Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Knowledge Management And Entrepreneurship

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

assistant professor

Abstract

Abstract

Although research on knowledge management in entrepreneurial organizations has attracted the attention of many scholars, most of these studies have been conducted independently rather than institutionally, geographically, or industrially. The purpose of this study is to combine the role of the field of activity with knowledge management research and examine the subsequent consequences of entrepreneurship. This article examines the theory of entrepreneurial knowledge spillover, open innovation theory and institutional perspective of knowledge management in entrepreneurial organizations and evaluates the return on investment in knowledge and knowledge spillover in different industries and different levels of economic activity (individual, company, industry, university, region). To achieve this goal, the latest authoritative foreign articles published in this field by qualitative meta-analysis method and using Maxqda 2020 qualitative analysis software in six steps and research findings in three sections, research methodology analysis, Qualitative content analysis of research articles and findings are explained and at the end, recommendations for future research are provided. Findings of this study show that knowledge management is affected by internal and external investment in knowledge and both of these investments directly or indirectly affect innovation in the organization. On the other hand, innovation is often the basis of entrepreneurship because of its competitive advantage in business.

Keywords

Main Subjects


  • فهرست منابع و مآخذ

    الف. منابع فارسی

    • امیری، مهدی (1397)، «بررسی رابطه بین مدیریت دانش و کارآفرینی استراتژیک مبتنی بر میانجی‌گری نوآوری سازمانی (مطالعه موردی: سازمان آموزش‌وپرورش فارس)»، فصلنامه ابتکار و خلاقیت در علوم انسانی، دوره 8، شماره 2، صص 184-147.
    • جاویدنیا، رضا؛ دباغ، رحیم و کمالی، میرتوحید (1395)، «بررسی ارتباط سیستم فرایند مدیریت دانش و کارآفرینی سازمانی مطالعه موردی: پژوهشکدۀ علم و فناوری دفاعی منتخب»، نشریه مدیریت اطلاعات و دانش‌شناسی، دوره 4 شماره 2، صص 26-11.
    • خنیفر، حسین و مسلمی، ناهید (1396)، اصول و مبانی روش‌های پژوهش کیفی، ج 1، تهران: نشر نگاه دانش.
    • ذاکرصالحی، غلامرضا و قانعی­راد، سید محمدامین (1394)، مرور نظام­مند و فراتحلیل پژوهش‌های ایرانی در قلمرو مطالعات اجتماعی علم و فناوری، مطالعات اجتماعی ایران، دوره 9 شماره 2، صص 63-29.
    • رحمدل، ناصر (1396)، «کارآفرینی و نوآوری»، انتشارات نوشناخت.
    • زاهدی، محمدرضا و جوادی کمنی، سکینه (1397)، «رویکرد جریان دانش و نقش آن در کارآفرینی سازمانی»، سیاست‌نامه علم و فناوری، دوره 8 شماره 3، صص 75-63.
    • سالاریان، محسن و کیا کجوری، داود (1394)، «بررسی رابطه بین مدیریت دانش و کارآفرینی سازمانی (مطالعه موردی: اداره کل بنادر و دریانوردی استان مازندران)»، نشریه صنعت حمل‌ونقل دریایی، سال اول، شماره 2، صص 75-65.
    • صادقی­فسایی، سهیلا و خادمی، عاطفه (1395)، فراتحلیل پژوهش­های بعد از انقلاب اسلامی در موضوع آموزش زنان، راهبرد فرهنگ، شماره 33، صص. 199-171.
    • محمدی، فروغ؛کلاته سیفری، معصومه؛ فراهانی، ابوالفضل و قاسمی، حمید (1395)، «تدوین مدل ارتباطی مدیریت دانش و کارآفرینی سازمانی با میانجی‌گری سرمایۀ اجتماعی در وزارت ورزش و جوانان»، نشریه رویکردهای نوین در مدیریت ورزشی، دوره 4 شماره 15، صص 53-39.
    • مرادی، سالار؛ کواکبیان، مصطفی و فلاحت­پیشه، حشمت­الله، (1396)، فراتحلیل مطالعات اعتماد سیاسی در ایران پس از انقلاب اسلامی، پژوهش­نامه انقلاب اسلامی، سال 7، شماره 24، صص 133-105.
    • نادری، احمد (1396)، فراتحلیل مشارکت سیاسی دانشجویان ایرانی: مطالعه اثربخشی عوامل تبیین­کننده عینی، انگیزشی- ذهنی، فرهنگی- اجتماعی و نهادی، مجله مطالعات جامعه­شناسی، دوره 24، شماره 1، صص 290-259.

     

    ب. منابع انگلیسی

    • Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B., & Lehmann, E. E. (2013). The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 41(4), 757–774.
    • Agarwal, R., Audretsch, D., & Sarkar, M. B. (2010). Knowledge spillovers and strategic entrepreneurship. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 4, 271–283.
    • Aizpurúa, L. I., Saldaña, P. E. Z., & Saldaña, A. Z. (2011). Learning for sharing: An empirical analysis of organizational learning and knowledge sharing. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 7(4), 509–518.
    • Anzenbacher, A. & Wagner, M. (2020). The role of exploration and exploitation for innovation success: Effects of business models on organizational ambidexterity in the semiconductor industry. International entrepreneurship and management journal, 16:373–385.
    • Arora, A., Athreye, S., & Huang, C. (2016). The paradox of openness revisited: Collaborative innovation and patenting by UK innovators. Research Policy, 45(7), 1352–1361.
    • Audretsch, D. B., Belitski, M., & Desai, S. (2019). National business regulations and city entrepreneurship in Europe: A multilevel nested analysis. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 43(6), 1148–1165.
    • Balland, P. A., Boschma, R., & Frenken, K. (2015). Proximity and innovation: From statics to dynamics. Regional Studies, 49(6), 907–920.
    • Beers, C., & Zand, F. (2014). R&D cooperation, partner diversity, and innovation performance: An empirical analysis. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31, 292–312.
    • Belitski, M. (2019). Innovation in Schumpeterian-type firms: Knowledge collaboration or knowledge spillover? Foundations and Trends® in Entrepreneurship, 15(3–4), 368–390.
    • Belitski, M., Caiazza, R., & Lehmann, E. E. (2019a). Knowledge frontiers and boundaries in entrepreneurship research. Small Business Economics, 1–11.
    • Briones-Peñalver, A.J., Bernal-Conesa, J.A. Nieves-Nieto, C. (2020). Knowledge and innovation management model. Its influence on technology transfer and performance in Spanish defense industry. International entrepreneurship and management journal, 16:373–385.
    • Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Obloj, K. (2008). Entrepreneurship in emerging economies: where are we today and where should the research go in the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(1), 1–14.
    • Caiazza, R., Belitski, M., & Audretsch, D. B. (2019). From latent to emergent entrepreneurship: the knowledge spillover construction circle. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 1–11.
    • Carree, M., Lokshin, B., & Alvarez, H. A. (2019). Technology partnership portfolios and firm innovation performance: Further evidence. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 54, 1–11.
    • Cassiman, B., & Valentini, G. (2016). Open innovation: Are inbound and outbound knowledge flows really complementary? Strategic Management Journal, 37, 1034-1046.
    • Dogan, Nilhun. (2015).The Intersection of Entrepreneurship and Strategic Management, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 195 (2015) 1288 – 1294,
    • Fernandes, C., Ferreira, J., & Raposo, M. (2013). Drivers to firm innovation and their effects on performance: an international comparison., 9 International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal (4), 557–580.
    • Ferreira, J. J., Ratten, V., & Dana, L. P. (2017). Knowledge spillover-based strategic entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 13(1), 161–167.
    • Ghio, N., Guerini, M., Lehmann, E. E., & Rossi-Lamastra, C. (2015). The emergence of the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 44(1), 1–18.
    • Giovannetti, E., & Piga, C. A. (2017). The contrasting effects of active and passive cooperation on innovation and productivity: evidence from British local innovation networks. International Journal of Production Economics, 187, 102–112.
    • Hall, B. H., & Sena, V. (2017). Appropriability mechanisms, innovation, and productivity: Evidence from the UK. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 26(1–2), 42–62.
    • Hayter, C. S. (2013). Conceptualizing knowledge-based entrepreneurship networks: perspectives from the literature. Small Business Economics, 899–911.
    • Hitt, M.A. Bierman, L., Shimizu, K & Kochhar, R., (2001).Direct andmoderating effects of human capital on strategy and performance inprofessional service firms Aresource- based perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), pp.13-28.
    • Hoffman, R., & Yeh, C. (2018). Blitzscaling: the lightning fast path to building massively valuable companies. New York: Currency Books.
    • Islam, A., Li, W., Johnson, K., & Lauchande, P. (2020). How far has the integrated care come? Applying an asymmetric lens to interorganisation trust amongst health and social care organization. International entrepreneurship and management journal 16:373–385.
    • Jansen, J.J.P., & Roelofsen, O. (2018). Focus today on the growth of tomorrow’. Nlgroeit, March 2018.
    • Khalil, S. & Khalil, C. (2020). Exploring knowledge Management in Agile Software Development Organizations. International entrepreneurship and management journal, 16:373–385.
    • Khalil, S., & Belitski, M. (2020). Dynamic capabilities for firm performance under the information technology governance framework. European Business Review ISSN: 0955-534X.
    • Kuratko, D. F., Holt, H. L., & Neubert, E. (2020). Blitzscaling: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Business Horizons, 63(11), 109–119.
    • Li, W., Liu, K., Belitski, M., Ghobadian, A., & O'Regan, N. (2016). E-leadership through strategic alignment: an empirical study of small-and medium-sized enterprises in the digital age. Journal of Information Technology, 31(2), 185–206.
    • Lin, H.F., Lee, G.G., (2007), Knowledge Sharing and Firm Innovation Capability an Empirical Study, International Journal of Manpower, Vol.28, No.3/4, p.174.
    • Link, A. N. & Scott, J. T. (2019). The economic benefits of technology transfer from US federal laboratories. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 1–11.
    • Link, A. N., Siegel, D. S., & Bozeman, B. (2017). An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in formal university technology transfer
    • McKelvie, A., & Wiklund, J. (2010). Advancing firm growth research: a focus on growth mode instead of growth rate. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(2), 261–288.
    • Mickiewicz, T., Nyakudya, F. W., Theodorakopoulos, N., & Hart, M. (2017). Resource endowment and opportunity cost effects along the stages of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 48(4), 953–976.
    • Rensburg, Deryck J van. (2013). Is Strategic Entrepreneurship a Pleonasm?, Journal of Management and Strategy, Vol. 4, No. 1;PP. 15- 27
    • Ritala, P., Olander, H., Michailova, S., & Husted, K. (2015). Knowledge sharing, knowledge leaking and relative innovation performance: an empirical study. Technovation, 35, 22–31.
    • Romer, P. M. (1994). The origins of endogenous growth. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(1), 3–22.
    • Roper, S., Love, J. H., & Bonner, K. (2017). Firms’ knowledge search and local knowledge externalities in innovation performance. Research Policy, 46(1), 43–56.
    • Tavassoli, S., Bengtsson, L., & Karlsson, C. (2017). Strategic entrepreneurship and knowledge spillovers: Spatial and aspatial perspectives. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 13(1), 233–
    • Veugelers, R., & Schneider, C. (2018). Which IP strategies do young highly innovative firms choose? Small Business Economics, 50(1), 113–129.
    • Volpeol, G. D. (2016). “Encouraging Organizations to Innovate and Create Value”. Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 68-75.
    • Welter, F., Baker, T., & Wirsching, K. (2019). Three waves and counting: the rising tide of contextualization in entrepreneurship research. Small Business Economics, 52(2), 319–330.
    • West, J., & Bogers, M. (2014). Leveraging external sources of innovation: A review of research on open innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(4), 814–831.