"بیوم نوآوری " و مقایسه آن با سایر استعاره‌‌های موجود: یک رویکرد پیمایشی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکترای مدیریت تکنولوژی، گروه مدیریت تکنولوژی ،واحد رودهن ، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی ، رودهن، ایران.

2 استاد گروه فناوری اطلاعات، دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس ، تهران ، ایران.

3 استادیار گروه مدیریت، دانشکده مدیریت، واحد رودهن، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد رودهن ، ایران.

چکیده

ضرورت درک پدیده نوآوری و پیچیدگی‌‌های آن، موجب شده که محققان مختلف برای فهمیدن و فهماندن این پدیده از استعاره‌‌های متعددی نظیر سیستم (نظام)، اکوسیستم، کارخانه، مارپیچ، خوشه، زنجیره، شبکه و ... استفاده کنند؛ اما اخیراً استعاره جدیدی به نام بیوم، از حوزه بوم‌‌شناسی برای نوآوری بکار رفته است. مقاله حاضر در پی آن است که این استعاره جدید را با استعاره‌های قبلی فوق‌‌الذکر مقایسه نماید و برای این منظور از پیمایش نظرات صاحب‌نظران استفاده می‌‌نماید. برای این هدف، هشت اصل بهینگی استعاره‌ها (شامل یکپارچه‌‌سازی، جانمایی، تنیدگی، امکان بازگشایی، دلیل خوب، تحکیم ترادف، فاصله‌داری و ملموس بودن) و نیز شش قاعده مقبولیت سنجی استعاره‌‌ها (شامل جذابیت، مشهود بودن، متصل بودن، باورکردنی بودن، زیبا بودن و واقعی به نظر رسیدن) بین استعاره‌های به‌کاررفته برای نوآوری در قالب دو فرضیه اصلی و 14 فرضیه فرعی بررسی می‌شود که به تائید فرضیه‌‌ها می‌‌انجامد. این بدان معناست که استعاره بیوم برای تبیین پدیده نوآوری مناسب‌تر است؛ زیرا با به‌کارگیری آن امکان تحلیل و سیاست‌‌گذاری اجزا تشکیل‌دهنده بیوم که در حوزه‌‌های مختلف از اکوسیستم‌‌ها و روابط بین آن‌ها تشکیل‌شده‌اند، تسهیل خواهد شد. لذا توصیه می‌شود که سیاست‌گذاران نوآوری از این چارچوب جدید استفاده کنند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Innovation Biome and Its Comparison to Other Existing Metaphors: A Survey Approach

نویسندگان [English]

  • Negin Taghizadeh ,Moghadam 1
  • Sepehr Ghazinoory 2
  • Bta Tabrixzain 3
1 PhD Student in Technology Management, Department of Technology Management, Roudehen Branch, Islamic Azad University, Roudehen, Iran.
2 Professor, Department of Information Technology Management, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Assistant Professor, Roudehen Branch, Islamic Azad University, Roudehen, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Extended Abstract
Abstract
 The necessity to comprehend the phenomenon of innovation and its complexities, has made researchers to make use of different metaphors such as system, ecosystem, factory, maze, cluster, chain, network, etc. to understand this phenomenon. Recently, biome as a new metaphor has been borrowed from the field of ecology for innovation. The present article tries to compare this new metaphor with the previous metaphors and we have used expert's opinions. To this end, the eight principles for optimal metaphoras well as six acceptability rules for metaphors for metaphors used for innovation are considered in terms of two main hypotheses and 14 sub-hypotheses. This means that the biome metaphor is more suitable for explaining innovation. Because it will facilitate the analysis and policy-making of biome components in different fields including ecosystems and the relationships among them. Therefore, it is recommended that innovation policy makers make use of this new framework.
Introduction
Researchers have also used ecological and biological metaphors in innovation and business studies. They have used metaphors such as ecosystems to account for some phenomena. A variety of terms such as Environmental ecosystems, industrial ecosystem, economic ecosystem, digital business ecosystem and entrepreneurial ecosystem have already been put forward in different fields. in our previous study , we tried to account for the shortcomings of the previous metaphor and Introduce a new metaphor (innovation biome) that has the ability to account for innovation processes and serve as a perfect metaphor for the innovation environment at the national level and finally lead to identification and extraction of useful policy implications needed to Improve the innovation environment in different countries; Implications that have been overlooked in innovation system metaphors.
Case study
The population of the study includes faculty members, PhD graduates and a number of experts in this field. The expert inclusion criteria were specialized experience in the field of innovation studies and the tendency to describe their understanding of the National Innovation Biome as a complement to the innovation ecosystem. thus, individuals with at least 2 years of managerial and policy-making experience in the field of innovation systems or innovation ecosystem; at least 3 published articles in the field of innovation studies and innovation ecosystem; and at least 2 years of activity in the afore-mentioned area were used as population of the study.
Materials and Methods
Snowball sampling method was used to determine the sample size in a systematic manner. Semi-structured Interviews (45 to 60 min) were used for data collection. SPSS software was used to analyze the collected data.
Discussion and Results
The innovation biome of each country includes different ecosystems (such as the innovation ecosystem of industrial sectors, different technologies, etc.), but a general atmosphere resulting from the general political situation as well as the economic and social life in that country is dominant over all those ecosystems. In other words, just as all ecosystems in the desert biome, for example, must adapt themselves to the general conditions governing the desert biome (i.e., water stress), all the ecosystems in the Iranian innovation biome need to adapt themselves to the political, cultural and economic conditions of the country.
Therefore, in the present study, the metaphorology strategy is systematically used to assess and validate the proposed metaphor of national innovation biome. The results confirm all eight principles of competency assessment and six principles of credibility assessment.
Conclusion
When a set of ecosystems with distinct functions in economic development are introduced into the economic environment of countries, it is necessary to define the governing environment at the national level. According to the hypothesis of the present study, innovation biome is actually the institutional environment that governs different ecosystems in countries. The ecosystems in each country lie within a context that, according to our hypothesis, can most probably be defined as an innovation biome; because ecosystems do not typically lie within a context sharing the nature of a "system." this is a gap that has not been addressed in the literature, and some studies have even extended the metaphor of ecosystem to national borders to introduce the national ecosystem of innovation. Aside from addressing this issue, in the present study attempts were made to bridge in this gap by introducing the Innovation biome.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • metaphor
  • innovation
  • innovation system
  • innovation biome
منابع فارسی
الهی شعبان، شایان علی، قاضی نوری سید سپهر، خداداد حسینی سید حمید. ارزیابی ابعاد شبکه های نوآوری: صنعت فناوری اطلاعات ایران. پژوهش های مدیریت منابع سازمانی. ۱۳۹۳; ۴ (۱) :۱-۲۷
تقی زاده مقدم نگین، قاضی نوری سید سپهر و تبریزیان بیتا. (1400). استعاره جدید بیوم ملی نوآوری در برابر استعاره نظام ملی نوآوری. رهیافت، 31(82)46-23
دانایی فرد حسن. (1388). روش شناسی نظریه پردازی در مطالعات سازمان و مدیریت: پژوهشی تطبیقی. پژوهش های مدیریت در ایران، 13(4)، 165-191.
موسوی، موحدی علی اکبر، کیانی بختیاری ابوالفضل . (1387). نوآوری چیست؟ مرور ادبیات مصادیق و ارائه تعریف جامع. رهیافت، 1387(42).
میرعمادی سید ایمان. (1398). نظام ملی نوآوری و نقش آن در بهبود سیاست‌های علم، فناوری و نوآوری، سیاست علم و فناوری. 11(2)، 135-154.
 
References
Bon, A. T., & Mustafa, E. M. (2013). Impact of total quality management on innovation in service organizations: Literature review and new conceptual framework. Procedia Engineering, 53, 516-529.
Danaei Fard, H. (2009). Building Theory Methodology in Organization and Management:A Comparative Study Management Research in Iran, 13(4), 165-191(In Persian).
Elahi, s., Shayan, A., Ghazinoory, S., & Khodadad hosseini, H. (2014). Assessment of innovation networks: information technology industry case study. Organizational Resources Management Researchs, 4(1), 1-27(In Persian).
Ghazinoory, S., & Afshari-Mofrad, M. (2012). Ranking different factors which affect E-Learning outcomes. International Journal of Computer Theory and Engineering, 4(2), 234.
Ghazinoory, S., Nasri, S., Afshari-Mofrad, M., & Moghadam, N. T. (2023). National Innovation Biome (NIB): A novel conceptualization for innovation development at the national level. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 196, 122834.
Ghazinoory, S., Phillips, F., Afshari-Mofrad, M., & Bigdelou, N. (2021). Innovation lives in ecotones, not ecosystems. Journal of Business Research, 135, 572-580.
Godin, B. (2006). The linear model of innovation: The historical construction of an analytical framework. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 31(6), 639-667.
Herliana, S. (2015). Regional innovation cluster for small and medium enterprises (SME): A triple helix concept. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 169, 151-160.
Jackson, D. (2019). What is an Innovation Ecosystem? 1st edition ed. Arlington VA: National Science Foundation, 1-13.
Keller, G. (2017). Statistics for management and economics: Cengage Learning, Inc.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2008). Metaphors we live by: University of Chicago press.
Levin, R. I. (2011). Statistics for management: Pearson Education India.
Miremadi, S. (2019). National Innovation System and Its Role in Improving Science. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 11(2), 135-154(In Persian).
Musavi, A., & Kiani, A. (2008). What is innovation? Reviewing the literature of instances and providing a comprehensive definition. Rahyaft, 42, 4-9(In Persian).
Taghizadeh moghadam,N., Ghazinoory, S., Tabrizian,B. The new metaphor of IB versus NIS. Rahyaft, 2021; https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/rahyaft.2021. 10660.1201.(In Perian).
Suroso, E., & Azis, Y. (2015). Defining mainstreams of innovation: a literature review. Paper presented at the International Conference on Economics and Banking (iceb-15), Indonesia.
Suurs, R. A. (2009). Motors of sustainable innovation: Towards a theory on the dynamics of technological innovation systems: Utrecht University.
Wang, Y., Wallace, S. W., Shen, B., & Choi, T.-M. (2015). Service supply chain management: A review of operational models. European Journal of Operational Research, 247(3), 685-698.
Weick, K. E. (1989). Theory construction as disciplined imagination. Academy of management review, 14(4), 516-531.