专注论文查重修改6年+经验

企业合作信任要素之研究

【中文摘要】:企业为快速获得创新成果,并节省其投入成本,降低无效创新之风险,于业界最普遍的选择方式为企业联盟合作,透过开放式创新的精神及合作模式,将企业的资源共享,形成互补性资产,进而提昇企业创新能力。
企业联盟合作最重要的关键成功因素,乃为联盟的信任基础,在互相信任的环境中,才能进行最有效且顺畅的沟通,建立共识并形成共同的价值观,以产生综效。然而,所谓信任乃一模糊的概念,为一无法量化的情感指标,但企业营运的準则及策略布局,无法单靠情感,便决定形成联盟的合作模式,仍得经过市场资讯的整合,以获得具体的评估结果,成为决策的基础。
本研究透过深度访谈企业的重要干部、专案决策及企业经营者,探讨企业进行联盟合作的过程,评估各项要素分析以构成信任的基础来源。经归纳所得的结论呈现,欲形成企业联盟,需评估伙伴企业的各项能力,其能力可区分为「外显实力」及「隐性能力」,其概念是由知识性质具有「内隐性」与「外显性」两大类的观念衍伸而来,形成企业合作的信任基础来源。而且此信任基础会因不同的合作时期,透过不同型态的能力条件支持信任的存在与发展。另外亦发现,外显实力与隐性能力具有因果关係,会相互影响及回馈,而其综合评估的结果成为联盟企业的信任基础来源。
诚如本研究的结果,经营者可参考企业联盟信任基础的来源,并依此思维评估自身及联盟伙伴的优劣势,成为进行联盟合作

专业的事,找专业的人降低重复率就找文懂论文网,专业降低重复率5年经验

行为初期的

szwox.com_029
评估工具及如何扩展联盟伙伴的信任程度,促成联盟有效的合作,以期发展为优良商誉及永续经营的企业。
【英文摘要】:Enterprise alliance cooperation is the most popular choice for accessing innovative, cost saving, and reducing the risk of ineffective innovation. With a concept of open innovation and co-operation model, enterprise sharing their resources, forming the complementary assets and enhance innovation capability.
The trust is the most important key success factors of Enterprise alliances. The environment of mutual trust must set up before processing the most effective and smoothest communication, and reaching the consensus and building the shared values to generate synergy. However, the trust is an ambiguous concept, an unquantifiable emotional indicator, the guidelines of business operations and strategy could not rely on emotional factors to form an alliance. It still has to go through the integration of market information to obtain specific assessment findings and becoming the basis for decision-making.
This study based on in-depth interview important staffs, project decision maker and business owners to discuss the enterprise alliance, assessment item analysis of the underlying source of trust. The conclusion presented needed ability assessment for the potential partner, its ability can be divided into “Explicit Competence” and “Implicit Competence”, the concept is from character of knowledge include “Implicit” and “Explicit” to form the based trust of enterprise cooperation. And these based trusts support its existence and development though the types of ability conditions in different

文懂论文网,论文查重最佳选择,立即论文查重,马上防止抄袭,提高论文品质

time periods. It was also found there is a causal connection in “Explicit Competence” and “Implicit Competence”, interrelate and response each other, the results of its comprehensive assessment became the source of the trust base of enterprise alliance.

As a result of this study, the business owner can consult the source of the trust base of the enterprise alliances and assess their own and partner’s strengths and weaknesses, to be an assessment tool of alliance cooperation and develop trust between alliance partner in the initial stage to facilitate the effective alliance cooperation, and develop an excellent goodwill and sustainable business enterprise.
【参考文献】:

  • Ahuja, G. (2000). “Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study.” Administrative science quarterly 45(3): 425-455.
  • Anderson, J. C. and J. A. Narus (1990). “A model of distributor firm and manufacturer firm working partnerships.” the journal of marketing: 42-58.
  • Bessant, J., et al. (2005). “Managing innovation beyond the steady state.” Technovation 25(12): 1366-1376.
  • Blomqvist, K., et al. (2008). “The role of trust and contracts in the internationalization of technology-intensive Born Globals.” Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 25(1): 123-135.
  • Bougrain, F. and B. Haudeville (2002). “Innovation, collaboration and SMEs internal research capacities.” Research Policy 31(5): 735-747.
  • Bromiley, P. and J. Harris (2006). “Trust, transaction cost economics, and mechanisms.” The Handbook of Trust Research: 124-143.
  • Carmines, E. G. and R. A. Zeller (1979). Reliability and validity assessment, Sage.
  • Chesbrough, H., et al. (2006). Open innovation: Researching a new paradigm, Oxford university press.
  • Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology, Harvard Business Press.
  • Clarke, A. E. (2006). “Feminisms, grounded theory, and situational analysis.”
  • Cohen, W. M. and D. A. Levinthal (1990). “Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation.” Administrative science quarterly: 128-152.
  • Colombo, M. G. and P. Garrone (1996). “Technological cooperative agreements and firm”s R & D intensity. A note on causality relations.” Research Policy 25(6): 923-932.
  • Corbin, J. M. and A. Strauss (1990). “Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria.” Qualitative sociology 13(1): 3-21.
  • Cummings, L. L. and P. Bromiley (1996). “The organizational trust inventory (OTI).” Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research 302: 330.
  • Faems, D., et al. (2005). “Interorganizational collaboration and innovation: toward a portfolio approach*.” Journal of product innovation management 22(3): 238-250.
  • Ferres, N., et al. (2004). “Co-worker trust as a social catalyst for constructive employee attitudes.” Journal of Managerial Psychology 19(6): 608-622.
  • Guba, E. G. and Y. S. Lincoln (1994). “Competing paradigms in qualitative research.” Handbook of qualitative research 2: 163-194.
  • Gulati, R. (1998). “Alliances and networks.” Strategic management journal 19(4): 293-317.
  • Hagedoorn, J. (1996). “Innovation and entrepreneurship: Schumpeter revisited.” Industrial and Corporate Change 5(3): 883-896.
  • Hyvärinen, L. (1990). “Innovativeness and its indicators in small-and medium-sized industrial enterprises.” International Small Business Journal 9(1): 64-79.
  • Jones, O. and F. Tilley (2003). Competitive advantage in SMEs: organising for innovation and change, Wiley.
  • Kale, P., et al. (2002). “Alliance capability, stock market response, and long‐term alliance success: the role of the alliance function.” Strategic management journal 23(8): 747-767.
  • Kandiah, G. and S. Gossain (1998). “Reinventing value: The new business ecosystem.” Strategy & Leadership 26(5): 28-33.
  • Kasper-Fuehrera, E. C. and N. M. Ashkanasy (2001). “Communicating trustworthiness and building trust in interorganizational virtual organizations.” Journal of Management 27(3): 235-254.
  • Kramer, R. and T. Tyler (1996). “Trust in organisations.” Frontiers of theory and research, Sage.
  • Kumar, N., et al. (1993). “Conducting interorganizational research using key informants.” Academy of management journal 36(6): 1633-1651.
  • La Londe, B. (2002). “Insights: Who Can You Trust These Days?” Supply Chain Management Review 6(3): 9-12.
  • La Londe, B. (2002). “Insights: Who Can You Trust These Days?” Supply Chain Management Review 6(3): 9-12.
  • Laursen, K. and A. Salter (2005). “My precious. The role of appropriability strategies in shaping innovative performance.” Danish Research Unit for Industrial Dynamics, Working Paper(05-02).
  • Laursen, K. and A. Salter (2006). “Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms.” Strategic management journal 27(2): 131-150.
  • Lee, S., et al. (2010). “Open innovation in SMEs—An intermediated network model.” Research Policy 39(2): 290-300.
  • Miotti, L. and F. Sachwald (2003). “Co-operative R&D: why and with whom?: An integrated framework of analysis.” Research Policy 32(8): 1481-1499.
  • Miotti, L. and F. Sachwald (2003). “Co-operative R&D: why and with whom?: An integrated framework of analysis.” Research Policy 32(8): 1481-1499.
  • Mohnen, P. and C. Hoareau (2003). “What type of enterprise forges close links with universities and government labs? Evidence from CIS 2.” Managerial and Decision Economics 24(2‐3): 133-145.
  • Moore, J. F. (1993). “Predators and prey: a new ecology of competition.” Harvard business review 71(3): 75-86.
  • Morgan, R. M. and S. D. Hunt (1994). “The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing.” the journal of marketing: 20-38.
  • Morgan, R. M. and S. D. Hunt (1994). “The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing.” the journal of marketing: 20-38.
  • Narula, R. (2004). “R&D collaboration by SMEs: new opportunities and limitations in the face of globalisation.” Technovation 24(2): 153-161.
  • Narula, R. and J. Hagedoorn (1999). “Innovating through strategic alliances: moving towards international partnerships and contractual agreements.” Technovation 19(5): 283-294.
  • Nieto, M. J. and L. Santamaría (2007). “The importance of diverse collaborative networks for the novelty of product innovation.” Technovation 27(6): 367-377.
  • Parida, V., et al. (2012). “Inbound Open Innovation Activities in High‐Tech SMEs: The Impact on Innovation Performance.” Journal of Small Business Management 50(2): 283-309.
  • Pavitt, K. (1998). “Technologies, products and organization in the innovating firm: what Adam Smith tells us and Joseph Schumpeter doesn”t.” Industrial and Corporate Change 7(3): 433-452.
  • Pittaway, L., et al. (2004). “Networking and innovation: a systematic review of the evidence.” International Journal of Management Reviews 5(3‐4): 137-168.
  • Pullen, A. J., et al. (2012). “Open innovation in practice: goal complementarity and closed NPD networks to explain differences in innovation performance for SMEs in the medical devices sector.” Journal of product innovation management 29(6): 917-934.
  • Robinson, D. L. and C. P. Kish (2001). Core concepts in advanced practice nursing, Mosby Incorporated.
  • Rothwell, R. and M. Dodgson (1994). “Innovation and size of firm.” The handbook of industrial innovation: 310-324.
  • San Martín-Rodríguez, L., et al. (2005). “The determinants of successful collaboration: a review of theoretical and empirical studies.” Journal of interprofessional care 19(S1): 132-147.
  • Smith, K. and F. Biley (1997). “Understanding grounded theory principles and evaluation.” Nurse Researcher 4(3): 17-30.
  • Smith, K. G., et al. (1995). “Intra-and interorganizational cooperation: Toward a research agenda.” Academy of management journal 38(1): 7-23.
  • Sparrowe, R. T., et al. (2001). “Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups.” Academy of management journal 44(2): 316-325.
  • Tushman, M. and D. Nadler (1986). “Organizing for innovation.” California management review 28(3): 74-92.
  • Van de Vrande, V., et al. (2009). “Open innovation in SMEs: Trends, motives and management challenges.” Technovation 29(6): 423-437.
  • Veryzer, R. W. (1998). “Discontinuous innovation and the new product development process.” Journal of product innovation management 15(4): 304-321.
  • Vidotto, G., et al. (2008). “Assessment of organizational trust: Italian adaptation and factorial validity of the organizational trust inventory.” Social Indicators Research 88(3): 563-575.
  • Wijnberg, N. M. and G. Gemser (2000). “Adding value to innovation: Impressionism and the transformation of the selection system in visual arts.” Organization science 11(3): 323-329.
  • Wimpenny, P. and J. Gass (2000). “Interviewing in phenomenology and grounded theory: is there a difference?” Journal of advanced nursing 31(6): 1485-1492.
  • Young, L. and K. Daniel (2003). “Affectual trust in the workplace.” International Journal of Human Resource Management 14(1): 139-155.
  • Young-Ybarra, C. and M. Wiersema (1999). “Strategic flexibility in information technology alliances: The influence of transaction cost economics and social exchange theory.” Organization science 10(4): 439-459.
  • 来源:中山大学;作者:田志雄
    文懂论文-重复率修改第一品牌,http://www.szwox.com解决论文查重论文降重复,重复率高等各种论文难题的专家

    最新文章

    • 什么是学术不端行为
      什么是学术不端行为
      什么是学术不端行为 1992 年,由美国国家科学院、国家工程院和国家医学研究院组成的 22 位...
    • 论文降重复服务 1. 本网站及服务 szwox.com提供哪些服务? szwox.com是一个...

    联络我们

    QQ: 767326772
    文懂论文
    网站:http://www.szwox.com/
    E-mail: turuinit@foxmail.com

    我们的服务

    我们提供毕业论文、期刊论文、硕士论文、博士论文、会议论文格式排版,论文查重,重复率修改等服务。强大论文查重系统,一手老师资源,首创安全保密查重修改流程。充分保障客户论文查重安全以及修改后的品质,赢得了老师和同学们的信任和口碑。