سامانه پشتیبانی خدمات اطلاعات

  اخبار و اعلانات

 آمار

تعداد نشریات162
تعداد شماره‌ها6,578
تعداد مقالات71,076
تعداد مشاهده مقاله125,704,275
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله98,937,735
عربیون, ابوالقاسم, میگون پوری, محمدرضا, نوری زاده, عباس. (1403). مدل‌سازی ساختاری-تفسیری هزینه‌های مبادله در انتقال دانش و فناوری از طریق متخصصین ایرانی مقیم خارج. , 10(3), 30-50. doi: 10.22059/jppolicy.2024.98672
ابوالقاسم عربیون; محمدرضا میگون پوری; عباس نوری زاده. "مدل‌سازی ساختاری-تفسیری هزینه‌های مبادله در انتقال دانش و فناوری از طریق متخصصین ایرانی مقیم خارج". , 10, 3, 1403, 30-50. doi: 10.22059/jppolicy.2024.98672
عربیون, ابوالقاسم, میگون پوری, محمدرضا, نوری زاده, عباس. (1403). 'مدل‌سازی ساختاری-تفسیری هزینه‌های مبادله در انتقال دانش و فناوری از طریق متخصصین ایرانی مقیم خارج', , 10(3), pp. 30-50. doi: 10.22059/jppolicy.2024.98672
عربیون, ابوالقاسم, میگون پوری, محمدرضا, نوری زاده, عباس. مدل‌سازی ساختاری-تفسیری هزینه‌های مبادله در انتقال دانش و فناوری از طریق متخصصین ایرانی مقیم خارج. , 1403; 10(3): 30-50. doi: 10.22059/jppolicy.2024.98672

مدل‌سازی ساختاری-تفسیری هزینه‌های مبادله در انتقال دانش و فناوری از طریق متخصصین ایرانی مقیم خارج

سیاستگذاری عمومی
دوره 10، شماره 3، 1403، صفحه 30-50    اصل مقاله (2.42 M)
نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22059/jppolicy.2024.98672
نویسندگان
ابوالقاسم عربیون* 1؛ محمدرضا میگون پوری2؛ عباس نوری زاده3
1دانشیار کارآفرینی فناورانه، دانشکده کارآفرینی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
2استادیار کارآفرینی فناورانه، دانشکده کارآفرینی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
3دکتری کارآفرینی فناورانه، دانشکده کارآفرینی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
چکیده
انتقال فناوری از مهمترین استراتژی‌های توسعه صنعتی برای کشورهای در حال‌توسعه محسوب می‌شود. انتقال فناوری مبادله‌ای دوسویه است و هزینه‌هایی غیرملموس با عنوان هزینه مبادله در آن نهفته است. شبکه متخصصین مقیم خارج ظرفیت مناسبی برای نقش‌آفرینی در این خصوص دارند. این تحقیق می‌کوشد با اتخاذ شیوه تحلیل پدیدار شناسانه و بکارگیری مدل‌سازی تفسیری- ساختاری از تجربه زیسته 22 متخصص مقیم، مدلی را از جنبه‌های تأثیرگذاری ایشان بر کاهش هزینه‌های مبادله شناسایی نماید و با ابزار تحلیلی MICMAC مهمترین عوامل را تبیین نماید. یافته‌ها حاکی از تأثیر بالای ارتباطات غیررسمی، اعتبار در شبکه و اعتماد بین متخصصین مقیم داخل و خارج در موفقیت تلاش های انتقال فناوری و دانش است. توصیه‌های سیاستی جهت تسهیل مسیرهای انتقال فناوری و دانش با بهره‌گیری مؤثرتر از ظرفیت متخصصین مقیم به‌ویژه در حوزه صنایع پیشرفته با تأکید بر تقویت شبکه غیررسمی ارائه شده است.
کلیدواژه‌ها
انتقال دانش و فناوری؛ متخصصین مقیم؛ هزینه مبادله؛ مدل‌سازی ساختاری تفسیری؛ پدیدارشناسی
عنوان مقاله [English]
Interpretive–Structural Modeling for Iranian Expats' Role in Reduction of Transaction Costs in Technology and Knowledge Transfer
نویسندگان [English]
abolghasem arabion1؛ mohammadreza meigounpoory2؛ Abbas Noorizadeh3
1Associate Professor of Technology Entrepreneurship, Faculty of Entrepreneurship Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2Assistant Professor of Technology Entrepreneurship, Faculty of Entrepreneurship Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
3PhD of Technology Entrepreneurship, Faculty of Entrepreneurship Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]
Technology and knowledge transfer (TKT) as a two-way interaction between sender and receiver is a key strategy for industrial development among developing countries. However, it includes intangible costs called transaction costs in addition to tangible and formal costs. Experience gained by developing countries show that expert expats have high capacity to play a key role in this regard. By adopting the phenomenological analysis method and using interpretative-structural modeling based on lived experience of 22 Iranian expert expats, this research tries to identify a model of their impact on reducing transaction costs (TCs) as well as factors in this respect. MICMAC analytical tool has then been applied to position the factors according to their influence and role. Finding show trust and personal credibility in the experts' network and informal relationship with expats home play a key role in reduction of TCs thus helping better achieve goals in TKT efforts. Policy recommendations in respect to facilitating the transfer of technology and strengthening informal connections and ties between expats and home are suggested, especially in hi-tech sectors.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
Technology Transfer, Expats, Transaction Cost, Interpretive Structural Modeling, Phenomenology
مراجع
  1. Abrazi, Mahdi and Karami, Reza (1998).Position of technology management in international technology transfer. Technology management conference of Iran. [In Persian]
  2. Agarwal, A., Shankar, R., & Tiwari, M. K. (2007). Modeling agility of supply chain. Industrial marketing management, 36(4), 443-457.
  3. Amirkhani, Amirhussein, and Esfandyari, Mohammadjavad (2012). Effective methods of technologytransfer. Roshd fanavari journal, 8 (31). 2-11. https://sid.ir/paper/144828/en [In Persian]
  4. Anderson, E., and Gatignon, H. (1986). Modes of Foreign Entry: A Transaction Cost Analysis and Propositions. Journal of International Business Studies, 17(3), 1–26.
  5. Attri, R., Grover, S., Dev, N., & Kumar, D. (2013). An ISM approach for modelling the enablers in the implementation of Total Productive Maintenance (TPM). International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, 4(4), 313-326.
  6. Audretsch, D., & Caiazza, R. (2016). Technology transfer and entrepreneurship: cross-national analysis. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(6), 1247-1259.
  7. Bolzani, D., & Scandura, A. (2023). The role of collaboration networks for innovation in immigrant-owned new technology-based firms. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 1-31.
  8. Bonache, J., & Zarraga-Oberty, C. (2008). Determinants of the success of international assignees as knowledge transferors: A theoretical framework. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19, 1–18.
  9. Caiazza, Rosa. (2015). A cross-national analysis of policies affecting innovation diffusion. The Journal of Technology Transfer. 41. 10.1007/s10961-015-9439-2.
  10. Castellacci, F. and Natera, JM. (2011). A new panel dataset for cross-country analyses of national systems, growth and development (CANA). Innovation and Development. 1(2).
  11. Cerdin, J. & Selmer, J. (2014). Who is a self-initiated expatriate? Towards conceptual clarity of a common notion. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25, 1281.
  12. Chaichian, M. (2012). The new phase of globalization and brain drain Migration of educated and skilled Iranians to the United States. International Journal of Social Economics, 39 (1/2), 18-38.
  13. Chiș, D. M., & Crișan, E. L. (2020). A framework for technology transfer success factors: validation for the Graphene4Life project. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 11(2), 217-245.
  14. Coase, R. H. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica, 4(16), 386-405.
  15. Connelly, B. L. (2010). Transnational entrepreneurs, world changing entrepreneurs, and ambassadors: a typology of the new breed of expatriates. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6(1), 39-53.
  16. Cunningham J.A, Mattthias M. & Young C.(2017). A review of qualitative case methods trends in technology transfer research. The journal of technology transfer, Springer, 42(4) pp(923-956).
  17. Cuypers, I. R., Hennart, J. F., Silverman, B. S., & Ertug, G. (2021). Transaction cost theory: Past progress, current challenges, and suggestions for the future. Academy of Management Annals, 15(1), 111-150.
  18. Eatough V. & Smith J.A(2017) Interpretive Phenenomenological Analysis. The Sgae handbook of Qualitative research in psychology, Ch. (12) pp. 193-200.
  19. Elo, M., & Servais, P. (2018). Migration perspective on entrepreneurship. The Palgrave handbook of multidisciplinary perspectives on entrepreneurship, 355-386.
  20. Fathiyan, Mohhamd; Shafia, Mohammadali; Amjadi, Izad (2017). Assessing factors that affect knowledge transfer among Iranian graduates in developed countries. Technology development quarterly (5) 35. 9-32. doi: 10.22104/jtdm.2018.2212.1764 [In Persian]
  21. Ferreira, M. P., Pinto, C. F., & Serra, F. R. (2014). The transaction costs theory in international business research: A bibliometric study over three decades. Scientometrics, 98(3), 1899-1922.
  22. Grimpe, C., & Hussinger, K. (2013). Formal and informal knowledge and technology transfer from academia to industry: Complementarity effects and innovation performance. Industry and innovation, 20(8), 683-700.
  23. Hannah, D. R., & Lautsch, B. A. (2011). Counting in qualitative research: Why to conduct it, when to avoid it, and when to closet it. Journal of Management Inquiry, 20(1), 14-22.
  24. Hariri, Najla (2001). Qualitative research fundamentals. Azad Univ. publication, 2nd (book) [In Persian]
  25. Heidarali, Hooman (2006). A practical guide to qualitative research. Samt publication, Tehran.(book) [In Persian]
  26. Hennart, J. F. (2012). Transaction cost theory and international business. Journal of Retailing, 86(3), 257-269.
  27. Ho, Seet, Pi-Shen & Jones, J. (2015). From Brain Drain and Brain Gain to Brain Circulation: Conceptualizing Re-Expatriation Intentions of Vietnamese Returnees.
  28. Iyer, K. C., & Banerjee, P. S. (2018). Facilitators and inhibitors in sector wide technology transfer projects in developing economies: An empirical study. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 43(1), 172-197.
  29. Javadi, Sahhin and Kheradmandnia, Soheila (2022). An analysis on technology transfer challenges to Iran. IRI parliament research center-Tehran. https://sid.ir/paper/1047733/fa . [In Persian]
  30. Kafouros, M., Love, J. H., Ganotakis, P., & Konara, P. (2020). Experience in R&D collaborations, innovative performance and the moderating effect of different dimensions of absorptive capacity. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 150, 119757.
  31. Kapur, D., (2001). Diasporas and Technology Transfer. Journal of Human Development, 2 (2) 266-286.
  32. Kazemipour, Shahla; Kazemipour, Shahla and Mohseni, Rezaali (2020). Elite Attitudes Towards social economic and scientific factors of origin and destination and its effect on their tendency to emigrate. Journal of strategic studies on youth and sport (No. 48) PP. 297-322. https://sid.ir/paper/507161/fa [In Persian]
  33. Keller, W. and Yeaple S.(2013). The Gravity of Knowledge. American Economic Review, 103 (4): 1414-44.
  34. Khosravi lagahb, Zohreh; Salarzehi, Habibollah, Mosleh, Abdolmajid, Yaghobi, N Mohammad (2017). A review on technology transfer as incentive to enter strategic international technological unity in oil industry. Strategic management research. (67)23. PP 39-59. https://sid.ir/paper/516824/fa [In Persian]
  35. Konecny, T. (2012). Expatriates and trade. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 13(1), 83-98.
  36. Lall, S. (2001). ‘Market-stimulating’Technology Policies in Developing Countries: A Framework with Examples from East Asia. In Competitiveness, technology and skills. Edward Elgar Publishing.
  37. Levent B. & Nijkamp, P. (2009) Characteristics of migrant entrepreneurship in Europe. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 21(4): 375-397.
  38. Mandal, B., & Marjit, S. (2010). Transaction Cost, Technology Transfer, and Mode of Organization. In Trade, Globalization and Development (pp. 51-62). Springer, India.
  39. Mathew J.M, and Raju K.Thomas (2013). Learning needs of TechnologyTransfer; Coping with discontinuities and disruptions. Journal of Knowledge Economy 4:511–539.
  40. McNulty, Y., & Brewster, C. (2016). Theorizing the meaning (s) of ‘expatriate’: Establishing boundary conditions for business expatriates. The International Journal of HRM,28(1),27-61.
  41. Nasiri aghdam, Ali (2013). Transaction cost economy. Economic insights. No(5), pp 158-205. https://sid.ir/paper/109017/fa [In Persian]
  42. Nishat Faisal, M., Banwet, D. K., & Shankar, R. (2006). Supply chain risk mitigation: modeling the enablers. Business Process Management Journal, 12(4), 535-552.
  43. North, D. C.(1992). Transaction costs, institutions, and economic performance (pp. 13-15). San Francisco, CA: ICS Press.
  44. Qian, F., Hong, J., Hou, B., & Fang, T. (2020). Technology transfer channels and innovation efficiency: Empirical evidence from Chinese manufacturing industries. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 69(5), 2426-2438.
  45. Radwan, A., & Sakr, M. (2018). Exploring ‘brain circulation’as a concept to mitigate brain drain in Africa and improve EU–Africa cooperation in the field of science and technology. South African Journal of International Affairs, 25(4), 517-529.
  46. A (2005). Transfer of technologies; a cross disciplinary taxonomy. Omega33, no.3 189-202.
  47. Rosenberg N, C (1985). International technology transfer: concepts, measures and comparisons. New York: Praeger Publishing Co.
  48. Santacreu-Vasut, E., & Teshima, K. (2016). Foreign employees as channel for technology transfer: Evidence from MNC's subsidiaries in Mexico. Journal of Development Economics, 122, 92-112.
  49. Schaeffer, V., Öcalan-Özel, S., & Pénin, J. (2020). The complementarities between formal and informal channels of university–industry knowledge transfer: a longitudinal approach. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 45, 31-55.
  50. Suzuki M. (2013) Addressing key issues in technology innovation transfer, case of clean energy. Environment economic study. Vol 16 . 157-169.
  51. Taghavifard, M taghi; Moghimi, Behzad and Hoshangi, Mohsen (2015). Selecting suitable method for technology transfer using Dimatel and network analysis in two chinaware production plant in Khorasan. Technology development quarterly 91) 3. PP 75-100. [In Persian]
  52. Technology Studies Research Center of Iran (2016). Comparative study of immigration of educated Iranians. TSRCI Press.
  53. Vakili, S., & Mobini, M. (2023). An Overview of Brain Drain, Causes, and Policy Issues in Iran. Medical Education Bulletin, 4(2), 715-726.
  54. Vega-Gomez, F. I., & Miranda-Gonzalez, F. J. (2021). Choosing between formal and informal technology transfer channels: determining factors among Spanish academicians. Sustainability, 13(5), 2476.
  55. Warfield, J. W. (1974). Developing interconnected matrices in structural modeling. IEEE Transcript on Systems, Men and Cybernetics, 4(1), 51−81.
  56. Wiles, Rose (2012). What are qualitative research ethics? Bloomsbury Academic.
  57. Williamson, O. E. (1981). The economics of organization: The transaction cost approach. American journal of sociology, 87(3), 548-577.
  58. Williamson, O. E. (1988). Technology and transaction cost economics: a reply. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 10(3), 355-363.
  59. Zeneli B., Emina C., Dzebo A., Riste Z. (2013). Brain gain policies and practices in West Balkans. Group 484 Centre for Migration, in cooperation with UNDP, Center for research development.
  60. Zulkifly, N. A., Ismail, M., & Hamzah, S. R. A. (2020). Predictors of knowledge transfer between expatriates and host country nationals: shared vision as mediator. European Journal of Management and Business Economics, 29(2), 199-215.
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 113
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 155





سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب