Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

ENTELEKTÜEL SERMAYENİN İNOVASYON YETENEĞİNE ETKİSİNDE YÖNETİM BİLİŞİM SİSTEMLERİ MEMNUNİYET DÜZEYİNİN ROLÜ

Year 2021, , 1 - 14, 30.03.2021

Osman Kunt Mustafa Sundu

https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1389

Abstract

Amaç- Entelektüel sermaye, inovasyon yeteneği ve yönetim bilişim sistemleri memnuniyet düzeyi arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemektir.
Yöntem- Araştırma, nicel bir saha çalışması niteliğinde temel bir araştırmadır. Veri toplama aracı olarak anket kullanılmıştır. Kolayda örneklem metoduyla anket katılımcılarına ulaşılmıştır. Araştırmanın değişkenlerini ölçmek için ilişkin 5’li Likert Tipi ölçek kullanılmıştır.
Bulgular- Entelektüel sermayenin ve yönetim bilişim sistemleri memnuniyet düzeyinin inovasyon yeteneğine pozitif ve anlamlı bir etkisi olduğu ortaya çıkmıştır. İnovasyon ile entelektüel sermaye arasındaki ilişkide yönetim bilişim sistemlerinin memnuniyet düzeyinin düzenleyici bir role sahip olduğu görülmüştür.
Sonuç- İnovasyon yeteneği ve entellektüel sermayenin ilişkili kavramlar oldukları ampirik olarak ortaya konmuştur. Araştırma göstermiştir ki firmaların sahip olduğu yönetim bilişim sistemlerinden memnuniyet düzeyi artıkça entellektüel sermayenin inovasyon yeteneğine katkısını olumlu yönde artmaktadır. Firmaların dijital dönüşüm süreçlerinde bu konuyu dikkate almaları faydalı olacaktır.

Keywords

Entelektüel sermaye yönetim bilişim sistemleri inovasyon insan sermayesi ilişkisel sermaye

References

  • Abed, M., Naser, S., Mahmoud, M (2020). The mediating role of management information system between business process management and operational excellence in banks, International Journal of Creative and Innovative Research, 2(12).
  • Achi, A., Salinesi, C., Viscusi, G. (2016). Information systems for innovation: A comparative analysis of maturity models’ characteristics. In International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering: 78-90. Springer, Cham.
  • Akgemci, T. G. (2010). İşletmelerde stratejik yönetim. Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi
  • Arslan, Özgür (2004). Entelektüel sermayenin Türkiye’deki raporlanma şeklinin incelenmesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(2):78–87.
  • Avcı, U. (2009). Öğrenme yönelimliğinin yenilik performansı üzerine etkisi: Muğla Mermer Sektöründe Bir İnceleme. ZKÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(10):121–138.
  • Avermaete, T. (2003). Determinants of Innovation in Small Food Firms. European Journal of Innovation Management, 6(1):8-17.
  • Aydıner, A. S., Tatoğlu, E. (2019). Türkiye’deki işletmelerde bilişim sistemleri uygulamaları üzerine bir saha araştırması. Bilişim Teknolojileri Dergisi, 12(1):59-73.
  • Bontis, N. (1998). Intellectual capital: an exploratory study that develops measures and models. Management Decision. Emerald, 36(2):63–76.
  • Bontis, N. (2001). Assessing Knowledge Assets: A review of the models used to measure intellectual capital. International Journal of Management Reviews, 3(1):41-60.
  • Bontis, N., Richardson, and S. Keow, W. (2000). Intellectual capital and business performance in Malaysian industries. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1(1):85–100.
  • Bozbura, F. and Toraman, A. (2010). Türkiye’de Entelektüel Sermayenin Ölçülmesi ile İlgili Model Çalışması ve Bir Uygulama. İTÜ Dergisi, 3(1):55-66.
  • Brooking, A. (1996). Intellectual capital – core asset for the third millennium enterprise. London:International Thomson Business Press.
  • Calantone, R. J., Cavusgil, S. T. and Zhao, Y. (2002). Learning orientation, firm innovation capability, and firm performance. Industrial Marketing Management 31(4):515–524.
  • Carroll, R. F. and Tansey, R. R. (2000). Intellectual capital in the new internet economy – its meaning, measurement and management for enhancing quality. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1(4):296–312.
  • Chen, J., Zhu, Z., (2004). Measuring intellectual capital: a new model and empirical study. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5(1): 1469-1930.
  • Cheng G., Zervopoulos P (2014). Estimating the technical efficiency of health care systems: A cross-country comparison using the directional distance function. European Journal of Operational Research, 238(3):899-900.
  • Çizmeci, B. (2011). Bilgi teknolojilerinin personel verimliliği üzerine etkisi: erciyes üniversitesi örneği. SBE, Erciyes Üniversitesi, Kayseri.
  • Connell, B. and Brennan, N. (2000). Intellectual capital: current issues and policy implications. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1(3):206–240.
  • Damanpour, F. (1996). Organizational complexity and innovation: developing and testing multiple contingency models. Management Sciences, 42(5):693-716.
  • Demircan, M. (1997). Bilgiyi yönetmek. İTÜ İşletme Fakültesi Yayınları.
  • Dixon, R. and Collier, P. (1995). The Evaluation and audit of management information systems. Managerial Auditing Journal. 10(7):25–32.
  • Drucker, P. F. (1985). Innovation and entrepreneurship: practice and principles. New York: Harper & Row.
  • Drucker, P. F. (2006). Yeni üretkenlik meydan okumasi. Çeviren: Zülfü Dicleli, İstanbul: Bahçeşehir Üniversitesi Yayınları
  • Edvinsson, L. and S. Malone, M. (1997). Intellectual capital : realizing your company’s true value by finding its hidden brainpower. New York:Harper Business; 1st edition.
  • Eggert, M., Alberts, J. (2020). Frontiers of business intelligence and analytics 3.0: a taxonomy-based literature review and research agenda. Business Research, 13(2): 685-739.
  • Elçi, Ş. (2007). İnovasyon: kalkınmanın ve rekabetin anahtarı. Ankara: Meteksan Yayınevi.
  • Fischer, M. M. (2001). Innovation, knowledge creation and systems of innovation. The Annals of Regional Science, 35(2): 199-216.
  • Göran, R. Johan, (1997). Measuring Your Company's Intellectual Performance. Long Range Planning 30(3):413-426
  • Grantham, C. and Judith, C. (2002). Nine Effective Strategies for Driving Business Growth. New York, NY: Wiley Publishers.
  • Gümüştekin, G., E. (2004). Bilgi yönetiminin stratejik önemi. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 18(3):201–211.
  • Hsu, Y. H. and Fang, W. (2009). Intellectual capital and new product development performance: The mediating role of organizational learning capability. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(5):664–677.
  • Hudson, W. (1993). Intellectual capital: how to build it, enhance it, use it. New York, NY: Wiley Publishers.
  • Hutahayan, B. (2020). The mediating role of human capital and management accounting information system in the relationship between innovation strategy and internal process performance and the impact on corporate financial performance. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 27(3).
  • Jacobsen, K, Hofman‐Bang, P. and Nordby, R. (2005). The IC rating TM model by intellectual capital Sweden. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 6(4): 570–587.
  • Karchegani, M. R, Sofian, S. and Amin, S. M. (2013). The relationship between intellectual capital and innovation: a review. International Journal of Business and Management Studies, 2(1):561–581.
  • Kuczmarski, T. D. (2003). What is innovation? and why aren’t companies doing more of it? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 20(6):536–541.
  • Laudon, J., Laudon, K. (2018). Management information systems, managing the digital firm. London:Pearson.
  • Lill, Wald, Munck. (2020). In the field of tension between creativity and efficiency: a systematic literature review. European Journal of Innovation Management, 23(1):1460-1060.
  • Luthy, D. H. (1998). Intellectual capital and its measurement. In Proceedings of the Asian Pacific Interdisciplinary Research in Accounting Conference (APIRA), Osaka, Japan.
  • Marr, B. and Moustaghfir, K. (2005). Defining intellectual capital: a three‐dimensional approach. Management Decision. 43(9):1114–1128.
  • Masloboev, A. V., Langhans, M. (2018). A multi-agent system for management information support of regional innovations. Scientific and Technical Journal of Information Technologies, Mechanics and Optics, 18(4):630-638.
  • Miller, W. L. (2006). Innovation rules!. Research-Technology Management, 49(2), 8-14.
  • Nazari, J. A., Herremans, I. M., Manassian, A., Isaac, R. G. (2010). National intellectual capital stocks and organizational cultures: a comparison of Lebanon and Iran. In Strategic Intellectual Capital Management in Multinational Organizations: Sustainability and Successful Implications (95-118). IGI Global.
  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches: London:Pearson new international edition. Pearson Education Limited.
  • Obeidat, U., Obeidat, B., Alrowwad, A., Alshurideh, M., Masadeh, R., & Abuhashesh, M. (2021). The effect of intellectual capital on competitive advantage: The mediating role of innovation. Management Science Letters, 11(4), 1331-1344.
  • OECD, (2006). Proposed guidelines for collecting and interpreting technological innovation data, Oslo Manual.
  • OECD, (2007). 2007 Annual report on sustainable development work in the OECD, OECD.
  • Ölçer, F. and Şanal, M. (2007. İşletmelerde entelektüel sermaye yönetimi. Ç.Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 17(1):479-500.
  • Özkent, B. (2015). Adım Adım İnovasyon, Ankara: Elma Yayınevi.
  • Panori, A., Kakderi, C., Komninos, N., Fellnhofer, K., Reid, A., & Mora, L. (2020). Smart systems of innovation for smart places: Challenges in deploying digital platforms for co-creation and data-intelligence. Land Use Policy, 104631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104631
  • Rodov, I. and Leliaert, P. (2002). FiMIAM: Financial method of intangible assets measurement. Journal of Intellectual Capital 3(3): 323-336.
  • Roffe, I. (1996). Transforming graduates, transforming small firms. Journal of European Industrial Training, 20(8):3-9.
  • Roos, G., Roos, J. (1997). Measuring your company's intellectual performance. Long range planning, 30(3):413-426.
  • Saeed N., Zhaleh N., Peter N., Pejvak O., Elham Z, (2018). How collaborative innovation networks affect new product performance: Product innovation capability, process innovation capability, and absorptive capacity. Industrial Marketing Management, 73(August): 193-205.
  • Santoro, G., Vrontis, D., Thrassou, A., Dezi, L. (2018). The internet of things: building a knowledge management system for open innovation and knowledge management capacity. Technological forecasting and social change, 136 (November):347-354.
  • Schermerhorn, J. R. (2001). Introducing management. New York, NY: Wiley.
  • Schultz, T. (1961). Investment in human capital. The American Economic Review, 51(1):1-17
  • Stewart, T. A. (1991). Brainpower. Fortune, 123(3):44-60.
  • Stewart, T. A. (2000). Intellectual capital: the new wealth of organization. Crown Publishing.
  • Sullivan, P. H. (2000). Value-driven intellectual capital: how to convert intangible corporate assets into market value. New York, NY: Wiley.
  • Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L.S., Ullman, J.B. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston, MA: Pearson.
  • Terzioğlu, M. (2008). İşletmelerde yenilik yeteneği: Denizli tekstil ve hazır giyim sektörü örneği. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 17(3):377-388.
  • Trott, P. (2005). Innovation management and new product development. Boston, MA: Pearson.
  • Valéry, N. (1999). Industry gets religion. The Economist.
  • Veltri, S., Puntillo, P. (2019). On intellectual capital management as an evaluation criterion for university managers: a case study. Journal of Management and Governance, 24(1):135-167.
  • Wang, Chengqi; Mario, K. (2009). Country-of-origin effects of foreign direct investment. Management International Review, 49(2):179-198.
  • Wang, Q., & Huo, B. (2018, July). The effect of intellectual capital on supply chain integration and competitive performance. In Academy of Management Proceedings, 2018(1):18643. Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510.
  • Wang, Z., Wang, N. and Liang, H. (2014). Knowledge sharing, intellectual capital and firm performance. Management Decision, 52(2):230–258.
  • Xu, J., Wang, B. (2018). Intellectual capital, financial performance and companies’ sustainable growth: Evidence from the Korean manufacturing industry. Sustainability, 10(12):4651.
  • Yavuz, A. (2009). Ulusal inovasyon politikaları ve kamu harcamaları: çeşitli ülkeler üzerine bir karşılaştırma. The Journal of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 14(3):65-90.
  • Zambon, S. Marasca, S., Chiucchi, M. (2019). The role of intellectual capital and integrated reporting in management and governance: a performative perspective. Journal of Management and Governance, 23(2):291-297

THE MODERATING ROLE OF SATISFACTION LEVEL OF MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN THE EFFECT OF INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL ON INNOVATION CAPABILITY

Year 2021, , 1 - 14, 30.03.2021

Osman Kunt Mustafa Sundu

https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1389

Abstract

Purpose- To examine the relation between intellectual capital, innovation and satisfaction level of management information systems.
Methodology- The research is a basic quantitative field study. Questionnaire was used as a data collection tool. Survey participants were reached using the convenience sampling method. 5-point Likert scales was used for measuring research variables.
Findings- Intellectual capital and management information systems satisfaction level have a positive and significant effect on innovation capability. The satisfaction level of management information systems has a moderating role in the relationship between innovation and intellectual capital.
Conclusion- It has been empirically demonstrated that innovation capability and intellectual capital are related concepts. The research findings have indicated that as the satisfaction level of the management information systems increases, the contribution of the intellectual capital to the innovation capability increases positively. It will be beneficial for companies to consider this issue in their digital transformation processes.

Keywords

Intellectual capital innovation management information systems human capital relational capital

References

  • Abed, M., Naser, S., Mahmoud, M (2020). The mediating role of management information system between business process management and operational excellence in banks, International Journal of Creative and Innovative Research, 2(12).
  • Achi, A., Salinesi, C., Viscusi, G. (2016). Information systems for innovation: A comparative analysis of maturity models’ characteristics. In International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering: 78-90. Springer, Cham.
  • Akgemci, T. G. (2010). İşletmelerde stratejik yönetim. Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi
  • Arslan, Özgür (2004). Entelektüel sermayenin Türkiye’deki raporlanma şeklinin incelenmesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(2):78–87.
  • Avcı, U. (2009). Öğrenme yönelimliğinin yenilik performansı üzerine etkisi: Muğla Mermer Sektöründe Bir İnceleme. ZKÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(10):121–138.
  • Avermaete, T. (2003). Determinants of Innovation in Small Food Firms. European Journal of Innovation Management, 6(1):8-17.
  • Aydıner, A. S., Tatoğlu, E. (2019). Türkiye’deki işletmelerde bilişim sistemleri uygulamaları üzerine bir saha araştırması. Bilişim Teknolojileri Dergisi, 12(1):59-73.
  • Bontis, N. (1998). Intellectual capital: an exploratory study that develops measures and models. Management Decision. Emerald, 36(2):63–76.
  • Bontis, N. (2001). Assessing Knowledge Assets: A review of the models used to measure intellectual capital. International Journal of Management Reviews, 3(1):41-60.
  • Bontis, N., Richardson, and S. Keow, W. (2000). Intellectual capital and business performance in Malaysian industries. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1(1):85–100.
  • Bozbura, F. and Toraman, A. (2010). Türkiye’de Entelektüel Sermayenin Ölçülmesi ile İlgili Model Çalışması ve Bir Uygulama. İTÜ Dergisi, 3(1):55-66.
  • Brooking, A. (1996). Intellectual capital – core asset for the third millennium enterprise. London:International Thomson Business Press.
  • Calantone, R. J., Cavusgil, S. T. and Zhao, Y. (2002). Learning orientation, firm innovation capability, and firm performance. Industrial Marketing Management 31(4):515–524.
  • Carroll, R. F. and Tansey, R. R. (2000). Intellectual capital in the new internet economy – its meaning, measurement and management for enhancing quality. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1(4):296–312.
  • Chen, J., Zhu, Z., (2004). Measuring intellectual capital: a new model and empirical study. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5(1): 1469-1930.
  • Cheng G., Zervopoulos P (2014). Estimating the technical efficiency of health care systems: A cross-country comparison using the directional distance function. European Journal of Operational Research, 238(3):899-900.
  • Çizmeci, B. (2011). Bilgi teknolojilerinin personel verimliliği üzerine etkisi: erciyes üniversitesi örneği. SBE, Erciyes Üniversitesi, Kayseri.
  • Connell, B. and Brennan, N. (2000). Intellectual capital: current issues and policy implications. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1(3):206–240.
  • Damanpour, F. (1996). Organizational complexity and innovation: developing and testing multiple contingency models. Management Sciences, 42(5):693-716.
  • Demircan, M. (1997). Bilgiyi yönetmek. İTÜ İşletme Fakültesi Yayınları.
  • Dixon, R. and Collier, P. (1995). The Evaluation and audit of management information systems. Managerial Auditing Journal. 10(7):25–32.
  • Drucker, P. F. (1985). Innovation and entrepreneurship: practice and principles. New York: Harper & Row.
  • Drucker, P. F. (2006). Yeni üretkenlik meydan okumasi. Çeviren: Zülfü Dicleli, İstanbul: Bahçeşehir Üniversitesi Yayınları
  • Edvinsson, L. and S. Malone, M. (1997). Intellectual capital : realizing your company’s true value by finding its hidden brainpower. New York:Harper Business; 1st edition.
  • Eggert, M., Alberts, J. (2020). Frontiers of business intelligence and analytics 3.0: a taxonomy-based literature review and research agenda. Business Research, 13(2): 685-739.
  • Elçi, Ş. (2007). İnovasyon: kalkınmanın ve rekabetin anahtarı. Ankara: Meteksan Yayınevi.
  • Fischer, M. M. (2001). Innovation, knowledge creation and systems of innovation. The Annals of Regional Science, 35(2): 199-216.
  • Göran, R. Johan, (1997). Measuring Your Company's Intellectual Performance. Long Range Planning 30(3):413-426
  • Grantham, C. and Judith, C. (2002). Nine Effective Strategies for Driving Business Growth. New York, NY: Wiley Publishers.
  • Gümüştekin, G., E. (2004). Bilgi yönetiminin stratejik önemi. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 18(3):201–211.
  • Hsu, Y. H. and Fang, W. (2009). Intellectual capital and new product development performance: The mediating role of organizational learning capability. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(5):664–677.
  • Hudson, W. (1993). Intellectual capital: how to build it, enhance it, use it. New York, NY: Wiley Publishers.
  • Hutahayan, B. (2020). The mediating role of human capital and management accounting information system in the relationship between innovation strategy and internal process performance and the impact on corporate financial performance. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 27(3).
  • Jacobsen, K, Hofman‐Bang, P. and Nordby, R. (2005). The IC rating TM model by intellectual capital Sweden. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 6(4): 570–587.
  • Karchegani, M. R, Sofian, S. and Amin, S. M. (2013). The relationship between intellectual capital and innovation: a review. International Journal of Business and Management Studies, 2(1):561–581.
  • Kuczmarski, T. D. (2003). What is innovation? and why aren’t companies doing more of it? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 20(6):536–541.
  • Laudon, J., Laudon, K. (2018). Management information systems, managing the digital firm. London:Pearson.
  • Lill, Wald, Munck. (2020). In the field of tension between creativity and efficiency: a systematic literature review. European Journal of Innovation Management, 23(1):1460-1060.
  • Luthy, D. H. (1998). Intellectual capital and its measurement. In Proceedings of the Asian Pacific Interdisciplinary Research in Accounting Conference (APIRA), Osaka, Japan.
  • Marr, B. and Moustaghfir, K. (2005). Defining intellectual capital: a three‐dimensional approach. Management Decision. 43(9):1114–1128.
  • Masloboev, A. V., Langhans, M. (2018). A multi-agent system for management information support of regional innovations. Scientific and Technical Journal of Information Technologies, Mechanics and Optics, 18(4):630-638.
  • Miller, W. L. (2006). Innovation rules!. Research-Technology Management, 49(2), 8-14.
  • Nazari, J. A., Herremans, I. M., Manassian, A., Isaac, R. G. (2010). National intellectual capital stocks and organizational cultures: a comparison of Lebanon and Iran. In Strategic Intellectual Capital Management in Multinational Organizations: Sustainability and Successful Implications (95-118). IGI Global.
  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches: London:Pearson new international edition. Pearson Education Limited.
  • Obeidat, U., Obeidat, B., Alrowwad, A., Alshurideh, M., Masadeh, R., & Abuhashesh, M. (2021). The effect of intellectual capital on competitive advantage: The mediating role of innovation. Management Science Letters, 11(4), 1331-1344.
  • OECD, (2006). Proposed guidelines for collecting and interpreting technological innovation data, Oslo Manual.
  • OECD, (2007). 2007 Annual report on sustainable development work in the OECD, OECD.
  • Ölçer, F. and Şanal, M. (2007. İşletmelerde entelektüel sermaye yönetimi. Ç.Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 17(1):479-500.
  • Özkent, B. (2015). Adım Adım İnovasyon, Ankara: Elma Yayınevi.
  • Panori, A., Kakderi, C., Komninos, N., Fellnhofer, K., Reid, A., & Mora, L. (2020). Smart systems of innovation for smart places: Challenges in deploying digital platforms for co-creation and data-intelligence. Land Use Policy, 104631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104631
  • Rodov, I. and Leliaert, P. (2002). FiMIAM: Financial method of intangible assets measurement. Journal of Intellectual Capital 3(3): 323-336.
  • Roffe, I. (1996). Transforming graduates, transforming small firms. Journal of European Industrial Training, 20(8):3-9.
  • Roos, G., Roos, J. (1997). Measuring your company's intellectual performance. Long range planning, 30(3):413-426.
  • Saeed N., Zhaleh N., Peter N., Pejvak O., Elham Z, (2018). How collaborative innovation networks affect new product performance: Product innovation capability, process innovation capability, and absorptive capacity. Industrial Marketing Management, 73(August): 193-205.
  • Santoro, G., Vrontis, D., Thrassou, A., Dezi, L. (2018). The internet of things: building a knowledge management system for open innovation and knowledge management capacity. Technological forecasting and social change, 136 (November):347-354.
  • Schermerhorn, J. R. (2001). Introducing management. New York, NY: Wiley.
  • Schultz, T. (1961). Investment in human capital. The American Economic Review, 51(1):1-17
  • Stewart, T. A. (1991). Brainpower. Fortune, 123(3):44-60.
  • Stewart, T. A. (2000). Intellectual capital: the new wealth of organization. Crown Publishing.
  • Sullivan, P. H. (2000). Value-driven intellectual capital: how to convert intangible corporate assets into market value. New York, NY: Wiley.
  • Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L.S., Ullman, J.B. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston, MA: Pearson.
  • Terzioğlu, M. (2008). İşletmelerde yenilik yeteneği: Denizli tekstil ve hazır giyim sektörü örneği. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 17(3):377-388.
  • Trott, P. (2005). Innovation management and new product development. Boston, MA: Pearson.
  • Valéry, N. (1999). Industry gets religion. The Economist.
  • Veltri, S., Puntillo, P. (2019). On intellectual capital management as an evaluation criterion for university managers: a case study. Journal of Management and Governance, 24(1):135-167.
  • Wang, Chengqi; Mario, K. (2009). Country-of-origin effects of foreign direct investment. Management International Review, 49(2):179-198.
  • Wang, Q., & Huo, B. (2018, July). The effect of intellectual capital on supply chain integration and competitive performance. In Academy of Management Proceedings, 2018(1):18643. Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510.
  • Wang, Z., Wang, N. and Liang, H. (2014). Knowledge sharing, intellectual capital and firm performance. Management Decision, 52(2):230–258.
  • Xu, J., Wang, B. (2018). Intellectual capital, financial performance and companies’ sustainable growth: Evidence from the Korean manufacturing industry. Sustainability, 10(12):4651.
  • Yavuz, A. (2009). Ulusal inovasyon politikaları ve kamu harcamaları: çeşitli ülkeler üzerine bir karşılaştırma. The Journal of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 14(3):65-90.
  • Zambon, S. Marasca, S., Chiucchi, M. (2019). The role of intellectual capital and integrated reporting in management and governance: a performative perspective. Journal of Management and Governance, 23(2):291-297
There are 72 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Business Administration
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Osman Kunt This is me 0000-0002-8115-2393

Mustafa Sundu 0000-0003-4168-9273

Publication Date March 30, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2021

Cite

APA Kunt, O., & Sundu, M. (2021). ENTELEKTÜEL SERMAYENİN İNOVASYON YETENEĞİNE ETKİSİNDE YÖNETİM BİLİŞİM SİSTEMLERİ MEMNUNİYET DÜZEYİNİN ROLÜ. Research Journal of Business and Management, 8(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1389
AMA Kunt O, Sundu M. ENTELEKTÜEL SERMAYENİN İNOVASYON YETENEĞİNE ETKİSİNDE YÖNETİM BİLİŞİM SİSTEMLERİ MEMNUNİYET DÜZEYİNİN ROLÜ. RJBM. March 2021;8(1):1-14. doi:10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1389
Chicago Kunt, Osman, and Mustafa Sundu. “ENTELEKTÜEL SERMAYENİN İNOVASYON YETENEĞİNE ETKİSİNDE YÖNETİM BİLİŞİM SİSTEMLERİ MEMNUNİYET DÜZEYİNİN ROLÜ”. Research Journal of Business and Management 8, no. 1 (March 2021): 1-14. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1389.
EndNote Kunt O, Sundu M (March 1, 2021) ENTELEKTÜEL SERMAYENİN İNOVASYON YETENEĞİNE ETKİSİNDE YÖNETİM BİLİŞİM SİSTEMLERİ MEMNUNİYET DÜZEYİNİN ROLÜ. Research Journal of Business and Management 8 1 1–14.
IEEE O. Kunt and M. Sundu, “ENTELEKTÜEL SERMAYENİN İNOVASYON YETENEĞİNE ETKİSİNDE YÖNETİM BİLİŞİM SİSTEMLERİ MEMNUNİYET DÜZEYİNİN ROLÜ”, RJBM, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2021, doi: 10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1389.
ISNAD Kunt, Osman - Sundu, Mustafa. “ENTELEKTÜEL SERMAYENİN İNOVASYON YETENEĞİNE ETKİSİNDE YÖNETİM BİLİŞİM SİSTEMLERİ MEMNUNİYET DÜZEYİNİN ROLÜ”. Research Journal of Business and Management 8/1 (March 2021), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1389.
JAMA Kunt O, Sundu M. ENTELEKTÜEL SERMAYENİN İNOVASYON YETENEĞİNE ETKİSİNDE YÖNETİM BİLİŞİM SİSTEMLERİ MEMNUNİYET DÜZEYİNİN ROLÜ. RJBM. 2021;8:1–14.
MLA Kunt, Osman and Mustafa Sundu. “ENTELEKTÜEL SERMAYENİN İNOVASYON YETENEĞİNE ETKİSİNDE YÖNETİM BİLİŞİM SİSTEMLERİ MEMNUNİYET DÜZEYİNİN ROLÜ”. Research Journal of Business and Management, vol. 8, no. 1, 2021, pp. 1-14, doi:10.17261/Pressacademia.2021.1389.
Vancouver Kunt O, Sundu M. ENTELEKTÜEL SERMAYENİN İNOVASYON YETENEĞİNE ETKİSİNDE YÖNETİM BİLİŞİM SİSTEMLERİ MEMNUNİYET DÜZEYİNİN ROLÜ. RJBM. 2021;8(1):1-14.

Research Journal of Business and Management (RJBM) is a scientific, academic, double blind peer-reviewed, quarterly and open-access online journal. The journal publishes four issues a year. The issuing months are March, June, September and December. The publication languages of the Journal are English and Turkish. RJBM aims to provide a research source for all practitioners, policy makers, professionals and researchers working in all related areas of business, management and organizations. The editor in chief of RJBM invites all manuscripts that cover theoretical and/or applied researches on topics related to the interest areas of the Journal. RJBM publishes academic research studies only. RJBM charges no submission or publication fee.

Ethics Policy - RJBM applies the standards of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). RJBM is committed to the academic community ensuring ethics and quality of manuscripts in publications. Plagiarism is strictly forbidden and the manuscripts found to be plagiarized will not be accepted or if published will be removed from the publication. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work. Plagiarism, duplicate, data fabrication and redundant publications are forbidden. The manuscripts are subject to plagiarism check by iThenticate or similar. All manuscript submissions must provide a similarity report (up to 15% excluding quotes, bibliography, abstract, method).

Open Access - All research articles published in PressAcademia Journals are fully open access; immediately freely available to read, download and share. Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Open access is a property of individual works, not necessarily journals or publishers. Community standards, rather than copyright law, will continue to provide the mechanism for enforcement of proper attribution and responsible use of the published work, as they do now.