulness and environmental friendliness of green new product. Third, this study provides a robust test of the natural-resource-based view of the firm, our results support that valuable

(14)

resources/capability can have positive impact on performance out-comes (Barney, 1991; Chen, 2005; Hunt and Morgan, 1995; Menguc and Ozanne, 2005). Therefore, we argue that firms should develop and apply valuable resources/capability that both to stress the constraints imposed by the natural environment, and to seize the opportunities offered by it, can gain higher performance. Fourth, we also explore how a family firm moderates the relationship between a firm’sgreen creativity and green new productperformance. Little study has explored how a family business reacts to green creativity.

Additionally, this study has practical implications. On the basis of our research results, we suggest top management must realize green creativity to the importance of green new product performance. Because a firm's attitude, knowledge, and procedures regarding green issues allow the firm to seek and identify green product innovation, which produces superior results. Also, this study mentioned marketing managers should pay attention to novelty, meaningfulness and environmental friendliness of green new product be implemented for green new product to occur. Because green creativity is the production or processes of novelty, meaningfulness and environmental friendliness by individuals or teams within an organization that are that are linked to environmental commitments and environmental concerns (Amabile et al., 1996; Im and Workman, 2004; Ramus and Steger, 2000; Tu, 2010). Therefore, green creativity can not only solve the environmental problems within an organization, but also help company enhance the product/process performance. Moreover, NPD project managers, also need to understand the effects regarding capabilities of green creativity. Because a creative firm that provides unique and meaningful products and programs will meet the changing needs of consumers by generating highly innovative and superior products and programs in the market, and can lead to competitive advantage by meeting unique market demands in meaningful ways, which in turn results in superior performance (Barney 1991; Cooper, 1979; Hunt and Morgan, 1995). In addition, market potential has positively and significantly influence on green new product performance. The reason why Taiwan is an export-oriented economy, for example, the hi-tech industries included electrical, electronics, and information industries took the amount of export as the potential demand for the GNP in the target market (Huang and Wu, 2010).

Subsequently, this study proposed some limitations and future researches. First, this study only examinestherelationship between afirm’scapability and performance. Future research might explore therelationship between afirm’sresource, capability and performance from the natural-resource-based view of the firm further. Second, this study explores the effects of a firm’s green creativity on green new product performance. Future researchers may investigate further what factors drive a firm to implement the green creativity. Third, this study uses one theory, namely, the natural-resource-based view of the firm to build up the model of research. Future research could apply institutional theory (DigMaggio and Powell,

(15)

1983; Jennings and Zandbergen, 1995), slack resource perspective (Bowen, 2002; Cyert and March, 1963; Levinthal and March, 1981) or integrate multi-perspective, for example incorporating both institutional theory and RBV (Clemens and Douglas, 2006; Oliver, 1997) to explore the relationship dependent and independent variables. Fourth, our research focused on the moderating effect of a family on the relationship between green creativity of a firm and green new product performance. Future researchers may wish to investigate whether different corporate governance mechanism may affecta family’sdecision to invest in the adoption of green product innovation.

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge financial support from the National Science Council of Taiwan (R.O.C.) (NSC 98-2410-H-151-004-MY2).

(16)

Reference

Aiken, L. S., & S. G. West (1991). Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Alpay, G., M. Bodur, C. Yilmaz, S. Cetinkaya, and L. Arikan (2008). “Performance Iimplications of Institutionalization Process in Family-owned Businesses: Evidence from an Emerging Economy,”Journal of World Business, 43, 435- 448.

Amabile, T. M. (1983). “The Social Psychology of Creativity: A Componential Conceptualization,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45(2), 357-376. Amabile, T. M., R. Conti, H. Coon, J. Lazenby, and M. Herron (1996). “Assessing the Work

Environment for Creativity,”Academy of Management Journal 39(5), 1154–1184. Amit, R., and P.J.H. Schoemaker (1993). “Strategic Assets and Organizational Rent,”

Strategic Management Journal 14 (1), 33–46.

Andrews, J., and D. C. Smith (1996). “In Search of the Marketing Imagination: Factors Affecting the Creativity of Marketing Programs for Mature Products,”Journal of Marketing Research 33(2), 174−187.

Aragon-Correa, J. A., and S. Sharma (2003). “A Contingent Resource-based View of Proactive Corporate Environmental Strategy,”Academy of Management Review 28, 71–88.

Aragon-Correa, J. A. (1998). “Strategic Proactivity and Firm Approach to the Natural Environment,”Academy of Management Journal 41(5), 556-567.

Armstrong, J. S., and T. S. Overton (1977). “Estimating Non-response Bias in the Mail Survey,”Journal of Marketing Research 14, 396-402.

Bagozzi, R. P., and Y. Yi (1988). “On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 16(1), 74-94.

Bagozzi, R. P., Y. Yi, and L. Y. Phillips (1991). “Assessing Construct Validity in Organizational Research,”Administrative Science Quarterly 36(3), 421-458.

Baker, W. E., and J. M. Sinkula (2005). “Environmental Marketing Strategy and Firm Performance: Effects on New Product Performance and Market Share,”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 33(4), 461-475.

Bansal, P. (2003). “From Issue to Actions: The Importance of Individual Concerns and Organizational Values in Responding to Natural Environmental Issues,”Organization Science 14, 510-527.

Barney, J. (1991). “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage,”Journal of Management 17(1), 99–120.

Belsley, D. A., E. Kuh, and R. E. Welsch (1980). Regression Diagnostics. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Berrone, P., C. Cruz, L.R. Gomez-Mejia, and M. L. Kintana (2010). “Socioemotional Wealth and Corporate Responses to Institutional Pressures: Do Family-Controlled Firms

(17)

Pollute Less?”Administrative Science Quarterly 55, 82-113.

Bowen, F. E. (2002). “Organizational Slack and Corporate Greening: Broadening the Debate,”British Journal of Management 13, 305–316.

Chan, R. Y. K. (2005). “Does the Natural-Resource-Based View of the Firm Apply in an Emerging Economy? A Survey of Foreign Invested Enterprises in China,”Journal of Management Studies 42(3), 625-672.

Chatterjee, S., and B. Price (1991). Regression Analysis by Example. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Chen, Y. S., S. B. Lai, and C. T. Wen (2006). “The Influence of Green Innovation Performance on Corporate Advantage in Taiwan,”Journal of Business Ethics 67(4), 331-39.

Child, J. (1972). “Organization Structure, Environment and Performance: The Role of Strategic Choice,”Sociology 6, 1-22.

Child,J.and T.Tsai(2005).“TheDynamicbetween Firms’EnvironmentalStrategiesand InstitutionalConstraintsin Emerging Economies:Evidencefrom Chinaand Taiwan”, Journal of Management Studies, 42(1), 95-125.

Chrisman, J. J., Chua,J.H.,and Steier,L.(2005).“Sourcesand ConsequencesofDistinctive Familiness:An Introduction,”Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 29(3), 237–247. Christmann, P. (2000). “Effects of ‘Best Practices’of Environmental Management on Cost

Advantage: The Role of Complementary Assets,”Academy of Management Journal 43, 663-680.

Churchill, G. A. Jr. (1979). “A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Construct,”Journal of Marketing 16(February), 64-73.

Clemens, B., and T. Douglas (2006). “Does Coercion Drive Firms to Adopt ‘Voluntary’ Green Initiatives? Relationships among Coercion, Superior Firm Resources, and Voluntary Green Initiatives,”Journal of Business Research 59, 483 –491.

Cooper,R.G.(1979).“The Dimensions of Industrial New ProductSuccessand Failure,” Journal of Marketing 43(3), 93–103.

Cordano, M., and I. H. Frieze (2000). “Pollution Reduction Preferences of U.S. Environmental Managers: Applying Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behavior,” Academy of Management Journal 43, 627- 641.

Craig, J., and C. Dibrell (2006). “The Natural Environment, Innovation, and Firm Performance: A Comparative Study,”Family Business Review 19(4), 275–288.

Cyert, R. M., and J. G. March (1963). A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs.

De Luca, L. M., and K. Atuahene-Gima (2007). “Market Knowledge Dimensions and Cross-Functional Collaboration: Examining the Different Routes to Product Innovation Performance,”Journal of Marketing 71(January), 95-112.

(18)

DiMaggio, P. J., and W. W. Powell (1983). “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields,” American Sociological Review 48(2), 147-160.

Egri, C. P., and S. Herman (2000). “Leadership in the North American Environmental Sector: Values, Leadership Styles, and Contexts of Environmental Leaders and Their Organizations,”Academy of Management Journal 43(4): 571-604.

Esty, D.C., and A.S., Winston (2006). Green to Gold: How Smart Companies Use Environmental Strategy to Innovate, Create Value, and Build Competitive Advantage. 1st ed., Yale University Press.

Fagerberg, J., D. C., Mowery and R. R. Nelson (Eds.). (2005). The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford University Press. UK: Oxford.

Fornell, C., and D. F. Larcker (1981). “Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error,”Journal Marketing Research 18(1), 39-50.

Gallo, M. A. (2004). “The Family Business and its Social Responsibilities,”Family Business Review 17(2), 135-149.

Gerbing, D. W., and J. C. Anderson (1988). “An Updated Paradigm for Scale Development Incorporating Unidimensionability and its Assessment,” Journal of Marketing Research 25(May), 186-192.

Han, J. K., N. Kim, and R. K. Srivastava (1998). “Market Orientation and Organizational Performance: Is Innovation a Missing Link?”Journal of Marketing 62(4), 30-45. Hart, S. L. (1995). “A Natural-Resource-Based View of theFirm,”Academy of Management

Review 20(4). 986–1014.

Huang, Y. C., and Y. C. J. Wu (2010).

Effects of the Organizational Factors on Green New Product Success: Evidence from High-Tech Industries in Taiwan,”Management Decision 48(10), 1539-1567.

Huang, Y. C., H. B. Ding, and M. R. Kao (2009). “Salient Stakeholder Voices: Family Business and Green Innovation Adoption,”Journal of Management and Organization 15(3), 309-326.

Hunt, S. D., and R. M. Morgan (1995). “The Comparative Advantage Theory of Competition,”Journal of Marketing 59 (2), 1–15.

Im, S. B., and Jr. Workman (2004). “Market Orientation, Creativity, and New Product Performance in High-Technology Firms,”Journal of Marketing 68(2), 114−132. Jaccard, J., and R. Turrisi (2003). Interaction Effects in Multiple Regression. Second Edition,

Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Jennings, P. D., and P. A. Zandbergen (1995).“Ecologically Sustainable Organizations: An Institutional Approach,”Academy of Management Journal 20(4), 1015–1053.

(19)

environmental technologies in manufacturing. Greener manufacturing and operations: from design to delivery and back. in Sarkis, J. (ed.), Greener manufacturing and operations: from design to delivery and back, Greenleaf Publishing Limited, 56-68. Judge, Jr. W. Q. and T. D. Douglas (1998). “Performance Implications of Incorporating

Natural Environmental Issues into Strategic Planning Process: An Empirical Assessment,”Journal of Management Studies 35(2), 241-262.

Kammerer, D. (2009). “The Effects of Customer Benefit and Regulation on Environmental Product Innovation: Empirical Evidence from Appliance Manufacturers in Germany,” Ecological Economics 68, 2285-2295.

Lee, S.-Y. & Rhee, S.-K. (2005). From end-of-pipe technology towards pollution preventive approach: the evolution of corporate environmentalism in Korea. Journal of Cleaner Production, 12: 387-395.

Levinthal, D. A., & J. March (1981). “A Model of Adaptive Organizational Search,”Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization 2, 307–333.

Li, T., and R. J. Calantone (1998). “The Impact of Market Knowledge Competence on New Product Advantage: Conceptualization and Empirical Examination,”Journal of Marketing 62, 13-29.

Makadok, R. (2001). Toward a synthesis of the resource-based and dynamic-capability views of rent creation. Strategic Management Journal, 22(5): 387.

Menguc, B., & L. Ozanne (2005). “Challenges of the Green Imperative: A Natural Resource-Based Approach to the Environmental Orientation-Business Performance Relationship,”Journal of Business Research 57(4), 430-438.

Moorman, C., & A. S. Miner (1997). “The Role of Organizational Memory in New Product Performance and Creativity,”Journal of Marketing Research 34 (February), 91-106. Oliver, C. (1997). “Sustainable Competitive Advantage: Combining Institutional and

Resource-Based Views,”Strategic Management Journal 18(9), 697-713. Peattie, K. (1992). Green Marketing. London: Pitman Publishing.

Peng, Y. S., and S. S. Lin (2008). “Local Responsiveness Pressure, Subsidiary Resources, Green Management Adoption and Subsidiary’s Performance: Evidence from Taiwanese Manufactures,”Journal of Business Ethics 79, 199-212.

Porter, M. E. and C. van der Linde (1995). “Green and competitive,”Harvard Business Review 73(5), 120-134.

Pujari, D, G. Wright, and K. Peattie (2003). “Green and Competitive: Influences on Environmental New Product Development Performance,”Journal of Business Research 56(8), 657-671.

Ramus, C. A., and U. Steger (2000). “The Roles of Supervisory Support Behaviors and Environmental Policy in Employee,” Academy of Management Journal 43(4), 605-626.

(20)

Russo, M. V., and P. A. Fouts (1997). “A Resource-Based Perspective on Corporate Environmental Performance and Profitability,”Academy of Management Journal 40(3), 534-559.

Sethi, R., D. C. Smith, and C. W. Park (2001). “Cross-functional Product Development Teams, Creativity, and the Innovativeness of New Consumer Products,”Journal of Marketing Research 38(2), 73-85.

Sharma, P., & Sharma, S. (2011). Drivers of Proactive Environmental Strategy in Family Firms. Business Ethics Quarterly, 21(2), 309-334.

Sharma, A., G. R. Iyer, A. Mehrotra, and R. Krishnan (2010). “Sustainability and Business-to-Business Marketing: A framework and implications,” Industrial

Marketing Management 39, 330-341.

Sharma, P., and G. P. Irving (2005). “Four Bases of Family Business Successor Commitment: Antecedents and Consequences,”Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice 29(1), 13-33. Sharma, S. (2000). “Managerial Interpretation and Organizational Context as Predictors

Corporate Choice of Environmental Strategy,”Academy of Management Journal 43(4), 681-697.

Sharma, S., and H. Vredenburg (1998). “Proactive Corporate Environmental Strategy and the Development of Competitively Valuable Organizational Capabilities,” Strategic Management Journal 19(8), 729-753.

Shepherd, D., and S. Zahra (2003). From Conservatism to Entrepreneurialism: The Case of Swedish Family Firms. Unpublished paper, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO. Shrivastava, P. (1995). “EnvironmentalTechnologies and CompetitiveAdvantage,” Strategic

Management Journal 16(Special issue), 183–200.

Song, X. M., and M. E. Parry (1997).“A Cross-national Comparative Study of New Product Development Processes: Japan and the United States,”Journal of Marketing 61(2), 1–18.

Song, X. M., and M. E. Parry (1999). “Challenges of Managing the Development of Breakthrough Productsin Japan,”Journal of Operations Management 17(6), 665-688. Song, X. M., and M. Montoya-Weiss (2001). “The Effect of Perceived Technological Uncertainty on Japanese New Product Development,”Academy of Management Journal 44 (1), 61-80.

Tu, C. (2010). Balancing Exploration and Exploitation Capabilities in High Technology Firms: A Multi-source Multi-context Examination,” Industrial Marketing Management 39(4), 672-680.

Wernerfelt, B. (1984). “A Resource-Based View of the Firm,”Strategic Management Journal 5(2), 171-180.

(21)

complex bargaining process. R&D Management, 35(1): 73-87.

Woodman, R. W., J. E. Sawyer, and R. W. Griffin (1993). “Toward a Theory of OrganizationalCreativity,”Academy of Management Review 18(2), 293-321.

Zahra, S. A., D. O. Neubaum, and B. Larraneta (2007). “Knowledge Sharing and Technological Capabilities: The Moderating Role of Family Involvement,” Journal of Business Research 60(10), 1070-1079.

(22)

Table 1 Factor Analysis for Green Creativity Factor name (% of variance explained) Items Loading Factor Reliability Cronbach’sα Green creativity (76.775%)

The green new product your company provided that

● isreally “outoftheordinary.” 0.924

● can be considered as revolutionary. 0.919

● is stimulating. 0.911

● shows an unconventional way of solving problems. 0.756 0.85667

● isrelevantto customers’needsand expectations. 0.834

● isconsidered suitableforcustomers’desires. 0.863

● isappropriateforcustomers’needsand desires. 0.874

● is useful for customers. 0.783

● reduce or eliminate packing. 0.849

● disassemble easily and reuse. 0.860

● reduce the use of energy and materials. 0.918

● eliminate harmful and toxic chemicals. 0.867

● examine the life cycle environmental impacts of products. 0.661 Factor name (% of variance explained) Items Loading Factor Reliability Cronbach’sα Green new product performance (70.184%)

Green new product has succeeded in achieving its main objectives

Sales relative to original objective. 0.903

Profit margin relative to original objective. 0.769 0.856 Return on assets relative to original objective. 0.633

Return on investment relative to original objective.

0.760

Customer satisfaction relative to original objective.

0.694

Created new international markets. 0.883 Reduced overall environmental impact. 0.834

(23)

Table 2 Mean and Correlation Coefficient of Variables Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Age (1) 1.000 Size (2) -.068 1.000 R&D strength (3) -.016 .084 1.000 Market potential (4) .285** -.052 .317** 1.000 Green creativity (5) .093 .019 ..106 .331** 1.000

Green new product performance (6) .121 .004 .098 .247** .639** 1.000

Family involvement (7) .160 .007 -.167 .106 .351** .328** 1.000

Note: n= 128; **<0.01

Table 3:Result of Multiple Moderated Regression Test of Study Variables Green New Product Performance

Model A Model B Model C

Beta p Beta p Beta p

Industry .133 .051 .148 .027 .113 .086 Age -.036 .610 -.054 .437 -.014 .841 Size .035 .605 .030 .652 .019 .761 R&D strength -.025 .727 .014 .845 .027 .693 Market potential .217 .005 .206 .007 .188 .011 Green creativity .598 .000 .542 .000 -.105 .634 Family involvement .179 .015 .177 .012 Green creativity * Family involvement .675 .002 Sig. .000 .000 .000 R2Adj. .433 .456 .492 △R2Adj. .023 .036 Sig. F Change .000 .000 n=128

(24)

行政院國家科學委員會補助專題研究計畫

■成 果 報 告

□期中進度報告

綠色新產品開發成功的前因與結果模式之建構與實證研究─以台灣地區電

機電子產業為例

The models building and empirical research about the antecedents and

consequences of green new product development success-The case of

Electric and Electronic Industries in Taiwan

計畫類別:■ 個別型計畫

□ 整合型計畫

計畫編號:

98-2410-H-151-004-MY2

執行期間:

2009 年 8 月 1 日至 2011 年 7 月 31 日

第二年(

2010 年 8 月 1 日至 2011 年 7 月 31 日

人:黃義俊 國立高雄應用科技大學企業管理系 副教授

共同主持人:陳榮方 國立高雄應用科技大學企業管理系 副教授

計畫參與人員:邱妙惠 國立高雄應用科技大學企業管理系 助教

:施麗婷 國立高雄應用科技大學企管系碩士生

:李懿庭 國立高雄應用科技大學企管系碩士生

成果報告類型(依經費核定清單規定繳交):□ 精簡報告■ 完整報告

本成果報告包括以下應繳交之附件:

□赴國外出差或研習心得報告一份

□赴大陸地區出差或研習心得報告一份

■出席國際學術會議心得報告及發表之論文各一份

□國際合作研究計畫國外研究報告書一份

處理方式:除產學合作研究計畫、提升產業技術及人才培育研究計畫、

列管計畫及下列情形者外,得立即公開查詢

□涉及專利或其他智慧財產權,□一年■二年後可公開查詢

執行單位:國立高雄應用科技大學企管系

一百 年 十 月 二十一 日

(25)

國科會補助專題研究計畫項下出席國際學術會議心得報告

日期:100 年 05 月 21 日

一、參加會議經過

本次 Academy of Management 的主題是,從膽大到謹慎:管理實

務和研究的熱情和憐憫,本人所發表的主題為:家族企業的綠色新產品

創新。首先投稿到 Academy of Management 的年會,再經過二位匿名委

員的審查通過後才能列入參加該年會文章的資格,其審查過程相當嚴謹,

因此文章未能達到水準是會被退稿。獲得參加資格後於 2010 年 8 月 8

日親自到加拿大蒙特婁年會的會場發表論文,獲得與會人員高度的好評

與興趣。

計畫編號 NSC98-2410-H-151-004-MY2

計畫名稱

綠色新產品開發成功的前因與結果模式之建構與實證研究─以台

灣地區電機電子產業為例

出國人

員姓名

黃義俊

服務機構

及職稱

國立高雄應用科技大學 副教授

會議時間

2010 年 8 月 6 日至

2010 年 8 月 10 日

會議地點

Montréal, Canada - August 6-10

會議名稱

第 70 屆管理學術研討會,從膽大到謹慎:管理實務和研究的

熱情和憐憫

70 Annual Meeting of Academy of Management, Dare to Care:

Passion & Compassion in Management Practice & Research

發表論

文題目

家族企業的綠色新產品創新

(26)

二、與會心得

Academy of Management 的年會是目前管理學界所辦規模最大、主

題最廣、要求最嚴謹以及參加人數最多的研討會。因此能夠參加這種會

議與領域相同或不同領域的專家學者作學術性的交流,對個人的學術知

識與研究能力有不錯的啟發與助益。

三、考察參觀活動(無是項活動者略)

四、建議

應該多鼓勵本國學者,尤其是獲得國科會補助的研究案能夠參加此

種的研討會,以增廣視野瞭解目前管理學界最新的研究議題,以及國際

化的能力,增加個人的研究能量。

五、攜回資料名稱及內容

Conference Program for Academy of Management 2010 Annual Meeting,包括,

所有參加的文章主題。

六、其他

(27)
(28)

5. 研討會所發表的論文,如附。

Green New Product Innovation in Family Firms

Abstract

Drawing on the social network research, we propose that the internal social networks of family firmshaveprofound impacton afamily firm’sability to involve and to learn from non-conventional stakeholder in the process of green new product development. The primary objective of our research is to examine the moderation effect of family firms in select green new product development practices. We tested our hypotheses using by surveying 181 manufacturers from Taiwan. Our analytical results suggest that managerial actions to improve green product development are likely to generate different impacts in family and non-family firms.

Keywords: Green new product development, internal social networks, environmental performance, financial performance, family firms.

(29)

INTRODUCTION

The emergence of natural environmental challenges in the last quarter of the twentieth century has motivated multinational efforts to manage these natural environmental problems. International treaties such as The Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer (1987) and The Basel Convention (1989) are notable milestones of such natural environmental management efforts. As national governments are more engaged in natural environmental issues, trade sanction and other regulatory measures are being developed to imposenaturalenvironmentalresponsibilitieson companies.In addition,thegeneralpublic’s awareness of natural environmental challenges motivates customers and the governments to advocate for the development of more environmentally responsible green new products. As commercial success of green new products is increasingly crucial in moving companies and society towards environmental sustainability, the development of green new products has demonstrated as a new source of long-term competitive advantage of firms.

The development of green product innovations is not necessarily associated with technological breakthroughs, however such project is most likely to be associated with the involvement of stakeholders who are seldom participants of conventional new product development (NPD) projects. For example, environmental activities may play a key role in green NPD but not in conventional NPD. Such organizational capability to identify and to integrate stakeholder opinions is an important organizational capability (Sharma & Vredenburg, 1998) in the development of environmental friendly products.

Among the companies developing green new products, family firms are a group of particular significance for two reasons. First, family controlled firms account for some 70 percent of GDP and employment in the global economy (Neubauer & Lank, 1998: 10). In addition, family firms are more likely to engage in environmentally friendly practices than their non-family counterparts (Craig & Dibrell, 2006). Second, a family firm is a business organization owned and controlled by a family. The boards and top management team are either filled with family member s or many long-time family friends. This practice increases the closeness of social networks in the family firms. As closely-knit social networks breed trust and mutual understanding among its members, such a social network improves the effectiveness of minor problem solving and developing incremental product innovations (Gulati, 1995). However, a close social network for innovation, or innovation network, is also likely to hinder the acquisition and transfer of radically new ideas for the development of discontinuous or radical innovation projects (Granovetter, 1973; Uzzi, 1996).

Drawing on the social network research, this research proposes that the internal social networksoffamily firmshaveprofound impacton afamily firm’sability to involveand to learn from non-conventional stakeholder in the process of green new product development. We tested our hypotheses using by surveying 181 manufacturers from Taiwan. This project will underscore the interactions between stakeholder integration and innovation network. The

(30)

findings will contribute to the literature of green NPD and NPD in general. Additionally, our examination of innovation network in family business is likely to enhance our understanding in what drives family firms behaving differently from non-family firms. Finally, for managers and policy makers, the outcomes of this project may shed lights to developing new managerial tools to assist family firms improve the effectiveness in green new product innovations. This paper is organized as follows. Next section reviews the literature of NPD, social network in family firms, followed by a review of green new product development research and hypothesis development. The methodology section introduces the research design, implementation, and the results of statistical analysis. Major research implications and managerial implications are presented in the discussion section.

INNOVATION NETWORK AND NPD

An effective NPD process is an organizational learning process in which developers create, transfer, and utilize knowledge for product development activities (Iansiti, 1997; Kale & Singh, 2007; Kogut & Zander, 1992; Kumar & Nti, 1998; Tsai, Ding, & Rice, 2008; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Wheelwright & Clark, 1992). An effective innovation developer must be capable of identifying the sources of critical knowledge and to manage, integrate relevant knowledge to the development of new products (Ding & Peters, 2000; Dougherty, 1990; Iansiti, 1997; Kogut, 2000).

However, the organizational capability to identify and to manage relevant innovation knowledge is closely associated with the innovation network of the innovation developer. A close or strong innovation among individuals within a firm breeds trust between them and encourages sharing of valuable knowledge (Krackhardt, 1992). Members of such strong networks usually know each other well. Additionally, because of their long friendship or past interactions, the members of a strong network are able to understand the needs of other members in the network. Based on his observations of New York City-based garment industries, Uzzi (1996) pointed out that over time, a strong social network emerge among garment workers. This network is a common platform for the transfer of knowledge and other resources for innovations (Gulati, 1999; Kogut, 2000). However, weak, or arms-length, relationships are more effective sources for novel ideas because strong social ties, defined by frequent interactions and long-term associations, are likely to share similar perspectives. On the contrary, individuals who have limited interactions are unlikely to share similar

perspectives developed from long-term close interactions (Granovetter, 1973; Mizruchi & Fein, 1999).

Both organizational capabilities, efficient problem solving and acquisition of non-conventional ideas, are important sources of sustainable competitive advantage of a firm, as firms need both incremental innovations and radical innovations to keep up with competitions (Hill & Rothaermel, 2003; Rice, O'Connor, Peters, & Morone, 1998). Organizations need to be able to utilize its existing innovation network and, in a lower

(31)

frequency, reconfigure its innovation network to identify and to manage relevant stakeholders for both incremental and radical innovation projects.

NPD literature has identified many key factors of new product success. While some of these factors contribute to new product success by utilizing existing innovation network, others require reconfiguration of innovation networks. Examples of the former include organizational commitment to the development of a project and R&D activities, cross-function integration represent a common practice to reconfigure existing innovation networks.

GREEN NPD AND INNOVATION NETWORK IN FAMILY FIRMS

The main difference between a green new product and any other new product is that the former has unique product attributes addressing one or more environmental concerns. Examples of these attributes include recyclability, recycled content, fuel efficiency, toxic content reduction, and emission-related performance. Green new product development is a process through which an organization creates a new product or redesigns an existing product to reduce negative impact to the natural environment (Berchicci & Bodewes, 2005; Pujari, Wright, & Peattie, 2003). While compliance to environmental regulations may still be an important factor in afirm’sdecision to develop green products,an increasing numberof firms have committed to the development of green products to enhance their competitive position in themarkets.Empiricalevidencehassuggested thatan organization’sability to align environmental issues with new product development can improve market performance (Baumann, Boons, & Bragd, 2002). The integration of environmental attributes in new product development process requires developers to re-evaluate the role of existing

stakeholders in the product development process (Polonsky, Rosenberger, & Ottman, 1998). Although the development process of a green NPD is very similar to one of conventional NPD, the Green NPD requires innovators to integrate stakeholders, who otherwise would not be included in the NPD process, into the process of product development. For example, new suppliers will have to be identified and contracted to supply key components for the new green products. The developers also have to acquire new market and technology information to support the development of new green products. The main challenge to developers of green new products is to attain both high environmental performance and high financial performance through the successes of new products. In summary, the main difference between green NPD and conventional NPD is that the compositions of stakeholders are very different from each other. Therefore NPD practices emphasizing network reconfiguration may have a more important role in green NPD success than network utilizing practices. This effect may be more salient in organizations with close, strong innovation networks such as family firms.

(32)

NETWORK UTILIZATION AND RECONFIGURATION IN FAMILY FIRMS

A widely reported attribute of family firms around the world is the involvement of family members in the decision-making and operations of the firm. Previous studies have documented that appointing family members on the board or managerial positions are common in family firms (Davis & Harveston, 1998; Mariussen, Wheelock & Baines, 1998; Ram & Holliday, 1993; Simpson, Wilson, & Jackson, 1992). The family ties constitute the core of internal social network in a family firm. The family members are close to each other as they generally have long history of interaction even before becoming co-workers or co-founders. Family members are also likely to have frequent interactions among themselves. These strong and close relationships among family members form the foundation of social capital within family firms (Arregle, Hitt, Sirmon, & Very, 2007).

The construction of this strong social network within the organization enables family owners to transfer the common family values such as loyalty, fairness, and harmony to their family firms (Ram & Holliday; 1993). This network can also reinforce the behavioral preference such as risk-aversion and long-term orientation. Since individuals bonded by close social ties develop strong trust toward each other, family members are willing to fund the family firm or to contribute disproportionately more in marginal productivity relative to compensation in order to sustain the growth of the family firms (Mariussen, Wheelock, & Baines, 1998; Simpson, Wilson, & Jackson, 1992). Strong ties among family members also enhance family cohesiveness (Salvato & Melin, 2008). As a family firm grows, non-family staff, manager, and board members are recruited to fill the newly created positions. The internal social network connecting the family members would expand to connect select non-family employees or directors. The internal network provides a mechanism of socialization (Portes, 1998) to ensure non-family employees occupying key positions understand and accept the norms and obligations upheld by the family owners.

The strong social network within family firms is likely to have profound impact on the behaviors of family firms. For example, Chirico and Salvato (2008) propose that the social capital derived from the internal social network enhances the knowledge integration among family members. In addition, close relationship among family members increase the willingness of knowledge integration within family. Although there is little evidence about the impact of family-based internal social network in family firms on the development of novel new products, the close internal social network in family firms are likely to affect outcome of non-conventional NPD.

Extensive research has offered guidelines, manuals, and tools to assist engineers and managers to effectively integrate environmental concerns into the new product development process (Brezet & Hemel, 1997; Mackenzie, 1997). While some of these practices have little impact on the composition of stakeholders in the NPD process, network reconfiguring

(33)

practices such as cross function integration enable firms to integrate environmental stakeholders to the NPD process more effectively. Given the strong-tie nature of innovation networks in family firms, network utilization and network reconfiguration practices are likely to have different effects in green NPD performances in family and in non-family firms.

Environmental Commitment and R&D

Corporate environmental policy refersto an organization’scommitmentto green NPD. Such commitment is reflected in the support from the top management and explicit expressions of environmentally responsible policies. Management supports and policy expressions provide a platform to incorporate an explicit and clearly defined environmental product strategy into the overall corporate strategy. An explicit product innovation strategy enables managers to plan for specific product development (Gupta & Wilemon, 1990). In addition, the outcome of the new product development process depends upon the willingness of top management to commit R&D activities and other resources to the new projects (Dwyer, 1990; Hegarty & Hoffman, 1990).

However, the development of green new products requires developers to review the existing product development process and even design green substitute products to replace their existing product lines. Development teams need to search for new information and to involve individuals (e.g. environmental lawyers or community groups) who are not included in conventional product development process in the new product process. Firms capable of reaching out to acquire such new information and involve new participants are more likely to develop successful green new products than the other firms. The intrafirm network plays a vital role in the process because this social capital assists in-house developers to identify internal and external information sources and participants for green product development projects. As the internal network in family firms are closer or stronger than that of non-family firms’(Tsui-Auch, 2005), we hypothesize:

Hypothesis 1a. Family and non-family firms will moderate the relationship between the organizational commitment to environmental responsibility and the environmental performance of green innovation projects, such that the relationship is lower in family firms than in non-family firms.

Hypothesis 1b. Family and non-family firms will moderate the relationship between the organizational commitment to environmental responsibility and the financial performance of green innovation projects, such that the relationship is lower in family firms than in non-family firms.

Hypothesis 2a. Family and non-family firms will moderate the relationship between the R&D strength and the environmental performance of green innovation projects, such that the relationship is lower in family firms than in non-family firms.

數據

Table 1 Factor Analysis for Green Creativity Factor name (% of variance explained) Items LoadingFactor ReliabilityCronbac h’ s α Green creativity (76.775%)
Table 3: Result of Multiple Moderated Regression Test of Study Variables Green New Product Performance

參考文獻

相關文件

以 2011 年經濟部統計處針對各製造業所做的調查,糕餅業所屬 的其他烘焙麵食品之生產值占食品製造業中 3.68%,在 33 項品向中排

第五章 結論與建議 159 中彰投區 特色產 業勞動 力發展趨 勢調查 -金屬 製 品製造業.

本研究除請教於學者專家外,在 1998 年版天下雜誌調查發布 在台灣地區 1000 大企業中,台鹽排名 414,在最賺錢的 50 家公 司中排名 13,但在最會賺錢的 50

The results show that (1) vertical integration, investment intensity and debt ratio have significantly negative impacts on ROE, (2) capital intensity and market share rate

近年來,國內積極發展彩色影像顯示器之產業,已有非常不錯的成果,其中 TFT-LCD 之生產研發已在國際間佔有舉足輕重的地位,以下針對 TFT-LCD 之生

研究與發展(research and development, R&amp;D) 係指進步的 科學知識或產品(與製程)之創新而言[23]。依據美國國家科學基 金會的報告,顯示在最近

(計畫名稱/Title of the Project) 提升學習動機與解決實務問題能力於實用課程之研究- 以交通工程課程為例/A Study on the Promotion of Learning Motivation and Practical

謝函亘﹝32﹞以衣夾為研究對象,採用 TRIZ 創新之方法,結合綠色設計(Green