تاثیر توانمندسازی عرضه‌کنندگان بر هم‌طراحی نوآورانه: تحلیل نقش میانجی هوشمندی بازار | ||
| کاوش‌های مدیریت بازرگانی | ||
| مقاله 14، دوره 13، شماره 26، بهمن 1400، صفحه 371-394 اصل مقاله (876.52 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22034/bar.2022.14122.3557 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| رضا سپهوند* 1؛ سید نجم الدین موسوی2؛ محسن عارف نژاد3؛ مسعود سپه وند4 | ||
| 1استاد، مدیریت بازرگانی، دانشکده علوم اقتصادی و دانشگاه لرستان، خرم آباد، ایران | ||
| 2دانشیار، مدیریت بازرگانی، دانشکده علوم اقتصادی و دانشگاه لرستان، خرم آباد، ایران | ||
| 3استادیار، مدیریت دولتی، دانشکده علوم اقتصادی و دانشگاه لرستان ، خرم آباد، ایران | ||
| 4دانشجوی دکتری، مدیریت دولتی، دانشکده علوم اقتصادی و دانشگاه لرستان ، خرم آباد، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| توانمندسازی و مشارکت دادن عرضه‌کنندگان در هنگام طراحی محصول یکی از مهمترین راهبردهای شرکت‌های نوآور در فضای کسب و کار امروز است. با این‌حال ارائه اطلاعات کاربردی و فرصت یادگیری در راستای توانمندسازی عرضه‌کنندگان می‌تواند به تسهیل طراحی مشترک کمک کند. این پژوهش با هدف بررسی تأثیر توانمندسازی عرضه‌کنندگان بر هم‌طراحی نوآورانه با نقش میانجی هوشمندی بازار در بین شرکت‌های تولید نوشابه در ایران انجام گرفت. روش تحقیق حاضر از نظر هدف، کاربردی و از نظر نحوه جمع‌آوری داده‌ها، توصیفی از نوع همبستگی است. در این پژوهش مدیران و کارشناسان دفاتر مرکزی شرکت‌های تولید نوشابه مستقر در تهران به تعداد 468 نفر به عنوان جامعه آماری انتخاب گردیده که از میان آنها تعداد 214 نفر طبق جدول مورگان و به صورت طبقه‌ای تصادفی به عنوان نمونه انتخاب گردیدند. تحلیل داده‌ها به وسیله نرم افزار Spss و Smart Pls و به روش معادلات ساختاری انجام شده است. نتایج پژوهش حاکی از آن است که توانمندسازی عرضه‌کنندگان با ضریب 211/0 به صورت مستقیم و با ضریب 266/0 از طریق هوشمندی بازار بر هم‌طراحی نوآورانه تاثیر مثبت و قابل توجهی دارد. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| توانمندسازی عرضه‌کنندگان؛ هم‌طراحی نوآورانه؛ هوشمندی بازار | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| The impact of suppliers’ empowerment on innovative co-designs and the role of market intelligence: analysis case study of beverage production companies in Iran | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Reza Sepahvand1؛ Seyed Najmoddin Mousavi2؛ Mohsen Aref Negad3؛ Masood Sepahvand4 | ||
| 1Professor, Business Management, Faculty of Economic Sciences and Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran | ||
| 2Associate Professor, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran | ||
| 3Assistant Professor, Business Management, Faculty of Economics and University of Lorestan, Khorramabad, Iran | ||
| 4PhD student, Governmental Management, Faculty of Economic Sciences and Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Introduction: Nowadays, the business environment has become a complex and competitive environment and has caused managers to face many operational challenges such as access to global resources, long supply chains and the need for customized production of products. Thus, communication with suppliers has become a strategic asset for the survival of organizations. Firms strive to build partnerships with suppliers in order to gain operational efficiency and effectiveness in the supply chain. The empowerment of suppliers is a business process for managing all the communication between organizations and suppliers. According to many researchers, the empowerment of suppliers can help to design, develop or re-engineer a product or process. In fact, when suppliers are involved in product designing, their sense of ownership is enhanced and they are more likely to add value to their interaction with the company. Therefore, empowering and involving suppliers when designing a product is one of the most important strategies of innovative companies in today's business environment. Methodology: The present research is applied in terms of purpose and descriptive-correlative in terms of data collection. In this study, 468 managers and experts at the central offices of beverage companies based in Tehran were selected as the statistical population, of whom 214 were selected as a random class according to Morgan table. In addition, library studies and field methods including the use of questionnaires served to collect the data. In order to measure the Supplier Empowerment variable, Lee and Koo questionnaire (2016), Falconnier innovative co-design questionnaire (2017) and Heppes & Toit market intelligence questionnaire (2009) were used. The data analysis was performed by the SPSS and Smart Pls software programs and structural equations. Results and Discussion: In this study, four hypotheses were proposed to examine the relationships among the variables. Since the value of the t-statistics for the first hypothesis (5.301) was more than 1.96 and the significance level (0.001) was less than 0.05, the suppliers empowerment with a coefficient of 0.211 had a positive and significant effect on the innovative co-design. In other words, sharing knowledge and information, partnership in product designs, signing long-term contracts and creating an atmosphere of mutual trust and confidence can synergize innovative efforts to design new products and increase the competitiveness of companies. The second hypothesis was confirmed because the value of the t-statistic (10.262) was more than 1.96 and the significance level (0.000) was less than 0.05. It can be concluded that supplier empowerment with a coefficient of 0.506 has a positive and significant effect on market intelligence. In other words, participation in product designing, sharing knowledge and information and consulting for the selection of raw materials lead to the continuous monitoring of the business environment and the awareness of market trends and brings more market intelligence to the company. The third hypothesis was also confirmed with the t-statistic of 9.479 which was more than 1.96 and the significance level of 0.000 which was less than 0.05. It can, thus, be concluded that market intelligence with a coefficient of 0.525 has a positive and significant effect on innovative co-design. In other words, variables such as awareness of customers’ tastes, competitors' strategies and government policies in the field of business lead to the increased market intelligence of organizations and the convergence of efforts to design new products and services. The fourth hypothesis, which examined the mediating role of market intelligence in suppliers’ empowerment and innovative co-design, was confirmed in Baron and Kenny's terms. In other words, those beverage companies that establish strong relationships with reliable suppliers through long-term contracts, participate in the design of products and services, join ventures in the purchase and transfer of technology and share knowledge and information permanently can monitor market trends, competitors, customers and government policies in the field of business and thus turn to innovative designs in response to environmental variables. Conclusion: In the highly competitive non-alcoholic beverage industry, those manufacturers who share knowledge and information with suppliers, consult them in the selection of raw materials, and participate in product design and technology investment with suppliers can achieve competitive advantage in the market through joint and innovative designs. In fact, innovative co-designing between suppliers and manufacturers, which leads to synergistic efforts, requires an intelligent approach to the market and the monitoring of the variables affecting it. Also, empowered suppliers can present their products according to the wishes of manufacturers. In fact, well-known brands in the beverage industry create value by fixing efficient contracts with a range of suppliers and empower them to produce according to parent company standards. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Supplier empowerment, Innovative co-design, Market intelligence | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Aarikka-Stenroos, L., & Jaakkola, E. (2012). Value co-creation in knowledge intensive business services: A dyadic perspective on the joint problem solving process. Industrial marketing management, 41(1), 15-26.
Abe, S., Tsutsui, Y., Mitake, Y., Sholihah, M., Hara, N., & Shimomura, Y. (2019). An Asymmetry Analysis Method to Support Value Co-creation in Product/Service Design. Procedia CIRP, 84, 442–446.
Abtahi, S. H., & Abbasi, S. (2015). Empowerment, Assignment and Delegation (Second Edition). Tehran: Foujan Publications.
Aghazadeh, H., & Khalil, M. (2013). Investigate market intelligence functions. Commercial Surveys, 11(60), 87-96.
Ahmadizad, A., Abbasi, E.,& Rahimpour, M. (2017). A Model of Business Intelligence Assessment in Telecom Industry. Journal of Strategic Management Studies, 7(28), 267-281.
Amoako-Gyampah, K., Boakye, K. G., Adaku, E., & Famiyeh, S. (2018). Supplier relationship management and firm performance in Developing Economies: A moderated mediation analysis of flexibility capability and ownership structure. International Journal of Production Economics.
Baron, RM., & Kenny, DA. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology,51(6),1173-1182.
Cai, J., Hu, X., Tadikamalla, P. R., & Shang, J. (2017). Flexible contract design for VMI supply chain with service-sensitive demand: Revenue-sharing and supplier subsidy. European Journal of Operational Research, 261(1), 143–153.
Davari, A., & Rezazadeh, A. (2013). Structural Equation Modeling with PLS Software. Tehran, Jahad University Press.
DePamphilis, D. M. (2019). Domestic and Cross-Border Business Alliances: Joint Ventures, Partnerships, Strategic Alliances, and Licensing. Mergers, Acquisitions, and Other Restructuring Activities, 415–440.
Dogliotti, S., García, M.C., Peluffo, S., Dieste, J.P., Pedemonte, A.J., Bacigalupe, G.F., Scarlato, M., Alliaume, F., Alvarez, J., Chiappe, M., & Rossing, W.A.H.( 2014). Co-innovation of family farm systems: a systems approach to sustainable agriculture. Agric. Syst. 126, 76–86.
Falconnier, G. N., Descheemaeker, K., Van Mourik, T. A., Adam, M., Sogoba, B., & Giller, K. E. (2017). Co-learning cycles to support the design of innovative farm systems in southern Mali. European Journal of Agronomy, 89, 61–74.
Forkmann, S., Henneberg, S. C., Naudé, P., & Mitrega, M. (2016). Supplier relationship management capability: a qualification and extension. Industrial Marketing Management, 57, 185–200.
Fuchs, C., & Schreier, M. (2011). Customer empowerment in new product development. Journal of product innovation management, 28(1), 17-32.
Fugate, B. S., Autry, C. W., Davis-Sramek, B., & Germain, R. N. (2012). Does knowledge management facilitate logistics-based differentiation? the effect of global manufacturing reach. International Journal of Production Economics, 139(2), 496-509.
Füller, J., Hutter, K., & Faullant, R. (2011). Why co‐creation experience matters? Creative experience and its impact on the quantity and quality of creative contributions. R&D Management, 41(3), 259-273.
Gallear, D., Ghobadian, A., & Chen, W. (2012). Corporate responsibility, supply chain partnership and performance: An empirical examination. International Journal of Production Economics, 140(1), 83-91.
Gupta, S. D. (2003). A strategy for intelligence, Network magazine, http://www.networkmagazineindia. com/archives.shtml.
Hattula, J. D., Schmitz, C., Schmidt, M., & Reinecke, S. (2015). Is more always better? An investigation into the relationship between marketing influence and managers’ market intelligence dissemination. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 32(2), 179–186.
Heppes, D., & Toit, A. d. (2002). "Level of Maturity of the Competitive Intelligence Function Case Study of a Retail Bank in South Africa", Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives , 61 (1), pp 48-66.
Herring, J. P.(1999). "Key Intelligence Topics: A Process to Identify and Define Intelligence Needs".Competitive Intelligence Review , 10 (2), pp 4-14.
Iranian Beverage Industry Association, (2013). Iran Food and Agriculture Industry Information Database food press.
Jamil, G. L. (2013). Approaching Market Intelligence Concept through a Case Analysis: Continuous Knowledge for Marketing Strategic Management and its Complementarity to Competitive Intelligence. Procedia Technology, 9, 463–472.
Jaworski, B. J., & Kohli, A. K. (2017). Conducting field-based, discovery-oriented research: lessons from our market orientation research experience. AMS Review, 7(1-2), 4-12.
Kroenke, D. (2012). Using MIS, 5th International Edition, Pearson Prentice Hall.
Laska, M. N., Sindberg, L. S., Ayala, G. X., D’Angelo, H., Horton, L. A., Ribisl, K. M., & Gittelsohn, J. (2018). Agreements between small food store retailers and their suppliers: Incentivizing unhealthy foods and beverages in four urban settings. Food Policy.
Liao, K., Deng, X., Liao, Y., & Zhang, Q. (2020). Supplier Empowerment: Mediating Situational Factors and Perceived Performance. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 100611.
Liao, Y., Hong, P., & Rao, S.S., (2010). Supply management, supply flexibility and performance outcomes: an empirical investigation of manufacturing firms. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 46 (3), 6-22.
Mathis, E. F., Kim, H. L., Uysal, M., Sirgy, J. M., & Prebensen, N. K. (2016). The effect of co-creation experience on outcome variable. Annals of tourism research, 57, 62-75.
Pihlajamaa, M., Kaipia, R., Aminoff, A., & Tanskanen, K. (2019). How to stimulate supplier innovation? Insights from a multiple case study. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 25(3), 100536.
Rezaei Soufi, M., Farahani, A., & YarAhmadi, J. (2016). Examining the Role of Market Orientation on Market Intelligence in Athletic Companies. Sport Management and Development, 5(1), 51-64.
Sanders, E. B-N., & Pieter, J. S.(2008). “Co-creation and the New Landscapes of Design.” CoDesign, 4(1) , 5–18.
Shi, Y., Huang, Z., Oh, S., Kaslan, N., Song, J., & Kuzum, D. (2019). Adaptive Quantization as a Device-Algorithm Co-Design Approach to Improve the Performance of In-Memory Unsupervised Learning With SNNs. IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, 66,1722-1728.
Song.M.& Thieme.J.(2009). The Role Of Suppliers In Market Intelligence Gathering For Radical And Incremental Innovation. Journal Of Product Innovation Management, 26(1),43-57.
Steen, M., Menno, M., & Nicole, D. K.(2011). “Benefits of Co-design in Service Design Projects.” International Journal of Design, 5(2), 53–60.
Howard, S., Howard, S., & Simon Howard .(2019). Quantitative market analysis of the European Climate Services sector – The application of the kMatrix big data market analytical tool to provide robust market intelligence. Climate Services.
Thamrin, D., Wardani,L.K., Sitindjak,R.H.I., & Natadjaja,L. (2018). Experiential Learning Through Community Co-Design In Interior Design Pedagogy. International Journal Of Art & Design Education,38, 1-17.
Tseng, S-M. (2014). The impact of knowledge management capabilities and supplier relationship management on corporate performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 154, 39–47.
Wang, C., & Hu, Q. (2017). Knowledge sharing in supply chain networks: Effects of collaborative innovation activities and capability on innovation performance. Technovation
Wang, J., Yang, J., & Xue, Y. (2017). Subjective well-being, knowledge sharing and individual innovation behavior: The moderating role of absorptive capacity. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 38(8), 1110-1127.
Yoon, S., & Lee, E. M. (2019). Social and psychological determinants of value co-creation behavior for South Korean firms: A consumer-centric perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 31(1), 14-36.
Yu, M. C., Mai, Q., Tsai, S. B., & Dai, Y. (2018). An empirical study on the organizational trust, employee-organization relationship and innovative behavior from the integrated perspective of social exchange and organizational sustainability. Sustainability, 10(3), 864- 878. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 596 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 380 |
||