Examining The Use Of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in Armed Organization As an Innovation: A Descriptive Analysis Study

Öz

Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, innovation has become a crucial source of competitive advantage. The focus of this process is to incorporate the breakthroughs in technology into organizations. Thus, technological innovation improves the qualifications and competencies of organizations. Developing technologies and the capabilities offered make it also necessary for armed organizations to be in a transformation process, just like other organizations. At this point, considering that the framework of qualitative superiority is to move from platform-centred operations to network-centred operations, unmanned aerial vehicles are a technological innovation that provides that transition. Since the changes in the organizational environment and the difficulties around them cause organizational and doctrinal developments, it will be novel to investigate the use of UAVs as a technological innovation in armed organizations specific to administrative science. Therefore, the aim of this study is to describe how the armed organization, which is affected by changing environmental conditions, interacts with unmanned aerial vehicles as a technological innovation in their natural environment. In accordance with the purpose of the research, the descriptive analysis method was run. According to the descriptive analysis, the purposes of use, the skills, benefits, and usage environments of UAVs as a technological innovation have been tried to be revealed.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Strategic Management
• Technological Innovation
• Organization

Bir İnovasyon Olarak İnsansız Hava Araçlarının Silahlı Organizasyondaki Kullanımının İncelenmesi: Bir Betimsel Analiz Çalışması

Öz

Sanayi devriminin başlangıcından itibaren inovasyon rekabet avantajının önemli bir kaynağı haline gelmiştir. Bu sürecin odağında organizasyonların teknolojik atılımları bünyesine kazandırmak bulunmaktadır. Böylece teknolojik inovasyon organizasyonların niteliklerini ve yetkinliklerini geliştirmektedir. Gelişen teknolojiler ve sunduğu kabiliyetler diğer organizasyonlar da olduğu gibi silahlı organizasyonların da bir dönüşüm süreci içinde olmasını gerekli kılmaktadır. Bu noktada niteliksel üstünlüğün çerçevesinin platform merkezli operasyonlardan ağ merkezli operasyonlara geçmek olduğu göz önünde bulundurulduğunda insansız hava araçları anılan geçişi sağlayan teknolojik bir inovasyondur. Organizasyon çevresinde yaşanan değişimler ve ortaya çıkan zorluklar örgütsel ve doktrinsel gelişmelere neden olduğundan bir teknolojik inovasyon olarak insansız hava araçlarının silahlı organizasyonda kullanımının yönetim bilimi özelinde araştırılması özgün bir çalışma olacaktır. Dolayısıyla bu çalışmanın amacı; değişen çevre şartlarından etkilenen silahlı organizasyonun bir teknolojik inovasyon olarak insansız hava araçları ile doğal ortamlarında nasıl etkileşime girdiğini betimlemektir. Araştırmanın amacına uygun olarak betimsel analiz yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Betimsel analize göre bir teknolojik inovasyon olarak İHA’ların kullanım amaçları, kazandırdığı beceriler, faydalar ve kullanım ortamları ortaya konulmaya çalışılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Stratejik Yönetim
• Teknolojik İnovasyon
• Organizasyon

Kaynakça

1. Akin, S. M., ve Sütütemiz, N. (2014). Nöropazarlama ve Uygulayicilarin Perspektifiyle Etik Yönü. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 2(1), 67-83.
2. Albani, D., Nardi, D., ve Trianni, V. (2017, 24-28 September). Field coverage and weed mapping by UAV swarms. In 2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (pp. 4319-4325). Vancouver University, Canada, Ieee. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=8206296, Erişim tarihi: 09 Aralık 2021.
3. Alvi, M. H. (2016). A manual for selecting sampling techniques in research. University of Karachi, Iqra University. MPRA Paper No. 70218. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/70218/1/MPRA_paper_70218.pdf, Erişim tarihi: 07 Mayıs 2021.
4. Amusa, O. I., Iyoro, A. O., ve Olabisi, A. F. (2013). Work environments and job performance of librarians in the public universities in Southwest Nigeria. International Journal of Library and Information Science, 5(11), 457-461.
5. Andreski, S. (1971). Military Organization and Society. Los Angeles: University of California Press, Berkeley.
6. Ayyildiz, A. Y., ve Dinler, S. (2020). Müşteri sadakati yaratmada sadakat programlarının otel işletmelerinde uygulanması. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 8(2), 1193-1220.
7. Banerjee, C. (2014). The human factor: The fundamental driver of innovation. Releasing the global innovation index. file:///C:/Users/saydogan/Downloads/wipo_pub_gii_2014-intro2.pdf, Erişim tarihi: 27 Aralık 2021.
8. Baregheh, A., Rowley, J., ve Sambrook, S. (2009). Towards a multidisciplinary definition of innovation. Management decision, 47(8), 1323-1362.

9. Bae, Y., ve Chang, H. (2012). Efficiency and effectiveness between open and closed innovation: empirical evidence in South Korean manufacturers. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 24(10), 967-980.
10. Başkale, H. (2016). Nitel araştırmalarda geçerlik, güvenirlik ve örneklem büyüklüğünün belirlenmesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Elektronik Dergisi. 9(1), 23-28.
11. Bracken P. (2021). Military Organization and Society. https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/society-military-organization-and, Erişim tarihi: 27 Kasım 2021.
12. Bryant, S. F., ve Harrison, A. (2019). Finding Ender: Exploring the Intersections of Creativity, Innovation, and Talent Management in the US Armed Forces. National Defense University Press.
13. https://www.bonfireteam.com/media/1doj1rig/strategic-perspectives-31-bryant-harrison.pdf, Erişim tarihi: 27 Kasım 2021. Bessant, J., Lamming, R., Noke, H., ve Phillips, W. (2005). Managing innovation beyond the steady state. Technovation, 25(12), 1366-1376.
14. Bogdan, R. C., ve Biklen, S. K. (2006). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods. London: Pearson.
15. Becker, S., Bryman, A., ve Ferguson, H. (2012). Understanding research for social policy and social work 2E: themes, methods, and approaches. Bristol: Policy press.
16. Bursalıoğlu, Z., (1978). Eğitim yönetiminde teori ve uygulama. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi.
17. Cannarella, C., ve Piccioni, V. (2003). Innovation transfer and rural SMEs. Journal of Central European Agriculture, 4(4), 371-388.
18. Cantu, J., ve Beruvides, M. (2013). Isomorphological Analysis: The Theory of it All. In International Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Management 2013, ASEM 2013 (pp. 136-146). Minneapolis.
19. Cheung, T. M., Mahnken, T. G., ve Ross, A. L. (2018). Assessing the state of understanding of defense innovation. SITC Research Briefs, (2018-1). https://escholarship.org/content/qt3wt3613v/qt3wt3613v.pdf, Erişim tarihi: 25 Kasım 2021.
20. Chiaroni, D., Chiesa, V. and Frattini, F. (2011). The open innovation journey: how firms dynamically implement the emerging innovation management paradigm, Technovation, 31(1), 34-43.
21. Clatworthy, S. (2011). Service innovation through touch-points: development of an innovation toolkit for the first stages of new service development, International Journal of Design, 5(2), 15-28.
22. Claussv, F. J. (2010). Corporate Financial Analysis with Microsoft Excel. New York The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2 Coccia, M. (2018). Theorem of not independence of any technological innovation. Journal of Economics Bibliography, 5(1), 29-35.
23. Creswell, J. W., ve Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage publications. Thousand Oaks, CA.
24. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Beş Yaklaşıma Göre Nitel Araştırma ve Araştırma Deseni [Qualitative Research and Research Design according to Five Approaches] (M. Bütün ve S. B. Demir, Çev. Ed.). Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri, Ankara: Siyasal Yayınevi.
25. Çağan, T., Oner, A., ve Başoğlu, N. (2003). Factors Affecting Innovation Diffusion: The Case of Turkish Armed Forces. Innovations, 11, 6.
26. Damanpour, F., ve Evan, W. M. (1984). Organizational innovation and performance: the problem of organizational lag. Administrative Science Quarterly, 392-409.
27. Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 555-590.
28. Damanpour, F., Walker, M. R., and Avellaneda, N. C. (2009). Combinative Effects of Innovation types and organizational performance: a longitudinal study of service organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 46:4.
29. Denton, D. K. (1999). Gaining competitiveness through innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 2(2), 7-27.
30. Danneels, E. (2002). The dynamics of product innovation and firm competences. Strategic Management Journal, 23(12), 1095-1121.
31. Dibrell, C., Craig, J., ve Hansen, E. (2011). Natural environment, market orientation, and firm innovativeness: An organizational life cycle perspective. Journal of Small Business Management, 49(3), 467-489.
32. Dombrowski, P. J., Gholz, E., ve Ross, A. L. (2002). Selling military transformation: The defense industry and innovation. Orbis, 46(3), 523-536.
33. Drucker P., F. (1985). Introduction, Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Harper ve Row Publishers, New York, 1–17. Drucker, P. F., ve Maciariello, J. A. (2008). Management: revised edition. New York: Harper Collins.
34. D'Urso, M., Buonanno, A., Prisco, G., ve Farina, A. (2010, 10-14 May). Moving targets tracking for homeland protection applications: A multi-sensor approach. In 2010 IEEE Radar Conference (pp. 1220-1223). IEEE. Arlington, USA.
35. Dyer, B. ve Song M.X. (1998). Innovation strategy and sanctioned conflict: a new edge in innovation?, Journal of product innovation management, 15(6), 505-519.
36. Ebadi, Y. M., ve Utterback, J. M. (1984). The effects of communication on technological innovation. Management Science, 30(5), 572-585.
37. Evanschitzky, H., Eisend, M., Calantone, R. J., ve Jiang, Y. (2012). Success factors of product innovation: An updated meta‐analysis. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29, 21-37.
38. Erkus, A. (2009). Davranış Bilimleri İçin Bilimsel Araştırma Süreci. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık, 117.
39. Eroğlu, S., ve Bektaş, O. (2016). STEM eğitimi almış fen bilimleri öğretmenlerinin STEM temelli ders etkinlikleri hakkındaki görüşleri. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi, 4(3), 43-67.
40. Etyemez, S., ve Kemer, E. (2021). Covid 19 salgınının turistik restoranlara etkisi üzerine nitel bir çalışma. İşletme araştırmaları dergisi, 13(1), 493-503.
41. Freeman, C. (1982). The Economics of Industrial Innovation, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
42. Gandotra, N. K. (2010). Imperatives and challenges of organizational competitiveness in the competition regime. International Journal of Business Economics and Management Research, 1(1), 56-63.
43. Glesne, C. (2013). Nitel Araştirmaya Giriş. (Trans. by A. Ersoy and P. Yalçınoğlu). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
44. Gürbüz, S. ve Şahin, F. (2014). Sosyal Bilimlerde Araştırma Yöntemleri, Felsefe-yöntem analiz. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık/ Sosyal Bilimler.
45. Hailey, V. H. (2001). Breaking the mould? Innovation as a strategy for corporate renewal. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12(7), 1126-1140.
46. Hareebin, Y., Aujirapongpan, S., ve Siengthai, S. (2018). Creating sustained strategic capabilities through organisational dynamic capabilities and strategies: a case study of rubber wood export industry in thailand. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 23(1).
47. Holmen, E., Pedersen, A. C., ve Torvatn, T. (2005). Building relationships for technological innovation. Journal Of Business Research, 58(9), 1240-1250.
48. Jabil (2021). The Current State of Defense Industry: Technology Innovation. https://www.jabil.com/blog/defense-industry-technology-innovation.html, Erişim tarihi: 20 Kasım 2021.
49. Kaptan, S. (1998). Bilimsel araştırma ve istatistik teknikleri (11.Baskı). Ankara: Tek Işık Web Ofset.
50. Katz, D., ve Kahn, R. L. (1978). Organizations and the system concept. Classics Of Organization Theory, 80, 480.
51. Keupp, M. M., Palmié, M., ve Gassmann, O. (2012). The strategic management of innovation: A systematic review and paths for future research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14(4), 367-390.
52. Koçel, T. (2007). İşletme Yöneticiliği: Yönetim ve Organizasyon, Organizasyonlarda Davranış, Klasik, Modern, Çağdaş ve Güncel Yaklaşımlar. İstanbul: Arıkan Basım Yayınları. İstanbul.
53. Kim, J., ve Chung, G. (2017). Implementing innovations within organizations: A systematic review and research agenda. Innovation: Management, Policy and Practice, 19(3), 372–399.
54. Kılcan, B. (2017). Eğitim bilimlerinde metaforların veri toplama aracı olarak kullanılması, örnek bir uygulama. Ankara: Pegem A.
55. Kleis, L., Chwelos, P., Ramirez, R. V., ve Cockburn, I. (2012). Information technology and intangible output: The impact of IT investment on innovation productivity. Information Systems Research, 23(1), 42-59.
56. Kloot, L. (1997). Organizational learning and management control systems: responding to environmental change. Management Accounting Research, 8(1), 47-73.
57. Knoblauch, H., Schnettler, B., Raab, J., ve Soeffner, H. G. (Eds.). (2012). Video analysis: Methodology and methods. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
58. Lake, D. R. (2012). Technology, qualitative superiority, and the overstretched American military. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 6(4), 71-99.
59. Lomax, H., ve Casey, N. (1998). Recording social life: Reflexivity and video methodology. Sociological Research Online, 3(2), 121-146.
60. Lorente, A. R. M., Dewhurst, F., ve Dale, B. G. (1999). TQM and business innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 2(1), 12-19.
61. Lin, C. Y., ve Ho, Y. H. (2007). Technological innovation for China’s logistics industry. Journal of Technology Management &Innovation, 2(4), 1–19.
62. Lu, I. Y., ve Tseng, C. J. (2010). A study of the service innovation activities of tourist hotels in Taiwan. International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 3(1), 156-172.
63. Miles, M. B., ve Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage publications. Thousand Oaks, CA.
64. Mueser, R. (1985). Identifying technical innovations. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, (4), 158-176.
65. Nairaland, (2021). Predator Drones with Pinpoint Accuracy. https://www.nairaland.com/3655863/predator-drones-pinpoint-accuracy-check, Erişim tarihi: 23 Kasım 2021.
66. Narvekar, R.S. and Jain, K. (2006), A new framework to understand the technological innovation process, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 7(2), 174-186.
67. OECD (2009). Innovation in Firms: A Microeconomic Perspective, https://www.oecd.org/berlin/44120491.pdf, Erişim tarihi: 19 Kasım 2021.
68. Oksanen, K., ve Hautamäki, A. (2015). Sustainable innovation: A competitive advantage for innovation ecosystems. Technology Innovation Management Review, 5.
69. Özant, N., ve Kelleci, M. Uçuş Korkusu Üzerine Nitel Bir Çalışma. Journal of Aviation Research, 3(2), 173-189.
70. Öztürk, M. F., ve Talas, M. (2015). Sosyal Medya ve Eğitim Etkileşimi. Interaction of social media and education, 7(1), 101-120.
71. Perry, C. D. (2000). Unmanned aerial vehicle: a tool for the operational commander. Naval war coll newport ri joint military operations dept. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA381737.pdf, Erişim tarihi: 9 Aralık 2021.
72. Porter, M. E. (1985). Technology and competitive advantage. Journal Of Business Strategy. 60-70.
73. Porter, M. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations, London: Macmillan.
74. Pellicer, E., Yepes, V., ve Rojas, R. J. (2010). Innovation and competitiveness in construction companies: A case study. Journal of Management Research, 10(2), 103-115.
75. Prajogo, D. I., ve Ahmed, P. K. (2006). Relationships between innovation stimulus, innovation capacity, and innovation performance. R&D Management, 36(5), 499-515.
76. Răducanu, G., ve Cîrciu, I. (2017). Unmanned aerial vehicle future development trends. Review of the Air Force Academy, (3), 105-110.
77. Rogers, M., ve Rogers, M. (1998). The definition and measurement of innovation. Melbourne Institute Working Paper No. 10/98, Melbourne Institute ofApplied Economic and Social Research, University of Melbourne.
78. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.194.4269&rep=rep1&type=pdf, Erişim tarihi: 9 Aralık 2021.
79. Roberts, P. W., ve Amit, R. (2003). The dynamics of innovative activity and competitive advantage: The case of Australian retail banking, 1981 to 1995. Organization science, 14(2), 107-122.
80. Ross, A. L. (2016). The Potential Import of New, Emerging, and Over-the-Horizon Technologies. In Emerging Critical Technologies and Security in the Asia-Pacific (pp. 22-36). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
81. Richert, A. (2018). Socializing with robots. In Knowledge Management in Digital Change (pp. 97-110). Springer, Cham, https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-73546-7_6. Erişim Tarihi: 10 Aralık 2021.
82. Seebode, D., Jeanrenaud, S., ve Bessant, J. (2012). Managing innovation for sustainability. R&D Management, 42(3), 195-206.
83. Schumpeter, J.A. (1950). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Harper & Row, New York, NY
84. Sikka, P. (1999). Technological innovations by SME's in India. Technovation, 19(5), 317-321.
85. Smithers, J., ve Blay-Palmer, A. (2001). Technology innovation as a strategy for climate adaptation in agriculture. Applied Geography, 21(2), 175-197.
86. Schilling, M. A., ve Shankar, R. (2019). Strategic Management of Technological Innovation. McGraw-Hill Education.
87. Shrum, W., Duque, R., ve Brown, T. (2005). Digital video as research practice: Methodology for the millennium. Journal of research practice, 1(1), M4-M4.
88. Strauss, A. ve Corbin, J. (2014). Basics Of Qualitative Research Techniques. New York: Sage Publications.
89. Tavşancıl, E., ve Aslan, A. E. (2001). Sözel, yazılı ve diğer materyaller için içerik analizi ve uygulama örnekleri. Epsilon. Travers, M. (2001). Qualitative Research Through Case Studies. Sage.
90. Türk Silahlı Kuvvetleri (TSK), (2021). Türk Silahlı Kuvvetlerinin Görevi, https://www.tsk.tr/Sayfalar?viewName=Gorevi, Erişim Tarihi: 26 Aralık 2021.
91. Cheung, T. M., Mahnken, T. G., ve Ross, A. L. (2018). Assessing the State of Understanding of Defense Innovation, STIC Research Briefs, Series 10 (2018–1), 3–4.
92. Thatcher, S. M., ve Zhu, X. (2006). Changing identities in a changing workplace: Identification, identity enactment, self-verification, and telecommuting. Academy of Management Review, 31(4), 1076-1088.
93. Thinktech (2021). İnsansız hava araçlarında elektronik harp uygulamaları, https://thinktech.stm.com.tr/uploads/docs/1619620343_stm-insansiz-hava-araclarinda-elektronik-harp.pdf?, Erişim tarihi: 26 Kasım 2021.
94. Tilastokeskus (2021). Technological innovation, https://www.stat.fi/meta/kas/tekn_innovaatio_en.html, Erişim tarihi: 25 Kasım 2021.
95. Truver, S. C. (2000). Tomorrow's US Fleet. Proceedings-United States Naval Instıtute, 126(3 ISSU 1165), 102-109. https://www.usni.org/search?search_api_fulltext=Tomorrow%27s+US+Fleet&sort_by=search_api_relevance&sort_order=DESC, Erişim tarihi: 25 Kasım 2021.
96. Unmannedairspace, (2021). Drones Set To Benefit From Enhanced Satellite Surveillance With Pinpoint Accuracy, https://www.unmannedairspace.info/latest-news-and-information/drones-set-to-benefit-from-enhanced-satellite-surveillance-with-pinpoint-accuracy-says-vodafone/, Erişim tarihi: 24 Kasım 2021.
97. Von Bertalanffy, L. (1950). The theory of open systems in physics and biology. Science, 111(2872), 23-29.
98. Von Bertalanffy, L. (1973). The meaning of general system theory. General system theory: Foundations, development, applications, 30-53.
99. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Genişletilmiş 9. Baskı, Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık. Yiğit, E., Yazar, I., ve Karakoç, T. H. (2018). İnsansiz hava araçlari (İHA)‘nın kapsamlı sınıflandırılması ve gelecek perspektifi. Sürdürülebilir Havacılık Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(1), 10-19.
100. Zhou, J. (2019). Armed Forces. In Fundamentals of Military Law, 123-126, Springer, Singapore.
101. Zeng, S. X., Xie, X. M., ve Tam, C. M. (2010). Relationship between cooperation networks and innovation performance of SMEs. Technovation, 30(3), 181-194.
102. Walker, R. M., Jeanes, E., and Rowlands, R. (2002). Measuring Innovation–Applying the Literature‐Based Innovation Output Indicator to Public Services. Public Administration, 80(1), 201-214.
103. Wang, C., ve Hu, Q. (2020). Knowledge sharing in supply chain networks: Effects of collaborative innovation activities and capability on innovation performance. Technovation, 94, 102010.
104. Weiss, D., ve Nemeczek, F. (2021). A text-based monitoring tool for the legitimacy and guidance of technological innovation systems. Technology in Society, 66, 101686.