Evaluating Global Technology Transfer Research Performance
*James K. C. Chen1 Wen-Hong Chiu2 Stacy F. L. Kong3 Leo Y. T. Lin4 Department of Business Administration, Asia University, Taiwan, China
(1kcchen@asia.edu.tw 2andychiu@asia.edu.tw 3stacyk@ms26.hinet.net 4n1659n@gmail.com) ABSTRACTʳ
Technology transfer is one of the most important fields in research and development of new products and new technology knowledge services, technology transfer also one of key issues in knowledge economics era. This study evaluates the global technology transfer development trend of research for the past sixteen years and provides insights into the characteristics of technology transfer research activities to identify development map, tendencies, or regularities that may exist in papers. Data are based on the online version of SCI, Web of Science from 1992 to 2008. Articles referring to technology transfer were assessed according to many aspects including logarithmic model fitting publication outputs during 1992–2007. The result displays that the USA is number one in technology transfer research totaling 447 papers, followed by UK totaling 150 papers.
Other leading countries in technology transfer research include Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Canada, Australia and France.
This new bibliometric method can help researchers realize the panorama of global technology transfer research, and establish further research direction.
Keywords: Technology transfer, SCI, research performance, logarithmic model
I. INTRODUCTION
Technology transfer is one of the most important fields in research and development of new products or new technology service today, making research technology transfer an important topic. Technology transfer also is one of knowledge learning and knowledge management domain. During the past decade, many promising research results indicate that technology transfer is the most important element of organizational knowledge creating processes [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. Technology transfer promotes organizational learning resulting in more research performance.
Continuing research on technology transfer has increased our understanding of some industry values like new products development, new technology transfer, new service procedures and new service business models [7]. Despite the high growth rate of technology transfer, scholars have shown little interest in topics such as fellow management, operations research & management science, engineering industrial and engineering multidisciplinary. The bibliometric method is a common research tool for this analysis, widely applied for the scientific production and research trends in many science and engineering disciplines [8, 9, 10].
The Science Citation Index (SCI), from the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Web of Science databases is the most important and frequently used database sources of choice for a broad review of scientific accomplishment in all fields of study [11]. Bibliometric analysis is a special advanced field of scientific research [12].
Conventional bibliometric methods often evaluate the research trend by publication outputs of countries, research institutes, journals, and research fields [13, 14] or by citation analysis [15, 16]. The bibliometric method could be used to outline the advance of technology transfer in the last sixteen years. However, finding show little bibliometric study on the topic of
current technology transfer or even in the whole field of technology transfer study [13].
Technology transfer is the process of sharing of skills, knowledge, technologies, methods and samples of manufacturing, and facilities among governments, and other institutions to ensure that scientific and technological developments are accessible to a wider range of users who can then further develop and exploit the technology into new products, processes, applications, materials or services. Technology transfer has become a competitive weapon in business operational management that could help firms keep cost down, enhance competitiveness and improve operation performance. Research technology transfer trend is the most one of research issues in e-era.
II. DATA SOURCES AND METHODOLOGY The data for this study are based on the online version of the Science Citation Index (SCI), Web of Science. The SCI are a multidisciplinary database of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI), Philadelphia, USA. The Journal Citation Reports (JCR), indexes 1,980 major journals with citation references across fifty-six scientific disciplines in 2008. The current study researched the online version of SCI under the keyword “technology transfer” to compile a bibliography of all papers related on technology transfer research. This research reclassified articles originating from England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales as from the United Kingdom (UK), and obtained the reported impact factor (IF) of each journal from the 2008 JCR.
This investigation determined collaboration type by the addresses of authors, where the term
“single country” was assigned if the researchers’
addresses were from the same country. The term
“international collaboration” was designated to those articles coauthored by researchers from different countries. The term “single institute publication” was
978-1-4244-6487-6/10/$26.00 ©2010 IEEE
assigned if the researchers’ addresses were from the same institute. The term “inter-institutionally collaborative publication” was assigned if authors were from different institutes. All articles referring to technology transfer during the past sixteen years, including the last seven years of the 20th century and the first nine years of the 21st century were assessed by the following aspects: document type and language of publications, characteristics of publication outputs during 1992–2007, distribution of output in subject categories and journals, publication outputs of country.
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION A. Document type and language of publication This work analyzed the distribution of the document type identified by ISI and found fourteen document types in the total 1891 publications. Article (1,144) was the most frequently used document type comprising 60% of total production, followed distantly by, proceeding paper (341; 18%), editorial materials (154; 8.1%), review (80; 4.2%), meeting abstract (67, 3.5%), news item (54, 2.9%) and book review (20; 1.1%). The others showing less significance included discussion (10), note (7), letter (5), reprint (3), correction, addition (3), Correction (2) and biographical-item (1). Journal articles represented the majority of document types that were also peer–reviewed within this field. This study only used 1,144 original articles for further analysis as relevant citable items, and discards all others.
Ninety–five percent of all these journal articles were published in English. Several other less used languages included: German (17), French (16), Spanish (15), Portuguese (2), Japanese (2), Rumanian (1), Slovak (1), Finnish (1), Italian (1) and Czech (1).
B. Characteristics of publication outputs during 1965–2008
Figure 1 displays the total publication amounts of SCI articles including “technology transfer” in their titles during the last 50 years. Technology transfer research continually grew along with SCI development during this long period, increasing significantly in the 1977, 1982, 1994 and 1996 year is peak point, and slow down in the 21st century. Built on many breakthroughs in the study period during 1975–2008, especially in the before 20st decade, technology transfer research has become one of the most important and dynamic fields of academic research [17, 18, 19].
In the past sixteen years, the annual number of published articles devoted to technology transfer research increased from 62 in 1993 to 91 in 2008, with a stable slightly increase in the number of journals article (Table 1). The average article length is ten papers and slightly fluctuated from eight to thirteen pages. The average number is 2.4 authors that from 1.9 authors to 3.6 authors with per article.
Papers in 1993 cited eleven references, compared to
thirty-two cited references per paper in 2008, averaging twenty-three cited references per paper.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Year
Number of world SCI articles
Fig. 1 Number of articles referring to “technology transfer” of SCI journal in last 50 years
Figure 2 shows the progression in the cumulative number of articles published each year from 1992 through 2007. This work simulated the growth pattern using logarithmic models. The logarithmic model plotted the regression curve first step from 1992 to 1998 and second step curve from 1998 to 2007. The data shows technology transfer low growth rate in second curve (1998~2007) that indicated technology transfer was replaced with new research topic. Examples, there are innovation, knowledge management, services science and the others new topic in 21st century.
TABLE I
CHARACTERISTICS OF PUBLICATION OUTPUTS FROM 1993 TO 2008
Year TP AU AU/P PG PG/P NR NR/P
1993 62 152 2.5 509 8.2 678 11
1994 67 129 1.9 592 8.8 1049 16
1995 82 157 1.9 861 11 1508 18
1996 90 168 1.9 842 9.4 1730 19
1997 84 177 2.1 828 9.9 1697 20
1998 90 190 2.1 910 10 2007 22
1999 93 226 2.4 975 10 1931 21
2000 82 180 2.2 884 11 1795 22
2001 69 162 2.3 724 10 1589 23
2002 63 163 2.6 716 11 1798 29
2003 52 175 3.4 565 11 1230 24
2004 49 127 2.6 487 9.9 1196 24
2005 50 120 2.4 629 13 1307 26
2006 57 154 2.7 703 12 1868 33
2007 63 228 3.6 680 11 1825 29
2008 91 287 3.2 991 11 2914 32
Total 1144 2795 11896 26122
Average 2.4 10 23
TP: Number of publications; PG: Page count; NR: Cited reference count; AU: Number of authors; PG/P: average of pages; NR/P:
references of paper; AU/P: authors in a paper.
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Years since 1992
Cumulative number of articles
Cumulative number of publications
1992-1998 Logarithmic model
1998-2007 Logarithmic model
Fig. 2 Cumulative numbers of publications of 1993-2008
C. Distribution of publication output of subject categories and journals
Based on the classification of subject categories in JCR, the publication output data of technology transfer research is distributed in 164 subject categories in SCI journal. To further study global trends on technology transfer research, this work compares between “management,” “Operations Research & Management Science,” “Engineering &
Industrial,” and “Engineering & Multidisciplinary” of 1993–2008 (Fig. 3).
“Management” is a general topic issue (e.g., knowledge management, technology management, operational management, business management, financial management and human resource).
Knowledge management issue first appears in the technology study field, in the context of organizational knowledge creation in 1994. While individuals develop new technology knowledge, organizations play a critical role in articulating and amplifying that technology knowledge [20]. Scholars combines the concept of weak ties from social network research and the notion of complex knowledge to explain the role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits in a multiunit organization [21]. During from1994 to 1995 years, the number of articles related to management had the highest growth rate, successfully transcending other subject in the past sixteen years.
Table 2 analyzes subject categories containing over 1,144 technology transfer related articles and the top ten most published journals on technology transfer. The analysis data displays that 21.6% of the articles reside in five core journals, whereas the remainder reside in another 510 journals. These top five core journals rank as follows: International Journal of Technology Management (104; 9.1%), Technovation (75; 6.6%), Ieee Transactions on Engineering Management (27; 2.4%), Energy Policy (22; 1.9%), Research-Technology Management (18;
1.6%). As the use of statistics in any scientific discipline can be considered a key element in evaluating its degree of maturity [22], the result provides a current view of technology transfer research emphases of this topic. A total of 1,144 articles were published in a wide range of 515 journals including specialty journals, but also in journals of other disciplines belonging to 164 subject categories above.
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Year
Number of articles
Management
Operations Research & Management Science Engineering,Industrial
Engineering,Multidisciplinary
Fig. 3 Comparison the growth trends of main subject categories
D. Distribution of country publications
This study estimated the contribution of different countries by the location of at least one published author. The investigation ranked the top thirty countries by number of publications, including the number and percentage of single country articles and internationally collaborated articles (Table 3). The six major industrial countries (G6: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, UK, and the USA) ranked in the top eight for world publications and the Japan was ranked at ten. The G7 (seven major industrial countries) demonstrated high productivity in independent papers totaling 805 (75.9%). Publication domination was not surprising from mainstream countries since the technology issue has occurred in most scientific fields [23]. To a certain extent, the number of research papers reflecting the activity and academic level of these countries was likewise high [24, 25, 26].
The earliest technology transfer research occurred in these industrial countries, which conducted the earliest and the most relative research performances.
The USA showed the greatest counts of world publications, followed distantly by other countries.
The USA also had the most–frequent partners, accounting for 45 percent of all international collaborative articles during the last sixteen years.
TABLE II
TOP TEN MOST PUBLISHED JOURNALS ON TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
Journal name IF TP (%) Subject Category Position
International Journal of Technology Management
0.526 104 (9.1) Engineering, Multidisciplinary; Management;
Operations Research & Management Science Technovation 1.907 75 (6.6) Engineering, Industrial; Management;
Operations Research & Management Science IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management
1.156 27 (2.4) Business; Engineering, Industrial; Management
Energy Policy 1.755 22 (1.9) Energy & Fuels; Environmental Sciences;
Environmental Studies Research-Technology
Management
0.676 18 (1.6) Business; Engineering, Industrial; Management
Chimia 1.283 16 (1.4) Chemistry, Multidisciplinary Journal of Electrocardiology 1.126 14 (1.2) Cardiac & Cardiovascular Systems Technology Analysis & Strategic
Management
N/A 13 (1.1) Management; Multidisciplinary Sciences
Journal of Forestry 1.263 11 (1) Forestry Journal of Engineering and
Technology Management
0.923 11 (1) Business; Engineering, Industrial; Management
IF: impact factor; TP: total published articles in the 16 years; %: percentage of all articles published in the years TABLE III
TOP THIRTY MOST PRODUCTIVE COUNTRIES OF ARTICLES DURING 1993-2008
Country TP TPR (%) SPR (%) CPR (%) FAR (%) RPR (%)
USA 477 1 (45) 1 (45) 1 (46) 1 (43) 1 (43) UK 150 2 (14) 2 (12) 2 (25) 2 (13) 2 (13) Germany 44 3 (4.2) 6 (3.1) 3 (11) 6 (2.9) 4 (3.1) Switzerland 39 4 (3.7) 4 (3.2) 6 (6.7) 3 (3.3) 3 (3.2) Italy 39 4 (3.7) 3 (3.4) 12 (5.3) 4 (3.1) 4 (3.1) Canada 38 6 (3.6) 4 (3.2) 10 (6) 4 (3.1) 6 (3) Australia 37 7 (3.5) 7 (3) 6 (6.7) 7 (2.9) 7 (2.8) France 33 8 (3.1) 8 (2.2) 5 (8.7) 8 (2.4) 8 (2.3) Netherlands 27 9 (2.6) 12 (1.4) 4 (9.3) 12 (1.5) 12 (1.6) Japan 24 10 (2.3) 11 (1.7) 10 (6) 10 (1.7) 9 (1.9) India 23 11 (2.2) 10 (1.9) 17 (4) 11 (1.6) 11 (1.7) Taiwan 22 12 (2.1) 9 (2) 22 (2.7) 9 (1.9) 9 (1.9) Spain 21 13 (2) 13 (1.2) 6 (6.7) 13 (1.4) 13 (1.5) Sweden 19 14 (1.8) 15 (1) 6 (6.7) 14 (1.1) 15 (1.2) Brazil 16 15 (1.5) 15 (1) 15 (4.7) 16 (1) 17 (1) Hong Kong 15 16 (1.4) 13 (1.2) 22 (2.7) 14 (1.1) 14 (1.3) Finland 14 17 (1.3) 15 (1) 20 (3.3) 16 (1) 16 (1.1) Austria 13 18 (1.2) 20 (0.55) 12 (5.3) 19 (0.76) 23 (0.6) South Africa 12 19 (1.1) 18 (0.89) 22 (2.7) 18 (0.86) 18 (0.8) Portugal 11 20 (1) 31 (0.33) 12 (5.3) 23 (0.57) 19 (0.7) China 10 21 (1) 31 (0.33) 15 (4.7) 23 (0.57) 26 (0.5) Mexico 10 21 (1) 23 (0.44) 17 (4) 21 (0.67) 19 (0.7) Belgium 9 23 (0.86) 23 (0.44) 20 (3.3) 23 (0.57) 23 (0.6)
South Korea 9 23 (0.86) 31 (0.33) 17 (4) 23 (0.57) 23 (0.6) Norway 8 25 (0.76) 18 (0.89) N/A 19 (0.76) 19 (0.7) Greece 7 26 (0.67) 23 (0.44) 26 (2) 23 (0.57) 26 (0.5) Chile 7 26 (0.67) 20 (0.55) 30 (1.3) 21 (0.67) 19 (0.7) Israel 6 28 (0.57) 31 (0.33) 26 (2) 28 (0.48) 31 (0.4) Cuba 5 29 (0.48) 20 (0.55) N/A 28 (0.48) 26 (0.5) Venezuela 5 29 (0.48) 23 (0.44) 39 (0.67) 31 (0.38) 31 (0.4) TP (%): the number of total publications;
TPR (%): the share in total publications;
SPR (%):the rank and percentage of single country publications, CPR (%):internationally collaborative publications,
FAR (%):first author publications,
RPR (%):corresponding author publications in total publications.
The analysis data in Figure 4 display USA predominance in global technology transfer research. The publications share of the USA distinctly increased in our study period, especially in the latest decade. The UK ranked second position in global technology transfer research fields. The global trend of technology transfer research accords with developmental trends toward world multi-polarization and scientific research globalization, while other countries in the world gradually increased their disparities with the USA. This figure displays the time–trend analysis among six others major countries. The figure shows an obvious rise in the number of articles related to innovation research in all six countries, while the rapid development of global technology transfer research in the last sixteen years was partly driven by these countries’
contributions [27, 28, 29, 30, 31].
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Year
Number of articles
USA UK Germany Italy Australia Canada France Switzerland
Fig. 4 Growth comparison trends of the top eight countries
The Germany has the high growth rate in the past ten years, with the high share (11%) of international collaborative articles in its total publications among the top thirty productive countries, representing its powerful independence in technology transfer related research field.
The scholars draft report outlines a process for both public and private funded scientists to follow in deriving and working with technology innovation [32, 33]. A series of positive policies undoubtedly motivate the rapid development of the technology transfer research in the Germany. Another significant point is that Switzerland (3.7%) and Italy (3.7%), have kept ahead of other countries in the last decade. The percentage of publications from Canada, Australia and France in the period of 1993–2008 has slightly increased, indicating that the growth rate of technology transfer research in these three countries is a little slower than in other productive countries. The increase could be attributed to various factors, while technology transfer research itself refers to science, technology, competitiveness and national politics.
Innovation has become an important indication of national competitiveness, the research and development facility of products, and widespread application of marketing and brand building [34, 35, 36, 37]. How do to combine innovation concept into technology transfer processing become one of the most success factor.
IV. Conclusion
This study on technology transfer papers dealing with SCI, obtained some significant points on research performance throughout the period from 1992 to 2008. This study used a logarithmic model analysis from 1992 to 2007. The logarithmic model fitting showed that yearly publicans had a distinct growth with a high rate during from 1992 to 1998, and little slow down from 1998 to 2007. There were a total of 515 journals listed in the 164 subject category. Subject categories for mainstream research on technology transfer included four domains of management, operations research
& management science, engineering & industrial, and engineering & multidisciplinary while increasing attention was paid to the field of technology transfer in the 21st century. As the flagship journal of the field, International Journal of Technology Management published the most articles. The G7 country which had a longer tradition in
research in this field, held the majority of total world production. The USA notably contributed the most independent and international collaborative articles, and had the most first author and corresponding author publications in total publication articles. This study concludes that adopt innovation concept/approach into business operation management, especially research related on “management”, “operations research”, “management science” and “engineering” are the orientation of all technology transfer research in the 21st century. The result display with bibliometric method can help relevant researchers realize the panorama of global technology transfer research, and establish the further research direction.
REFERENCES
[1] Chen, M. Y. Chen, A. P. (2006), “Knowledge management
performance evaluation: a decade review from 1995 to 2004”. Journal of Information Science, Vol. 32(1), pp. 17-38.
[2] Nonaka, I. (1994), “A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation”. Organization Science, Vol. 5(1), pp. 14-37.
[3] Nonaka, I. and Von Krogh, G. (2009), “Perspective tacit knowledge and knowledge conversion: controversy and advancement in organizational knowledge creation theory”. Organization Science, Vol.
20 (3), pp. 635-652.
[4] Robertson, M., Scarbrough, H. and Swan, J. (2003), “Knowledge creation in professional service firms: Institutional effects”.
Organization Studies, Vol. 24(6), pp. 831-857.
[5] Stolz, I. and Mclean, G. N. (2009), “Organizational skills for a corporate citizen: policy analysis”. Human Resource Development Review, Vol. 8 (2), pp. 174-196.
[6] Thomas, J. B., Sussman, S. W. and Henderson, J. C. (2001),
“Understanding strategic learning: Linking organizational learning, knowledge management, and sensemaking”. Organization Science, Vol.
12(3), pp. 31-345.
[7] Martinez, C. M. and Jimenez, J. D. (2009), “The effectiveness of TQM:
The key role of organizational learning in small business”.
International Small Business Journal, Vol. 27(1), pp. 98:125.
[8] Keiser, J. and Utzinger, J. (2005), “Trends in the core literature on tropical medicine: A bibliometric analysis from 1952-2002”.
Scientomrics, Vol. 62 (3), pp. 351-365.
[9] Tang, R. and Thelwall, M. (2003), “USA academic departmental Web-site interlinking in the United States disciplinary difference”.
Library & Information Science Research, Vol. 25(4), pp. 437-458.
[10] Zitt, M. and Bassecoulard, E. (1994), “Development of a method for detection and trend analysis of research fronts built by lexical or citation analysis”. Scientometrics, Vol. 30 (1), pp. 333-351.
[11] Bayer, A. E. and Folger, J. (1996), “Some correlates of a citation measure of productivity in science”. Sociology of Education, Vol. 39 (4), pp. 381-390.
[12] Garfield, E. (1998), “From citation indexing to informetrics: is the tail now wagging the dog? Libri, Vol. 48, pp. 67-80.
[13] Colman, A. M., Dhillon, D. and Coulthard, B. (1995), “A bibliometric evaluation of the research performance of British university politics departments: Publications in leading journals”. Scientomrics, Vol. 32 (1), pp. 49-66.
[14] Braun, T., Glanzei, W. and Grupp, H. (1995), “The scientometric weight of 50 nations in 27 science areas, 1989-1993. Part I. All fields combined, mathematics, engineering, chemistry and physics”.
Scientometrics, Vol. 33 (3), pp. 263-293.
[15] Cole, S. (1989), “Citation and the evaluation of individual scientiste”.
Trends in Biochemical Sciences, Vol. 14 (1), pp. 9-13.
[16] Schutz, H. and Six, B. (1994), “More than 7000 pages of social-psychology: A journal in retrospect”. Zeitschrift fur Sozialpsychologie, Vol. 25 (1), pp. 5-17.
[17] Reinstaller, A. (2005), “Policy entrepreneurship in the co-evolution of institutions, preferences, and technology comparing the diffusion of totally chlorine free pulp bleaching technologies in the U.S.A. and Sweden”. Research Policy, Vol. 34 (9), pp. 1366-1384.
[18] Nonaka, I. and Von Krogh, G. (2009), “Perspective tacit knowledge and knowledge conversion: controversy and advancement in organizational knowledge creation theory”. Organization Science, Vol.
20 (3), pp. 635-652.
[19] Szulanski, G. (1996), “Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to
the transfer of best practice within the firm”. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17 (Sp. Iss. ), pp. 27-43.
[20] Noaka, I. (1994), “A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation”. Organization Science, Vol. 5(1), pp. 14-37.
[21] Hansen, M. T. (1999), “The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits”.
Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 44 (1), pp. 82-111.
[22] Palmer, A. L., Sese, A. and Montano, J. J. (2005), “Tourism and statistics – Bibliometric study 1998-2002”. Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 32 (1), pp. 167-178.
[23] Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B. and Davis, F. D. (2003),
“User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view”.
MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27 (3), pp. 425-478.
[24] Arunachalam, S. and Jinandera, D. M. (2000), “Mapping international collaboration in science in Asia through coauthorship analysis”.
Current Science, Vol. 79 (5), pp. 621-628.
[25] Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. and Trajtenberg, M. (2005), “Market value and patent citations”. Rand Journal of Economics, Vol. 36 (1), pp. 16-38.
[26] Trajtenberg, M. (2000), “Innovation in Israel 1968-1997: A
comparative analysis using patent data”. Research Policy, Vol. 30 (3), pp. 363-389.
[27] Grant, R. M. (1996), “Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: Organizational capability as knowledge integration”.
Organization Science, Vol. 7 (4), pp. 375-387.
[28] Audretsch, D. B. and Feldman, M. P. (1996), “R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production”. American Economic Review, Vol. 86 (3), pp. 630-640.
[29] Gray, B. (2008), “Enhancing trans disciplinary research through collaborative leadership”. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol. 35 (2), pp. 124-132.
[30] Gulati, R. and Singh, H. (1998), “The architecture of cooperation:
Managing coordination costs and appropriation concerns in strategic alliances”. Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 43 (4), pp.
781-814.
[31] Singh, J. (2005), “Collaborative networks as determinants of knowledge diffusion patterns”. Management Science, Vol. 51 (5), pp.
756-770.
[32] Hagedoorn, J. (1993), “Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering- interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences”. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 14 (5), pp.
371-385.
[33] Volberda, H. W. (1996), “Toward the flexible form: How to remain vital in hypercompetitive environments”. Organization Science, Vol.
7 (4), pp. 359-374.
[34] Eisenhardt, K. M. and Tabrizi, B. N. (1995), “Accelerating adaptive processes – product innovation in the global computer industry”.
Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 40 (1), pp. 84-110.
[35] Ahuja, G. (2000), “Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study”. Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 45 (3), pp. 425-455.
[36] Brown, S. L. and Eisenhardt, K. M. (1995), “Product
development-past research, present findings, and future-direction”.
Academy of management review, Vol. 20 (2), pp. 343-378.
[37] Hurley, R. F. and Hult, G. T. M. (1998), “Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: An integration and empirical examination”. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62 (3), pp. 42-54.
James K. C. Dr. Chen is Assistant Professor of Department of Business Administration, Asia University. He got ph. D. degree from the Institute of Management of Technology, National Chiao Tung University, in Taiwan.
His research interests include MIS (management information systems) planning, technology forecasting, technology of management and innovation management.
