BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Innovation Portrait of Turkey in The Context of Firm Sizes (2002-2008 Period)

Yıl 2014, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 1 , 23 - 51 , 29.04.2014

Özden Akın , Metin Reyhanoğlu

https://doi.org/10.16953/deusbed.62064
https://izlik.org/JA48HS32DE

Öz

Abstract

Science, technology and rapid transformation in competition are an indispensable part of human development and the wealth of nations shape innovation. For surviving and shining in the business area firms must obtain a sustainable competitive advantage continuously. Innovation brings to firms to have a competitive advantage by creating new product, process, organization and market. Hence, governments support innovation efforts of firms. It is said that government support for innovation must be given to firms within by firm size. In this study, relation between innovation types and firm size were examined in the three periods of 2002-2008 years in Turkey. Despite of the significant and positive relationship between innovation types and firm size innovation is not very different in terms of firm sizes because of weak relationship. Being positive but very weak relationship between innovation expenditure and firms size also supports this finding. Also, innovation efforts of firms didn’t increase in terms of periods.

Keywords: Innovation, Firm Size, Innovation Types.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Innovation Firm Size Innovation Types

Kaynakça

  • Achilladelis, B. ve Antonakis, N. (2001). The dynamics of technological innovation: The case of the pharmaceutical industry. Research Policy, 30 (4): 535-588.
  • Acs, Z. J. ve Audretsch, D. B. (1988). Innovation in large and small firms an empirical analysis. The American Economic Review, 78 (4): 678-690.
  • Araujo, T. ve Mendes, V. R. (2009). Innovation and self- organization in a multi-agent model. Advances in Complex Systems, 12 (2): 233-253.
  • Armatlı-Köroğlu, B. (2005). Türkiye’de sanayi bölgelerinde yenilik süreçleri ve KOBİ’lerde yenilikçilik göstergeleri. Gazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 18 (4): 693-706.
  • Armbruster, H., Bikfalvi, A., Kinkel, S. ve Lay, G. (2008). Organizational innovation: The challenge of measuring non-technical innovation in large-scale surveys. Technovation, 28 (10): 644-657.
  • Arundel, A. ve Hollanders, H. (2005). Policy, indicators and targets: Measuring the impacts of innovations policies. Merit, European Commission, Enterprise Directorate-General, http://www.proinno-europe.eu/extranet/admin /uploaded_documents/EIS_2005_Policy_and_Targets.pdf (12.02.2012).
  • Becheikh, N., Landry, R. ve Amara, N. (2006). Lessons from innovation empirical studies in the manufacturing sector: A systematic review of the literature from 1993-2003. Technovation, 26 (5-6): 644-664.
  • Bryman, A. ve Cramer, D. (2009). Quantitative Data Analysis with SPSS 14, 15 & 16. New York: Routledge.
  • Camison, C. ve Monfort-Mir, V. M. (2011). Measuring innovation in tourism from the Schumpeterian and the dynamic-capabilities perspectives. Tourism Management, 33 (4): 1-14.
  • Carland, J. W., Hoy, F., Boulton, W. R. ve Carland, J. A. C. (1984). Differentiating entrepreneurs from small business owners: A conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 9 (2): 354-359.
  • Cetindamar, D. ve Ulusoy, G. (2008). Innovation performance and partnerships in manufacturing firms in Turkey, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 19 (3): 332-345.
  • Chen, C. C., Greene, P. G. ve Crick A. (1998). Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers?. Journal of Business Venturing, 13 (4): 295-316.
  • Çalıpınar, H. ve Baç, U. (2007). KOBİ’lerde İnovasyon Yapmayı Etkileyen Faktörler ve Bir Alan Araştırması. Ege Akademik Bakış, 7 (2): 445-458.
  • Daft, R. L. (1978). A Dual-Core Model of Organizational Innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 21 (2): 193-210.
  • Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34 (3): 555-590.
  • Damanpour, F. ve Wischnevsky, J. D. (2006). Research on innovation in organizations: Distinguishing innovation-generating from innovation-adopting organizations. Journal of Engineering Technology Management, 23 (4): 269-291.
  • Devi, S. ve Thangamuthu, C. (2006). A New paradigm of entrepreneurship vis-à-vis liberalization and globalization. Global Business Review, 7 (2): 259-269.
  • Eisenhardt, K. M. ve Schoonhoven, C. B. (1996). Resource-based view of strategic alliance formation: Strategic and social effects in entrepreneurial firms. Organization Science, 7 (2): 136-150.
  • Elçi, Ş. (2006). İnovasyon: Kalkınmanın ve rekabetin anahtarı. Ankara: Nova Yayınları.
  • Elçi, Ş. (2007). İnovasyon: Nedir, ne değildir?. http://www.focusinnovation.net/inovasyon/inovasyon-nedir,-ne-de%C4%9Fildir .aspx (12.02.2012).
  • Erbi, E. (2007). The limits of the national innovation systems model: The case of Turkey. Doctorate Dissertation. Graduate School of Cornell University. USA.
  • Eren, E., Alpkan, A. ve Erol, Y. (2005). Temel fonksiyonel yeteneklerin firmanın yenilik ve finansal performansına etkileri. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 4 (7): 201-224.
  • Eshlagy, A. T. ve Maatofi, A. (2011). Learning orientation, innovation and performance: Evidence from small-sized business firms in Iran. European Joournal of Social Sciences, 19 (1): 114-122.
  • European Commission (Aralık 1995). Green Paper on innovation. http://europa.eu/documents/comm/green_papers/pdf/com95_688_en.pdf (12.02.2012).
  • European Commission (30 Kasım 2011). Horizon 2020 - The framework programme for research and innovation. http://ec.europa.eu/research/ horizon2020/pdf/proposals/horizon_2020_impact_assessment_report.pdf#view=fit&pagemode=none (30.12.2013).
  • Grabowski, W., Pamukcu, T., Szczygielski, K. ve Tandogan, V. S. (2013). Does government support for private innovation matter? Firm-level evidence from Turkey and Poland. CASE Network Studies & Analyses No.458, http://www.case-research.eu/sites/default/files/publications/CNSA_2013_458.pdf (22.01.2014).
  • Haihua, C. ve Song, C. (2009). “Study on motivations, institutional form organizations of innovation cluster”. 2009 International Conference on Information Management and Industrial Engineering, 26-27 December 2009, Xi’an, China. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5369701, 4: 436-439 (12.02.2012).
  • Hansson, F., Husted, K. ve Vestergaard, J. (2005). Second generation science parks: From structural hole jockeys to social capital catalysts of the knowledge society. Technovation, 25 (9): 1039-1049.
  • Horizon 2020 - Work Programme 2014-2015. http://ec.europa.eu/ research/horizon2020/pdf/work-programmes/innovation_in_sme_draft_work_ programme.pdf (13.01.2014).
  • Hu, Y. ve Zheng, W. (2008). “Market orientation, innovation and performance of nonprofit organizations: evidence from China”. IEEE International Conference on Service Operations and Logistics, and Informatics (IEEE/SOLI) 2008, 12-15 October 2008, Beijing, China. http://ieeexplore. ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4686434, 1: 429-434 (12.02.2012).
  • Işık, N. ve Kılınç, E. C. (2012). İnovasyon sistemi yaklaşımı ve inovasyon'un coğrafyası: Türkiye örneği. Bilgi Ekonomisi ve Yönetimi Dergisi, 7 (1): 169-198.
  • İstanbul Sanayi Odası (2009). İnovasyon Yönetimi. Yayına Hazırlayan Huriye Aygören, İstanbul Sanayi Odası Kalite ve Teknoloji İhtisas Kurulu (İSO-KATEK), Yayın No: 2009/3, http://www.iso.org.tr/tr/Documents/Kobi/KolayBilgi/ 16-Inovasyon_Yonetimi.pdf (12.02.2012).
  • Kanchan, U. ve Gupta, A. (2009). “How to be an innovative organization: developing a culture of innovation in organizations”. 2009 International Conference on Computer Technology and Development, 13-15 November, Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber =5360197, 2: 502-505 (12.02.2012).
  • Karahan, M. ve Karhan, G. (2013). A case study on innovation activities in Turkey and the obstacles for innovation. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 75 (3): 129-138.
  • Kassicieh, S., Kirchhoff, B., Walsh, S. ve McWhorter, P. (2002). The role of small firms in the transfer of disruptive Technologies. Technovation, 22 (11): 667-674.
  • Kelley, D. J., Peters, L. ve O'Connor, G. C. (2009). Intra-organizational networking for innovation-based corporate entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 24 (3): 221-235.
  • Kim, C., Song, J. ve Nerkar, A. (2011). Learning and innovation: exploitation and exploration trade-offs. Journal of Business Research, 65 (8): 1189-1194.
  • Kim, Y. ve Ha, S. (2011). Innovation activities and innovation performances of SMEs: The Korean electronic parts industry 1990-1995. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 18 (1): 125-160.
  • KOBİ Yönetmeliği (2005). 19/10/2005 tarihli ve 2005/9617 sayılı Bakanlar Kurulu Kararı ile yürürlüğe konulan Küçük ve Orta Büyüklükteki İşletmelerin Tanımı, Nitelikleri ve Sınıflandırılması Hakkında Yönetmelik (Değişiklik Resmi Gazete 4 Kasım 2012/28457).
  • Lambooy, J. (2005). Innovation and knowledge: theory and regional policy. European Planning Studies, 13 (8): 1137-1152.
  • Lin, L.-H. ve Lin, W.-H. (2010). Innovation and information technology in virtual organizations: an empirical study. 2010 IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation and Technology (ICMIT), 2-5 June, Singapore. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5492912, 1188-1193 (12.02.2012).
  • Liu, X. ve Cheng, P. (2011). Is China’s Indigenous innovation strategy compatible with globalization?. East-West Center, Policy Studies 61, http://www.eastwestcenter.org/sites/default/files/private/ps061.pdf (12.02.2012).
  • Massa, S. ve Testa, S. (2008). Innovation and SMEs: Misaligned perspectives and goals among entrepreneurs, academics, and policy makers. Technovation, 28 (7): 393-407.
  • McDaniel, B. A. (2002). Entrepreneurship and innovation. New York: M. E. Sharpe.
  • McGee, J. E., Dowling, M. J. ve Megginson, W. L. (1995). Cooperative strategy and new venture performance: The role of business strategy and management experience. Strategic Management Journal 16 (7): 565-580.
  • Meesapawong, P., Rezgui, Y. ve Li, H. (2010). Perceiving societal value as the core of innovation management in public research and development organizations. 2010 IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation and Technology (ICMIT), 2-5 June, Singapore. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5492708, 310-317 (12.02.2012).
  • Meng, H. ve Wang, Y. (2009). On enterprise innovation integration based on the self-organization model. 16th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management 2009 (IE&EM '09), 21-23 October, Beijing, China. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp =&arnumber=5344475, 808-812 (12.02.2012).
  • Mueller, S. L. ve Thomas, A. S. (2001). Culture and entrepreneurial potential: A nine country study of locus of control and innovativeness. Journal of Business Venturing, 16 (1): 51-75.
  • Nooteboom, B. (1994). Innovation and diffusion in small firms: Theory and evidence. Small Business Economics, 6 (5): 327-347.
  • OECD (2005). Oslo manual guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data. 3rd Edition. OECD ve Eurostat ortak yayını, http://browse.oecdbookshop.org/oecd/pdfs/free/9205111e.pdf (12.02.2012).
  • Pallant, J. (2011). SPSS survival manual. 4th Edition. Australia: Allen & Unwin. http://ebooks.narotama.ac.id/index.php/16 (06.08.2012).
  • Papaioannou, T. (2011). Technological innovation, global justice and politics of development. Progress in Development Studies, 11 (4): 321-338.
  • Peters, T. (1991). Get innovative or get dead. California Management Review, 33 (2): 9-23.
  • Popadiuk, S. ve Choo, C. W. (2006). Innovation and knowledge creation: How are these concepts related?. International Journal of Information Management, 26 (4): 302-312.
  • Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press.
  • PRO INNO Europe (2011). http://www.proinno-europe.eu/inno-metrics/page/innovation-union-scoreboard-2011, (12.02.2012).
  • Ramadani, V. ve Gerguri, S. (2011). Theoretical framework of innovation and competitiveness and innovation program in Macedonia. European Journal of Social Sciences, 23 (2): 268-276.
  • Romijn, H. ve Albaladejo, M. (2002). Determinants of innovation capability in small electronics and software firms in southeast England. Research Policy, 31 (7): 1053-1067.
  • Rosenbusch, N., Brinckman, J. ve Bausch, A. (2011). Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing, 26 (4): 441-457.
  • Saatçioğlu, Ö. Y. ve Timurcanday Özmen, Ö. N. (2010). Analyzing the barriers encountered in innovation process through interpretive structural modelling: Evidence from Turkey. Yönetim ve Ekonomi, 17 (2): 207-225.
  • Samadi, S. (2011). Fostering creativity and innovation for organizations in a turbulent environment for long-term survival. 2011 IEEE International Summer Conference of Asia Pacific Business Innovation and Technology Management (APBITM), 10-12 July, Dalian, China. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org /stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5996295, 71-74, (12.02.2012).
  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, M.A.: Harvard University Press. http://books.google.com.tr/ books/about/The_Theory_of_Economic_Development.html?id=-OZwWcOGeOw C&redir_esc=y (12.02.2012).
  • Schumpeter, J. A. (2003). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. USA: Taylor & Francis e-Library. http://sergioberumen.files.wordpress. com/2010/08/schumpeter-joseph-a-capitalism-socialism-and-democracy.pdf (24.07.2012).
  • Sivadas, E. (2000). An examination of organizational factors influencing new product success in internal and alliance-based processes. Journal of Marketing, 64 (1): 31-49.
  • Soylu, A. (2011). "AB 2020" ve "Vizyon 2023" stratejilerinde inovasyon hedeflerinin karşılaştırılması. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 14 (2): 105-122.
  • Tang, J. ve Le, C. D. (2007). Multidimensional innovation and productivity. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 16 (7): 501-516.
  • Temel, S. ve Glassman, B. (2013). Examining university-industry collaboration as a cource of innovation in the emerging economy of Turkey. Journal International Journal of Innovation Science, 5 (1): 81-88.
  • Tödtling, F., Lehner, P. ve Kaufmann, A. (2009). Do different types of innovation rely on specific kinds of knowledge interactions. Technovation, 29 (1): 59-71.
  • Tsai, W. (2001). Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 44 (5): 996-1004.
  • TÜİK (Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu) (2002-2004-2006-2008). Yenilik Araştırması İstatistikleri Analiz Veri Kütüğü.
  • Türker, M. V. ve İnel, M. N. (2013). Is it enough to be entrepreneurship? Enhancing the ‘value added’ created by SME’in Turkey through innovation. Prodecia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 75 (3rd April): 397-406.
  • TÜSİAD-Sabancı Üniversitesi Rekabet Forumu (2006). Ulusal inovasyon girişimi: İnovasyon çerçeve raporu. C. Arıkan, G. Ulusoy ve S. Karaata (Der.) http://ref.sabanciuniv.edu/sites/ref.sabanciuniv.edu/files/inovasyon_cerceve_ raporu.pdf (22.01.2014).
  • Uzkurt, C., Kumar, R., Kimzan, H. S. ve Eminoglu, G. (2013). Role of innovation in the relationship between organizational culture and firm performance: A study of the banking sector in Turkey. European Journal of Innovation Management, 16 (1): 92-117.
  • Uzun, A. (2001). Technological innovation activities in Turkey: The case of manufacturing industry, 1995-1997. Technovation, 21 (3): 189-196.
  • Van de Ven, A. H. (1986). Central problems in the management of innovation. Management Science, 32 (5): 590-607.
  • Van Dijk, B., Hertog, R. D., Menkveld, B. ve Thurik, R. (1997). Some new evidence on the determinants of large- and small-firm innovation. Small Business Economics, 9 (4): 335-343.
  • Wan, D., Ong, H. C. ve Lee, F. (2005). Determinants of firm innovation in Singapore. Technovation, 25 (3): 261-268.
  • Weerawardena, J. ve Mavondo, F. T. (2011). Capabilities, innovation and competitive advantage. Industrial Marketing Management, 40 (8): 1220-1223.
  • Wonglimpiyarat, J. (2005). Does complexity affect the speed of innovation. Technovation, 25 (8): 865-882.
  • Yeşil, S., Çınar, Ö. ve Uzun, E. (2010). Kahramanmaraş’ta faaliyet gösteren işletmelerin yenilik faaliyetleri üzerine bir alan çalışması. Bilgi Ekonomisi ve Yönetimi Dergisi, 5 (2): 81-100.
  • Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E. ve Sapienza, H. J. (2001). Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology-based firms. Strategic Management Journal, 22 (6/7): 587-613.
  • Zahra, S. A. ve Bogner, W. C. (2000). Technology strategy and software new ventures' performance: Exploring the moderating effect of the competitive environment. Journal of Business Venturing, 15 (2): 135-173.

İşletme Büyüklükleri Bağlamında Türkiye’nin İnovasyon Portresi (2002-2008 Dönemi)

Yıl 2014, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 1 , 23 - 51 , 29.04.2014

Özden Akın , Metin Reyhanoğlu

https://doi.org/10.16953/deusbed.62064
https://izlik.org/JA48HS32DE

Öz

Öz

İnsanlığın gelişimi ve ulusların zenginliğinin vazgeçilmezi olan bilim, teknoloji ve rekabetin hızlı dönüşümü inovasyonu da şekillendirmektedir. İşletmeler hayatta kalmak ve başarılı olmak için inovasyon aracılığıyla sürekli bir rekabet avantajı sağlama yoluna gitmektedirler. İnovasyonun yeni ürün, süreç, organizasyon ve pazar yaratarak işletmelere rekabet gücü kazandırması nedeniyle, hükümetler inovasyon çabalarını desteklemektedirler. İnovasyona verilmesi gereken hükümet desteğinin, işletme büyüklükleri çerçevesinde yapılması gerektiği söylenmektedir. Bu çalışmada, Türkiye’deki 2002-2008 yıllarını kapsayan üç dönemdeki işletmelerin inovasyon çalışmalarına yönelik, inovasyon türleri ile işletme büyüklüğü arasındaki ilişkilere bakılmıştır. İnovasyon türleri ile büyüklük arasındaki anlamlı ve pozitif ilişkiye rağmen bu ilişkinin zayıf olması inovasyonun işletme büyüklükleri açısından çok farklı olmadığını göstermiştir. İnovasyon harcamaları ile işletme büyüklüğü arasındaki ilişkinin pozitif ama çok zayıf olması da bu bulguyu desteklemektedir. Ayrıca, dönemler itibariyle inovasyon çabalarının artmadığı gözlemlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler: İnovasyon, İşletme Büyüklüğü, İnovasyon Türleri.

 

Anahtar Kelimeler

İnovasyon İşletme Büyüklüğü İnovasyon Türleri

Kaynakça

  • Achilladelis, B. ve Antonakis, N. (2001). The dynamics of technological innovation: The case of the pharmaceutical industry. Research Policy, 30 (4): 535-588.
  • Acs, Z. J. ve Audretsch, D. B. (1988). Innovation in large and small firms an empirical analysis. The American Economic Review, 78 (4): 678-690.
  • Araujo, T. ve Mendes, V. R. (2009). Innovation and self- organization in a multi-agent model. Advances in Complex Systems, 12 (2): 233-253.
  • Armatlı-Köroğlu, B. (2005). Türkiye’de sanayi bölgelerinde yenilik süreçleri ve KOBİ’lerde yenilikçilik göstergeleri. Gazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 18 (4): 693-706.
  • Armbruster, H., Bikfalvi, A., Kinkel, S. ve Lay, G. (2008). Organizational innovation: The challenge of measuring non-technical innovation in large-scale surveys. Technovation, 28 (10): 644-657.
  • Arundel, A. ve Hollanders, H. (2005). Policy, indicators and targets: Measuring the impacts of innovations policies. Merit, European Commission, Enterprise Directorate-General, http://www.proinno-europe.eu/extranet/admin /uploaded_documents/EIS_2005_Policy_and_Targets.pdf (12.02.2012).
  • Becheikh, N., Landry, R. ve Amara, N. (2006). Lessons from innovation empirical studies in the manufacturing sector: A systematic review of the literature from 1993-2003. Technovation, 26 (5-6): 644-664.
  • Bryman, A. ve Cramer, D. (2009). Quantitative Data Analysis with SPSS 14, 15 & 16. New York: Routledge.
  • Camison, C. ve Monfort-Mir, V. M. (2011). Measuring innovation in tourism from the Schumpeterian and the dynamic-capabilities perspectives. Tourism Management, 33 (4): 1-14.
  • Carland, J. W., Hoy, F., Boulton, W. R. ve Carland, J. A. C. (1984). Differentiating entrepreneurs from small business owners: A conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 9 (2): 354-359.
  • Cetindamar, D. ve Ulusoy, G. (2008). Innovation performance and partnerships in manufacturing firms in Turkey, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 19 (3): 332-345.
  • Chen, C. C., Greene, P. G. ve Crick A. (1998). Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers?. Journal of Business Venturing, 13 (4): 295-316.
  • Çalıpınar, H. ve Baç, U. (2007). KOBİ’lerde İnovasyon Yapmayı Etkileyen Faktörler ve Bir Alan Araştırması. Ege Akademik Bakış, 7 (2): 445-458.
  • Daft, R. L. (1978). A Dual-Core Model of Organizational Innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 21 (2): 193-210.
  • Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34 (3): 555-590.
  • Damanpour, F. ve Wischnevsky, J. D. (2006). Research on innovation in organizations: Distinguishing innovation-generating from innovation-adopting organizations. Journal of Engineering Technology Management, 23 (4): 269-291.
  • Devi, S. ve Thangamuthu, C. (2006). A New paradigm of entrepreneurship vis-à-vis liberalization and globalization. Global Business Review, 7 (2): 259-269.
  • Eisenhardt, K. M. ve Schoonhoven, C. B. (1996). Resource-based view of strategic alliance formation: Strategic and social effects in entrepreneurial firms. Organization Science, 7 (2): 136-150.
  • Elçi, Ş. (2006). İnovasyon: Kalkınmanın ve rekabetin anahtarı. Ankara: Nova Yayınları.
  • Elçi, Ş. (2007). İnovasyon: Nedir, ne değildir?. http://www.focusinnovation.net/inovasyon/inovasyon-nedir,-ne-de%C4%9Fildir .aspx (12.02.2012).
  • Erbi, E. (2007). The limits of the national innovation systems model: The case of Turkey. Doctorate Dissertation. Graduate School of Cornell University. USA.
  • Eren, E., Alpkan, A. ve Erol, Y. (2005). Temel fonksiyonel yeteneklerin firmanın yenilik ve finansal performansına etkileri. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 4 (7): 201-224.
  • Eshlagy, A. T. ve Maatofi, A. (2011). Learning orientation, innovation and performance: Evidence from small-sized business firms in Iran. European Joournal of Social Sciences, 19 (1): 114-122.
  • European Commission (Aralık 1995). Green Paper on innovation. http://europa.eu/documents/comm/green_papers/pdf/com95_688_en.pdf (12.02.2012).
  • European Commission (30 Kasım 2011). Horizon 2020 - The framework programme for research and innovation. http://ec.europa.eu/research/ horizon2020/pdf/proposals/horizon_2020_impact_assessment_report.pdf#view=fit&pagemode=none (30.12.2013).
  • Grabowski, W., Pamukcu, T., Szczygielski, K. ve Tandogan, V. S. (2013). Does government support for private innovation matter? Firm-level evidence from Turkey and Poland. CASE Network Studies & Analyses No.458, http://www.case-research.eu/sites/default/files/publications/CNSA_2013_458.pdf (22.01.2014).
  • Haihua, C. ve Song, C. (2009). “Study on motivations, institutional form organizations of innovation cluster”. 2009 International Conference on Information Management and Industrial Engineering, 26-27 December 2009, Xi’an, China. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5369701, 4: 436-439 (12.02.2012).
  • Hansson, F., Husted, K. ve Vestergaard, J. (2005). Second generation science parks: From structural hole jockeys to social capital catalysts of the knowledge society. Technovation, 25 (9): 1039-1049.
  • Horizon 2020 - Work Programme 2014-2015. http://ec.europa.eu/ research/horizon2020/pdf/work-programmes/innovation_in_sme_draft_work_ programme.pdf (13.01.2014).
  • Hu, Y. ve Zheng, W. (2008). “Market orientation, innovation and performance of nonprofit organizations: evidence from China”. IEEE International Conference on Service Operations and Logistics, and Informatics (IEEE/SOLI) 2008, 12-15 October 2008, Beijing, China. http://ieeexplore. ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4686434, 1: 429-434 (12.02.2012).
  • Işık, N. ve Kılınç, E. C. (2012). İnovasyon sistemi yaklaşımı ve inovasyon'un coğrafyası: Türkiye örneği. Bilgi Ekonomisi ve Yönetimi Dergisi, 7 (1): 169-198.
  • İstanbul Sanayi Odası (2009). İnovasyon Yönetimi. Yayına Hazırlayan Huriye Aygören, İstanbul Sanayi Odası Kalite ve Teknoloji İhtisas Kurulu (İSO-KATEK), Yayın No: 2009/3, http://www.iso.org.tr/tr/Documents/Kobi/KolayBilgi/ 16-Inovasyon_Yonetimi.pdf (12.02.2012).
  • Kanchan, U. ve Gupta, A. (2009). “How to be an innovative organization: developing a culture of innovation in organizations”. 2009 International Conference on Computer Technology and Development, 13-15 November, Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber =5360197, 2: 502-505 (12.02.2012).
  • Karahan, M. ve Karhan, G. (2013). A case study on innovation activities in Turkey and the obstacles for innovation. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 75 (3): 129-138.
  • Kassicieh, S., Kirchhoff, B., Walsh, S. ve McWhorter, P. (2002). The role of small firms in the transfer of disruptive Technologies. Technovation, 22 (11): 667-674.
  • Kelley, D. J., Peters, L. ve O'Connor, G. C. (2009). Intra-organizational networking for innovation-based corporate entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 24 (3): 221-235.
  • Kim, C., Song, J. ve Nerkar, A. (2011). Learning and innovation: exploitation and exploration trade-offs. Journal of Business Research, 65 (8): 1189-1194.
  • Kim, Y. ve Ha, S. (2011). Innovation activities and innovation performances of SMEs: The Korean electronic parts industry 1990-1995. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 18 (1): 125-160.
  • KOBİ Yönetmeliği (2005). 19/10/2005 tarihli ve 2005/9617 sayılı Bakanlar Kurulu Kararı ile yürürlüğe konulan Küçük ve Orta Büyüklükteki İşletmelerin Tanımı, Nitelikleri ve Sınıflandırılması Hakkında Yönetmelik (Değişiklik Resmi Gazete 4 Kasım 2012/28457).
  • Lambooy, J. (2005). Innovation and knowledge: theory and regional policy. European Planning Studies, 13 (8): 1137-1152.
  • Lin, L.-H. ve Lin, W.-H. (2010). Innovation and information technology in virtual organizations: an empirical study. 2010 IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation and Technology (ICMIT), 2-5 June, Singapore. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5492912, 1188-1193 (12.02.2012).
  • Liu, X. ve Cheng, P. (2011). Is China’s Indigenous innovation strategy compatible with globalization?. East-West Center, Policy Studies 61, http://www.eastwestcenter.org/sites/default/files/private/ps061.pdf (12.02.2012).
  • Massa, S. ve Testa, S. (2008). Innovation and SMEs: Misaligned perspectives and goals among entrepreneurs, academics, and policy makers. Technovation, 28 (7): 393-407.
  • McDaniel, B. A. (2002). Entrepreneurship and innovation. New York: M. E. Sharpe.
  • McGee, J. E., Dowling, M. J. ve Megginson, W. L. (1995). Cooperative strategy and new venture performance: The role of business strategy and management experience. Strategic Management Journal 16 (7): 565-580.
  • Meesapawong, P., Rezgui, Y. ve Li, H. (2010). Perceiving societal value as the core of innovation management in public research and development organizations. 2010 IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation and Technology (ICMIT), 2-5 June, Singapore. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5492708, 310-317 (12.02.2012).
  • Meng, H. ve Wang, Y. (2009). On enterprise innovation integration based on the self-organization model. 16th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management 2009 (IE&EM '09), 21-23 October, Beijing, China. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp =&arnumber=5344475, 808-812 (12.02.2012).
  • Mueller, S. L. ve Thomas, A. S. (2001). Culture and entrepreneurial potential: A nine country study of locus of control and innovativeness. Journal of Business Venturing, 16 (1): 51-75.
  • Nooteboom, B. (1994). Innovation and diffusion in small firms: Theory and evidence. Small Business Economics, 6 (5): 327-347.
  • OECD (2005). Oslo manual guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data. 3rd Edition. OECD ve Eurostat ortak yayını, http://browse.oecdbookshop.org/oecd/pdfs/free/9205111e.pdf (12.02.2012).
  • Pallant, J. (2011). SPSS survival manual. 4th Edition. Australia: Allen & Unwin. http://ebooks.narotama.ac.id/index.php/16 (06.08.2012).
  • Papaioannou, T. (2011). Technological innovation, global justice and politics of development. Progress in Development Studies, 11 (4): 321-338.
  • Peters, T. (1991). Get innovative or get dead. California Management Review, 33 (2): 9-23.
  • Popadiuk, S. ve Choo, C. W. (2006). Innovation and knowledge creation: How are these concepts related?. International Journal of Information Management, 26 (4): 302-312.
  • Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press.
  • PRO INNO Europe (2011). http://www.proinno-europe.eu/inno-metrics/page/innovation-union-scoreboard-2011, (12.02.2012).
  • Ramadani, V. ve Gerguri, S. (2011). Theoretical framework of innovation and competitiveness and innovation program in Macedonia. European Journal of Social Sciences, 23 (2): 268-276.
  • Romijn, H. ve Albaladejo, M. (2002). Determinants of innovation capability in small electronics and software firms in southeast England. Research Policy, 31 (7): 1053-1067.
  • Rosenbusch, N., Brinckman, J. ve Bausch, A. (2011). Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing, 26 (4): 441-457.
  • Saatçioğlu, Ö. Y. ve Timurcanday Özmen, Ö. N. (2010). Analyzing the barriers encountered in innovation process through interpretive structural modelling: Evidence from Turkey. Yönetim ve Ekonomi, 17 (2): 207-225.
  • Samadi, S. (2011). Fostering creativity and innovation for organizations in a turbulent environment for long-term survival. 2011 IEEE International Summer Conference of Asia Pacific Business Innovation and Technology Management (APBITM), 10-12 July, Dalian, China. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org /stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5996295, 71-74, (12.02.2012).
  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, M.A.: Harvard University Press. http://books.google.com.tr/ books/about/The_Theory_of_Economic_Development.html?id=-OZwWcOGeOw C&redir_esc=y (12.02.2012).
  • Schumpeter, J. A. (2003). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. USA: Taylor & Francis e-Library. http://sergioberumen.files.wordpress. com/2010/08/schumpeter-joseph-a-capitalism-socialism-and-democracy.pdf (24.07.2012).
  • Sivadas, E. (2000). An examination of organizational factors influencing new product success in internal and alliance-based processes. Journal of Marketing, 64 (1): 31-49.
  • Soylu, A. (2011). "AB 2020" ve "Vizyon 2023" stratejilerinde inovasyon hedeflerinin karşılaştırılması. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 14 (2): 105-122.
  • Tang, J. ve Le, C. D. (2007). Multidimensional innovation and productivity. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 16 (7): 501-516.
  • Temel, S. ve Glassman, B. (2013). Examining university-industry collaboration as a cource of innovation in the emerging economy of Turkey. Journal International Journal of Innovation Science, 5 (1): 81-88.
  • Tödtling, F., Lehner, P. ve Kaufmann, A. (2009). Do different types of innovation rely on specific kinds of knowledge interactions. Technovation, 29 (1): 59-71.
  • Tsai, W. (2001). Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 44 (5): 996-1004.
  • TÜİK (Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu) (2002-2004-2006-2008). Yenilik Araştırması İstatistikleri Analiz Veri Kütüğü.
  • Türker, M. V. ve İnel, M. N. (2013). Is it enough to be entrepreneurship? Enhancing the ‘value added’ created by SME’in Turkey through innovation. Prodecia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 75 (3rd April): 397-406.
  • TÜSİAD-Sabancı Üniversitesi Rekabet Forumu (2006). Ulusal inovasyon girişimi: İnovasyon çerçeve raporu. C. Arıkan, G. Ulusoy ve S. Karaata (Der.) http://ref.sabanciuniv.edu/sites/ref.sabanciuniv.edu/files/inovasyon_cerceve_ raporu.pdf (22.01.2014).
  • Uzkurt, C., Kumar, R., Kimzan, H. S. ve Eminoglu, G. (2013). Role of innovation in the relationship between organizational culture and firm performance: A study of the banking sector in Turkey. European Journal of Innovation Management, 16 (1): 92-117.
  • Uzun, A. (2001). Technological innovation activities in Turkey: The case of manufacturing industry, 1995-1997. Technovation, 21 (3): 189-196.
  • Van de Ven, A. H. (1986). Central problems in the management of innovation. Management Science, 32 (5): 590-607.
  • Van Dijk, B., Hertog, R. D., Menkveld, B. ve Thurik, R. (1997). Some new evidence on the determinants of large- and small-firm innovation. Small Business Economics, 9 (4): 335-343.
  • Wan, D., Ong, H. C. ve Lee, F. (2005). Determinants of firm innovation in Singapore. Technovation, 25 (3): 261-268.
  • Weerawardena, J. ve Mavondo, F. T. (2011). Capabilities, innovation and competitive advantage. Industrial Marketing Management, 40 (8): 1220-1223.
  • Wonglimpiyarat, J. (2005). Does complexity affect the speed of innovation. Technovation, 25 (8): 865-882.
  • Yeşil, S., Çınar, Ö. ve Uzun, E. (2010). Kahramanmaraş’ta faaliyet gösteren işletmelerin yenilik faaliyetleri üzerine bir alan çalışması. Bilgi Ekonomisi ve Yönetimi Dergisi, 5 (2): 81-100.
  • Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E. ve Sapienza, H. J. (2001). Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology-based firms. Strategic Management Journal, 22 (6/7): 587-613.
  • Zahra, S. A. ve Bogner, W. C. (2000). Technology strategy and software new ventures' performance: Exploring the moderating effect of the competitive environment. Journal of Business Venturing, 15 (2): 135-173.
Toplam 82 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Yazarlar

Özden Akın

Metin Reyhanoğlu

Gönderilme Tarihi 21 Ocak 2015
Yayımlanma Tarihi 29 Nisan 2014
DOI https://doi.org/10.16953/deusbed.62064
IZ https://izlik.org/JA48HS32DE
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2014 Cilt: 16 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Akın, Ö., & Reyhanoğlu, M. (2014). İşletme Büyüklükleri Bağlamında Türkiye’nin İnovasyon Portresi (2002-2008 Dönemi). Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 16(1), 23-51. https://doi.org/10.16953/deusbed.62064

Cited By

Tekstil İşletmelerinde İnovasyon Uygulamalarına Yönelik Bir Araştırma: İstanbul Sanayi Odası Örneği
Girişimcilik İnovasyon ve Pazarlama Araştırmaları Dergisi
Yusuf Esmer
https://doi.org/10.31006/gipad.631979
THE ROLE AND EFFECT OF HUMAN CAPITAL AND R&D ON THE SALES OF NEW PRODUCT: A STUDY ON THE INNOVATION PERFORMANCE OF THE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY OF KEIHANSHIN REGION IN JAPAN
Uluslararası Akademik Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi
Bekir Sami OGUZTURK
https://doi.org/10.51947/yonbil.939220
İŞLETME VE İKTİSAT BÖLÜMÜ ÖĞRENCİLERİNİN GİRİŞİMCİLİK EĞİLİMLERİNİN VE İNOVASYON BECERİLERİNİN İNCELENMESİ: KIRŞEHİR AHİ EVRAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ ÖRNEĞİ
İktisadi ve İdari Yaklaşımlar Dergisi
Muhammed MARUF
https://doi.org/10.47138/jeaa.815155
İşletme Performansı Üzerinde Sosyal Medya Pazarlaması ve İnovasyonun Etkisinin Teknoloji Kabul Modeli ile Birlikte İncelenmesi
Sosyoekonomi
https://doi.org/10.17233/sosyoekonomi.2022.04.07

Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Aile Yılı Özel Sayısı Çağrısı
Sayı Editörü
Prof. Dr. NEBİYE KONUK KANDEMİR

Sevgili Araştırmacılar ve Değerli Yazarlar,
Aile, toplumun temel yapı taşıdır ve bireylerin gelişimi ile sosyal yaşamın şekillenmesinde kritik bir rol oynamaktadır. Aile yapıları ve dinamikleri, tarihsel, kültürel ve toplumsal faktörlerle şekillenirken, bu faktörlerin aile içerisinde yaşanan sorunları, ilişkileri ve güç dengelerini nasıl etkilediği büyük bir önem taşımaktadır. 2025 yılı "Aile Yılı" olarak ilan edilmesi, aile olgusunun daha geniş bir perspektiften ele alınmasını ve bu konudaki farkındalığın artırılmasını hedeflemektedir.
Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, "Cilt: 28 Sayı: Özel Sayı" olarak 2026 yılında yayımlanacak olan Aile Yılı Özel Sayısı'na yönelik makale çağrısında bulunmaktadır. Bu özel sayı, aile yapılarını, rollerini ve dinamiklerini inceleyen çalışmalara ev sahipliği yapmayı hedeflemektedir.
Aile ile ilgili çalışmalara olan ihtiyaç, yalnızca bireysel düzeyde değil, toplumsal düzeyde de açıktır. Son yıllarda, aile içi ilişkilerin sağlıklı bir şekilde sürdürülmesi, toplumsal cinsiyet eşitliği, kadın hakları, çocuk sağlığı ve eğitim gibi konular ön plana çıkmış, bu konularda yapılacak bilimsel araştırmaların önemi artmıştır. Aile Yılı Özel Sayısı'nın hazırlanması, bu kritik meselelerin sistematik bir biçimde incelenmesine ve topluma duyurulmasına olanak sağlayacaktır.
Bu özel sayı, aile dinamiklerini, ilişkilerini ve sorunlarını derinlemesine inceleyen, özgün ve yenilikçi çalışmaları bir araya getirerek, alanında önemli bir kaynak oluşturmayı hedeflemektedir. Ayrıca, uzmanların görüşleri ve çeşitli disiplinlerden gelen katkılar sayesinde, aile kavramına dair güncel bakış açıları sunulacak, toplumsal fayda sağlanacaktır.
Aşağıda, özel sayıda kabul edilebilecek (ama bunlarla sınırlı olmayan) güncellenmiş konular listesi yer almaktadır:

• Aile Yapıları ve Değişimi
• Geleneksel ve Modern Aile Rolleri
• Aile İçi İletişim ve İlişkiler
• Ailedeki Psiko-Sosyal Dinamikler
• Aile İlişkilerinde Kültürel Farklılıklar
• Evlilik ve Boşanma Dinamikleri
• Aile ve Çocuk Gelişimi
• Ebeveynlik Stilleri ve Çocuk Üzerindeki Etkileri
• Aile Ekonomisi ve Sosyal Politika
• Aileyi Etkileyen Toplumsal Değişimler
• Aile ve Eğitim İlişkisi
• Ailede Şiddet ve Koruma Mekanizmaları
• Aile İçi Sağlık ve Refah
• Kadınların Aile İçindeki Rolü ve Değişen Dinamikleri
• Kadın Hakları ve Aile İlişkileri
• Kadının Aile Üyeleriyle İlişkileri ve Güç Dinamikleri
• Ailede Cinsiyet Eşitliği
İki bağımsız anonim hakem tarafından değerlendirmeden geçecek makaleler, kabul edilmesi halinde, Aralık 2026'da yayımlanacak özel sayımızda yer alacaktır. Gelecek sayıların dolmuş olması ve süreçte makale yoğunluğunun bulunması nedeniyle dergimiz, özel sayı dışında makale kabulüne kapalıdır. Özel sayı dışında dergimize gönderilen makaleler iade edilecektir.
Saygılarımızla