KOBİ’LERDE BİLGİ TEKNOLOJİSİ KULLANIMININ, REKABET GÜCÜ, YENİLİKÇİLİK, GİRİŞİMCİLİK VE PAZARLAMA KAPASİTESİYLE İLİŞKİLERİ: OTOMOTİV SEKTÖRÜNDE BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Öz

Çalışmanın amacı, otomotiv sektöründe faaliyet gösteren KOBİ’lerin bilgi teknolojisi (BT) kullanım düzeyini araştırmak ve bu bağlamda BT ile yenilikçilik, pazarlama kapasitesi, rekabet gücü ve girişimcilik kapasitesi arasındaki ilişkileri ortaya çıkarmaktır. Araştırma, Konya’da otomotiv yedek parça imalatı yapan 81 KOBİ’de gerçekleştirilmiştir. Veriler SPSS 10.0 programında değerlendirilmiş; tanımlayıcı istatistikler, t testi, tek yönlü varyans analizi, regresyon, korelâsyon analizleri uygulanmıştır. Araştırmanın sonucunda, KOBİ’lerin BT kullanım düzeyi ile yenilikçilik, rekabet gücü ve pazarlama kapasitesi arasında pozitif ve anlamlı bir ilişki bulunmuştur. Elde edilen bulgulara göre; pazarlama kapasitesi ve yenilikçilik, girişimcilik kapasitesini pozitif ve anlamlı biçimde etkilemektedir. BT kullanımı, ihracat yapıp yapmamaya, işletme büyüklüğüne ve işletme yöneticisinin/sahibinin öğrenim düzeyine göre anlamlı farklılık göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bilgi Teknolojisi
• Otomotiv Sektörü
• Rekabet Gücü
• Yenilikçilik
• Pazarlama Kapasitesi
• Girişimcilik Kapasitesi

Kobi’lerde Bilgi Teknolojisi Kullanımının Rekabet Gücü Yenilikçilik Girişimcilik Ve Pazarlama Kapasitesiyle ilişkileri: Otomotiv Sektöründe Bir Araştırma

Öz

The aim of this study is to research the level of information technology of SMEs at Automotive Sector and finding whether they have relations with innovativeness marketing capacity entrepreneurial intensity and competition power level or not This research has been carried out by researching with 81 of SMEs the province of Konya Automotive Spare Part Manufacturing Sector’s Industry The data were evaluated by the packet programme of SPSS 10 0; the descriptive statistics t test anova regression correlation analyses were carried out The results of this study indicate that a positive relationship was found between the level of information technology use of SMEs competetive power ınnovation the marketing capacity entrepreneurial intensity The marketing capacity and innovation a significant positive effect on entrepreneurial capacity Besides the level of information technology use a significant differences were show that between whether export or not the size of company and the level of education of business manager or owner Key Words: Information Technology The Automotive Sector Competetive Power Innovation The Marketing Capacity Entrepreneurial Intensity

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Information Technology
• The Automotive Sector
• Competetive Power
• Innovation
• The Marketing Capacity
• Entrepreneurial Intensity

Kaynakça

1. ADAMIDES E. D. ve KARACAPILIDIS N. (2006), “Information Technology Support For The Knowledge And Social Processes of Innovation Management”, Technovation, (26):50–59.
2. ADETAYO, J.O., SANNI, S.A. ve ILORI, M.O. (1999), “The Impact of Information Technology on Product Marketing: A Case Study of A Multinational Company in Nigeria”, Technovation, (19):691–699.
3. BHUIAN, Shahid N., MENGUC, B. ve BELL, S. J., (2005), “Just Entrepreneurial Enouh: The Moderating Effect of Entrepreneurship on The Relationship Between Market Orientation and Performance”, Journal of Business Research, (58):9- 17.
4. BYRD, T. A. ve TURNER, D. E., (2001), “An Exploratory Examination of The Relationship Between Flexible IT Infrastructure and Competitive Advantage”, Information & Management, (39):41-52.
5. CARBONELL, P. ve RODRIGUEZ, A. I., (2006), “The Impact of Market Characteristics and Innovation Speed on Perceptions of Positional Advantage and New Product Performance”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, (23):1–12.
6. CHEN, Y., LIANG, L., YANG, F., ZHU, J., (2006), “Evaluation of Information Technology Investment: A Data Envelopment Analysis Approach”, Computers& Operations Research, (32):1368–1378.
7. CLEMONS, E.K. ve ROW, M. (1991), “Sustaining IT Advantage: The Role of Structural Differences”, MIS Quartely, (15):3: 275–292.
8. DAVIS F., (1989), “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology”, MIS Q, Maintenance Information System for Quality, (13):3: 319–42.

9. DAY, J., D., AFTAB, A. ve REYNOLDS, P. L. (1998), “Relationship Marketing: Its Key Role in Entrepreneurship”, Long Range Planning, (31):6:828–837.
10. DEARDEN, J. A., LILIEN, G. L., YOON, E. (1999), “Marketing and Production Capacity Strategy For Non-Differentiated Products:Winning and Losing At The Capacity Cycle Game”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, (16):57– 74.
11. DIERCKX, M. A. F. ve STROEKEN, J. H. M. (1999), “Information Technology and Innovation in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, (60):149–166.
12. FERNELEY, E. ve BELL F., (2005), “Using Bricolage to Integrate Business and Information Technology Innovation in SMEs”, Technovation, www.sciencedirect.com., (erişim. 01.02.2006).
13. HURMELINNA, P., KYLAHEIKO, K., JAUHIAINEN, T., (2005), “The Janus face of The Appropriability Regime in The Protection Of Innovations: Theoretical Re-Appraisal And Empirical Analysis”, Technovation, www.sciencedirect., (erişim: 10.02.2006). http://www.igeme.org.tr. (erişim. 01.02.2006). http://www.taysad.org.tr. (erişim. 01.02.2006). http://www.insankaynaklari.com. (erişim. 01.02.2006).
14. JANSON, M. A. ve WRYCZA, S., (1999), “Information Technology and Entrepreneurship: Three Cases from Poland”, International Journal of Information Management (19):351–367.
15. JØRGENSEN, S., KORT, P. M. ve DOCKNER, E. J., (2005), “Venture Capital Financed Investments in Intellectual Capital”, Journal of Economic Dynamics&Control, www.sciencedirect.com, (erişim. 01.02.2006).
16. KAISER, H. F., RICE, J., (1974), “Little Jiffy, Mark ΙV”, Educational and Psychological Measurement, (34):111–117.
17. KALAYCI, C., (2006), “Ticareti Kolaylaştırma Çalışmaları ve Etkileri”, http://www.dtm.gov.tr/ead/DTDERGI/nisan2005/Cemalettin.htm, (erişim:02.01.2006).
18. LENGNICK-HALLA, C. A., LENGNICK-HALLA, M. L. ABDINNOUR- HELMB., S., (2004), “The Role of Social and Intellectual Capital in Achieving Competitive Advantage Through Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems”, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management Jet-M, (21):307–330.
19. LORDKIPANIDZE, M., BREZET, H. ve BACKMAN, M., (2005), “The Entrepreneurship Factor in Sustainable Tourism”, Journal of Cleaner Production, (13):8:787–799.
20. MORGAN, L. O. ve DANIELS R. L. (2001), “Integrating Product Mix And Technology Adoption Decisions: A Portfolio Approach For Evaluating Advanced Technologies in The Automobile Industry”, Journal of Operations Management, (19):219–238.
21. MAY, A., CARTER, C., (2001), “A Case Study of Virtual Team Working in The European Automotive Industry”, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics , (27):3:171-186.
22. NASSIMBENI, G., (2001), “Technology, Innovation Capacity, and The Export Attitude of Small Manufacturing Firms: A Logitrtobit Model”, Research Policy,(30):245–262.
23. PAPASTATHOPOULOU, P., AVLONITIS G.J. ve PANAGOPOULOS N.G., (2005), “Intraorganizational Information and Communication Technology Diffusion: Implications for Industrial Sellers and Buyers”, Industrial Marketing Management,www.sciencedirect.com. (erişim. 10.02.2006).
24. PALVIA, Prashant C., (1997), “Developing A Model of The Global and Strategic Impact of Information Technology”, Information and Management, (32):229– 244.
25. PREMKUMAR, G. ve ROBERTS, M., (1999), “Adoption of New Information Technologies in Rural Small Businesses”, Omega, International Journal of Management Science, (27):467–484.
26. RASTOGI, P.N., (2000), “Knowledge Management and Intellectual Capital- The New Virtuous Reality of Competitiveness”, Human Systems Management, (19):1:2-10.
27. RITTER, T. ve GEMUNDEN, H. G., (2004), “The Impact of A Company’s Business Strategy on Its Technological Competence, Network Competence and Innovation Success”, Journal of Business Research, (57):548– 556.
28. SANCHEZ, P., CHAMINADE, C. ve OLEA, M. (2000), “Management of Intangibles An Attempt To Built A Theory”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, (1):4:312- 327.
29. SARIHAN, H. İ., (1998), Rekabette Başarının Yolu Teknoloji Yönetimi, Beta Basım Yayın, İstanbul.
30. SOLLEIRO, J. L. ve CASTAŇON, R. (2005), “Competitiveness And Innovation Systems: The Challenges for Mexico’s Insertion in The Global Context”, Technovation, (25):1059–1070.
31. SOYUER, H., ve VENTURA, K., (2005), “KOBİ’lerin E-iş Uygulamaları: Türk-Avrupa Birliği KOBİ’lerinin Karşılaştırılması”, 2. KOBİ’ler ve Verimlilik Kongresi”AB KOBİ’leri ile İşbirliği”, Aralık, İstanbul, s.19-27.
32. TORKZADEHA, G. ve DOLL, W.J. (1999), “The Development of A Tool for Measuring The Perceived Impact of Information Technology on Work”, Omega, International Journal Management Science, (27):327–339.
33. TUUNAINEN, V. K., (1998), “Opportunities of Effective Integration of EDI For Small Businesses in The Automotive Industry”, Information & Management, (34):6: 361–375.
34. ULLRICH, D., (1998), “Intellectual Capital=ComnetenceXCommitment”, Sloan Management Review, (39):15-26.
35. WEERAWARDENA, J., (2003), “The Role Of Marketing Capability in Innovation-Based Competitive Strategy”, Journal Of Strategıc Marketing, (11):15–35.
36. WEERAWARDENA, J. ve O’CASS, A., (2004), “Exploring The Characteristics Of The Market-Driven Firms And Antecedents to Sustained Competitive Advantage”, Industrial Marketing Management, (33):419– 428.
37. VELOSO, F. ve FIXSON, S., (2001), “Make–Buy Decisions in The Auto Industry: New Perspectives on The Role of The Supplier As An Innovator”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, (67):239–257.
38. YILDIRIM, F. K. ve GÖKŞEN, Y., (2005), “Bilgi Teknolojilerinin Türkiye’deki KOBİ’lerin Rekabet Gücü Üzerindeki Rolünü Belirlemeye Yönelik Bir Saha Çalışması”, 2. KOBİ’ler ve Verimlilik Kongresi”AB KOBİ’leri ile İşbirliği”, Aralık, İstanbul, s.10-18.