8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

1/18

Does Technology and Innovation M ana gem ent

Improve M arket Posit ion Em pirical Evidence

from Innovating Firm s in South Africa

Leon Oerlemans Gerrit Rooks and Tinus Pretorius

There is a growing recognition of the central role of techn ology and know ledge

man agem ent for market succe ss of organizations. Little is empirically know, how-

ever, about this relationship. Drawing on the S outh African Innovation Survey, a

unique dataset on innovative behavior o f South African firm s in manufacturing and

services, this pape r investigates the question to what extent an d in which w ays do

technology and innovation management activities affect firms market position.

Findings sho w that condu cting techn ology strategy activities pays out. Moreover,

especially a combination o f internal and external technolo gy audits seems to be

ben efici al for organizational perform ance .

ntroduct ion

For a var ie ty o f r easons , fo r ins tance increas ing g lobal com pet i t ion , there i s a

g r o w in g r eco g n it i o n o f th e cen t ra l r o l e o f t ech n o lo g y an d k n o w led g e i n d e t e rm in -

ing market success . As a resu l t, o rgan iza t ions inc reas ing ly adop t and imp leme nt

advanced technolog ies and , a l so , in t roduce technolog ica l ly soph is t ica ted knowl-

edge- in tens ive p roducts and serv ices . These changing prac t ices have a le r ted com-

p an i e s t o t he n eed f o r d ev e lo p in g t ech n o lo g y an d i n n o v at i on m an a g em en t a s a p a r t

o f th e i r b u s in es s s t ra t eg i es . M an y f i r m s u n d e r s t an d t h at p o o r t ech n o lo g y ch o i ces

ma y af fec t f i rm pe r form ance and surv iva l . To s tr eng then co mpe t i t ive pos i t ion in a

g iven market one o f the mos t impor tan t o rgan iza t ional cap ab i l i t i es tha t a f i rm mus t

develo p i s the ab i l i ty to cons tan t ly eva lua te and assess the dev elopm ent o f r e levan t

technolog ies ins ide a n d outs ide the o rgan iza t ion . Ba sed on the v iew tha t t echnol -

Leon O erlemans is at the Department of Organization S tudies of Tilburg University (The Nether-

lands) and the Department of Engineering and Technology Management at the U niversity of Preto ria

(South Africa). Gerrit Rooks is at the Departm ent of Technology and Policy at Eindhoven Univer-

sity of Technology (Th e Netherlands). Tinus Pretorius is at the D epartment o f Engineering and

Technology Managem ent of the University of Pretoria (South Africa). The y may b e reached at

, and respectively.

Knowledge, Technology, Policy, Fall 2005, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 38-55.

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

2/18

Oe r le m a n s Ro o k s a n d P r e to r iu s 3 9

o g y a n d i n n o va t io n m a n a g e m e n t a d d r e ss e s n o t o n l y a f i r m ' s p r o d u c t t e c h n o l o g i e s

bu t a l so i ts p r oc e s s t e c hno log ie s a nd tha t bo th a f f e ct a n o r ga n iz a t ion ' s va lue c ha in ,

m o r e i n t e g ra t iv e a p p r o a ch e s h a v e e m e r g e d t h a t c o n s i d e r m a n a g e m e n t o f t e ch n o l -

ogy a nd innova t ion be yon d the r e se a r c h a nd d e ve lopm e n t a re a s a nd in a m or e s tr a-

teg ic contex t (Burge lman and Rosenbloom, 1989; Zahra e t a l . , 1993) .

M os t s t ra t e gy the o r is t s wo u ld a g r e e t ha t a sy s t e m a t i c t e c hno logy a nd inno va t ion

m a na g e m e n t a pp r oa c h , a t a m in im um , e nc om pa sse s a f i r m ' s p l a ns a nd a c t iv i t ie s to

e f f e c tive ly de ve lop , a cqu i r e a nd de p loy t e c hno log ic a l r e sou r c e s a nd k now le dg e in

a wa y to e nsu r e be t te r f i r m pe r f o r m a nc e ( Za h r a , 1996). I de a lly , t e c hn o log y a nd

innova t ion m a na ge m e n t s tr e ng the ns t he suc c e s s fu l de p loy m e n t o f a n o r ga n iz a t ion ' s

t e c hno log ic a l c a pa b il i ti e s a nd r e sou r c e s i n pu r su i t o f t he goa l s o f t he o r ga n iz a t ion .

E f f e c t ive de p loym e n t o f t e c hno log ic a l r e sou r c e s he lp s t o bu i ld a su s t a ina b le c om -

pe t i tive advantage tha t enhances a com pany 's f inanc ia l pe r form ance (Por te r, 1985a).

H o w e v e r , d e s p it e t h e w i d e r e c o g n i t io n o f t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t e c h n o l o g y a n d i n n o -

va t ion ma n a ge m e n t fo r f i r m pe r f o r ma nc e , th i s r e la t i onsh ip ha s no t be e n w e l l doc u -

m e n te d e m pi r i c a lly in t he li t e ra tu r e ( s e e al so : Za h r a a n d C ov in , 1993: 451 ) . As

W i lbon ( 1999: 148 ) a r gue s : S e ve r a l s t r ea ms o f r e se a r c h e x i s ts w h ic h l i nk b i t s o f

t e c hno logy to p i e c e s o f s tr a te gy o r pe r f o r ma n c e , bu t t oo l it tl e e f fo r t ha s be e n g ive n

to in t e g r at ing suc h wor ks . M or e f unda m e n ta l ly , t he r e s e e ms to be a l a c k o f a g r e e -

m e n t o n t h e c o n t e n t o f te c h n o l o g y m a n a g e m e n t p o l ic i es , w h i c h m a k e s i t h a r d t o

a s se ss t he i r c on t r ibu t ion a s a sou r c e o f c ompe t i t ive a dva n ta ge . M or e ove r , t he va s t

m a jo r i t y o f t he l i te r a tu r e i n th i s a r e a i s c on c e p tua l a nd p r e sc r ip t ive i n na tu r e ( s e e

for example : Brockhof f , 1996; Bone and Saxon, 2000; Da S i lve i ra , 2002) .

As a r e a c t ion to t he se e x is t i ng de f i c i e nc i e s i n the l i te r a tu r e , a f e w e m pi r i c a l

s tud ie s ha ve be e n pub l i she d tha t i nve s t iga t e t he a s soc i a t i on be twe e n t e c hno logy

s t ra t e gy a nd f i r m pe r f o r m a nc e ( M c G e e a nd Dow l ing , 1994 ; Za h r a , 1996 ; De e ds e t

a l . , 1997, Le febv re e t a l . , 1997; Sha rm a, 2003) . W ilbo n (1999 : 148) s ta tes that :

' n e ve r the l e s s , m or e s tud ies a r e ne e de d to unde r s t a nd the dy na m ic s o f the t e c hno l -

ogy s t r a te gy - pe r f o r ma nc e r e l a ti onsh ip ' . W e a g r e e w i th t h is s t a t e me n t , a nd w a n t t o

c o n t ri b u te t o t h e e m e r g i n g s c ie n t if i c f i e ld o f t e c h n o l o g y m a n a g e m e n t i n f o u r w a y s

by a nsw e r ing the f o l lowing e xp lo r a to r y r e se a r c h que s t ion : t o wh a t e x t e n t a nd in

wh ic h wa ys do t e c hno logy a nd innova t ion m a na g e m e n t a c tiv i ti e s af f e ct f i r m s ' m a r -

ke t pos i t ion? F i rs t , th i s pape r provides addi t ion a l em pir ica l ins ights in the techno l -

ogy s t r a te gy - pe r f o r ma nc e r e la t i onsh ip . S e c ond , to m e a su r e a t e c h no lo gy s t r a te gy

we t a ke a n a c t iv i ty a pp r oa c h a s oppose d to ma ny s tud ie s t ha t t a ke n a n ou tc ome

approach . Severa l s tud ies a rgue tha t R& D ef for t and ( the leve l of ) au tom at ion i s a

m a j o r c o m p o n e n t o f te c h n o l o g y p o l i c y a n d s t ra t eg y a t t h e f i r m l e ve l (Z a h r a a n d

C ov in , 1983 ; S ha r ma , 2003) . The me a su r e me n t o f , f o r e xa mple , t he numbe r o f

f l ex ib l e m a nuf a c tu r ing sys t e ms i s r e ga r d e d a s a r e f l e c t ion o f t he t e c h no lo gy s t ra t-

e gy o f a fi r m. A l thoug h we a g r e e t ha t t he se type s o f i nd i c a to r s m e a su r e t he out

comes of t e c hno logy s t r a te g i e s , we t a ke a d i f f e r e n t a ng le , t ha t i s, we t a ke a n

a c ti v it y -b a s e d p er sp e c ti v e. T h e n u m b e r o f t e c h n o l o g y a n d i n n o v a ti o n m a n a g e m e n t

a c t iv i t ie s pe r f o r m e d by innova t ing f i r ms i s r e ga r de d a s t he e xp r e s s ion o f a ct iv i ti e s

t a k ing p l a c e du r ing the t e c hno logy s t r a te gy de v e lopm e n t p r oc e s s ( Tu r va n i , 2001) .

To ou r kno wle dg e , t h is a p p r oa c h i s re l a ti ve ly ne w to t he e m pi r i c a l f i e ld . Th i rd , t o

t e st ou r hypo the se s , a un ique da t a se t i s u se d , wh ic h w a s ga the r e d w i th in t he f r a m e -

wo r k o f t he F i r st S ou th Af r i c a n Innova t ion S u r ve y r e se a r c h p r o j e c t . The r e f o r e , i n

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

3/18

40 K now ledge , Techn o logy , Po l i cy / Fa ll 2005

our pa pe r w e r e po r t on a spe c t s o f innova t ive be ha v io r o f S ou th Af r i c a n c o m pa n ie s

on w h ic h ha r d ly a ny r e c e n t e mp i r i c a l kno wle d ge e x is ts . F ou r th , t he r e su l t s o f t h i s

p a p e r m a y b e b e n e f i c i a l to p r a c t it io n e r s i n t h e f i e l d o f t e c h n o l o g y m a n a g e m e n t

s i n ce i n s ig h t s a r e p r o v id e d o n h o w c o m b i n a t io n s o f th e u s e o f te c h n o l o g y a n d

innova t ion ma na ge m e n t a c t iv i t ie s impa c t on f i r m ' s c om pe t i t ive pos it i on .

This pa per i s s t ruc tured as fo l lows. In the next sec t ion , a theore t ica l f ramew ork

i s de ve lop e d l e a d ing to the f o r mu la t ion o f a num be r o f hypo the se s . The subse que n t

se c t ion de sc r ibe s the r e se a r c h m e thodo log ie s a pp li e d , whe r e a s the f o l lowing se c -

t ion presents th e resu l t s of the da ta ana lyses . A d isc uss ion o f the resu l t s , l imi ta -

t ions , a nd r e se a r c h a nd po l i c y imp l i c a t ions a r e p r ov ide d in the l a st s e c t ion .

T h e o r y a n d H y p o t h e s e s

The goa l o f im p le m e n t ing bus ine s s s tr a t e gy is t o ga in sus ta ina b le c om pe t i t i ve

a dva n ta ge ( P o rt e r, 1990). L ike w ise , t he a im o f e m ploy ing a t e c hn o logy s t r a t egy i s

to ga in o r ma in ta in a su s t a ina b le t e c hno log ic a l a dva n ta ge tha t a c c o m m oda te s a

c om pe t i t i ve e dge ( Kha l i l , 2000) . Th i s im p l i e s t ha t a h igh l e ve l o f i n t e r r e la t e dne ss

and in tegra t ion be tween bus iness an d technolo gy s t ra teg ies i s pa ram ount . To achieve

a h igh l e ve l o f i n t e r re l a t e dne ss a nd in t e g r a t ion , e x t e ns ive de l ibe r a tions a bou t a n

o r ga n iz a t ion ' s d i s t i ngu i sh ing t e c hno log ic a l c om pe te nc e s , t he good s a nd se r v i c e s it

c a n p r oduc e , i t s po te n ti a l u ser s , a nd the pos i t ion in wh ic h the c om pa ny w a n t s t o be ,

i s re qu i r e d . H e nc e , a n o r ga n iz a tion ' s t e c hno log ic a l c om pe te nc e s , c a pa b i l it i e s, a nd

te c hno log ie s m us t be e xp lo i te d , p r o t e c t e d a nd d e ve lope d on the ba s i s o f a we l l -

de s ign e d p l a n . L ink ing bus ine s s a nd t e c hno logy s t r a te g ie s suc c e s s f u l ly i s t he ba se s

o f e f f e c t ive t e c hno log y m a na g e m e n t ( s e e a l so P o r te r , 1985a ).

F o r d ( 1988) s t a te d tha t t e c hno logy s t r a t e gy i s c onc e r n e d w i th e xp lo i t i ng , de ve l -

op ing , a nd m a in ta in ing the c omple t e s e t o f know le dge r e sou r c e s a nd a b i li t ie s o f a n

o r ga n iz a t ion . No t i c e tha t F o r d ' s de sc r ip t ion u se s ve r bs to s t r e s s t ha t t e c hno logy

s t ra tegy is an ac t iv i ty-based e f fort d i rec ted a t the kno w ledg e base an d i t s deve lop-

m e n t o f a n o r ga n iz a tion . B one a nd S a xon ( 2000) took the sa me a pp r oa c h by m a in -

t a in ing tha t t e c h no log y s t ra t e gy i s bo th a n a na ly t ic a l a nd c r e a t ive p r oc e s s , a ga in

po in t ing a t t he a c t iv i ty -ba se d f e a tu r es o f t he c onc e p t .

Severa l schola r s (Twiss and G ood r idge , 1989; Du ssau ge e t a l ., 1992; S t i l lma n,

1997 ; B one a n d S a xon , 2000) s tr e ss t he be ne f i t s o f im p le m e n t ing a t e c hno logy

s t r a t e gy p r oc e s s in a n o r ga n iz a t ion . Exa mple s o f suc h be ne f i t s a r e a n inc r e a se d

a b i l it y t o r e a c t f a s t e r a nd m or e e f f e c tive ly to c ha ng e s in the o r ga n iz a t iona l e nv i -

r onme n t ; a c l e a r e r f oc us on ma in t e c hno log ic a l c om pe te nc e s a nd kno wle dg e , wh ic h

c ou ld l e a d to be t t e r qua l i t y p roduc t s , e a r l i e r p r oduc t l a unc he s , a nd inc r e a se d r e v -

e n u e a n d p r o f i t ; a n i n c r e a s e d p r o t e c t i o n f r o m s u d d e n t e c h n o l o g i c a l l e a p s a n d

d i sc on t inu it i e s ; be tt e r f oc us inve s tme n t , l owe r c os ts a nd ne w va lue c r e a t ion . O ne

of the m os t im por t a n t be ne f i t s o f a te c hno logy s t ra t e gy p r oc e s s i s a we l l - de f ine d

f u tu r e p a t h w a y fo r r e s ea r c h d e v e l o p m e n t a n d e n g i n e er i n g t h at c a n b e c o m m u n i -

c a te d , unde r s tood a nd a g r e e d to b y a l l o r ga n iz a t iona l s t a ke ho lde r s . I n the e nd , t he se

be ne f i t s w i l l tr a ns l at e i n to c om pe t i ti ve a dva n ta ge s, w h ic h c ou ld impr ove the r e l a-

t ive ma r ke t pos i t i on o f f i rms .

How e ve r , de s ign ing a nd imp le me n t ing a t e c hno log y s t ra t e gy suc c e s s f u l ly is a

f a r fr om u npr ob le m a t i c p roc e s s . I n the l i t e r atu r e ( se e f o r e xa mple : B ur ge lm a n e t

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

4/18

Oe r le m a n s Ro o k s a n d P r e to r iu s 4 1

a l. , 1995 ; Ca r a ya nn i s , 2000 ) s e ve r a l e s s e n t ia l c ond i t i ons ha ve be e n i d e n t i f i e d f o r

s u c c e s sf u l s tr a te g y i m p l e m e n t a t io n . T o n a m e a f e w : k e y p l a y e r s i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n

a r e i d e n t i f ie d a n d t h e ir n e e d s a n d e x p e c t a t i o n s u n d e r s t o o d ; t h e p r o c e s s i s e x p l ic i t

a n d t r an s p a r e n t; t o p m a n a g e m e n t is i n v o l v e d i n a s y s te m a t i c w a y ; t h e d e v e l o p m e n t

o f th e s tr a te g y is a c o n t i n u o u s p ro c e s s , w h i c h i s c l e ar ly m a p p e d a n d c o m m u n i c a t e d

t h r ou gho u t t he o r ga n i z a t i on ; t he s t r a t e gy i s w e l l - l i nke d to o r ga n i z a t i ona l c u l t u r e .

M o r e o v e r , it is f o u n d t h a t w e l l - tr i e d a n d t e s te d a p p r o a c h e s h a v e t o b e a d a p t e d a n d

m o d i f i e d t o s u it th e n e e d s o f th e p a r t ic u l a r o r g a n iz a t io n , a n d t h e u s e o f o f f t h e

s h e l f p r e s c ri p t iv e to o l s a n d t e c h n i q u e s s h o u l d b e a v o i d e d .

B o n e a n d S a x o n ( 2 0 0 0) p r o v i d e d a f r a m e w o r k f o r t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f a t e c h n o l -

ogy s tr a te gy , w h i c h i s s u it a b l e f o r ou r pu r po s e s f o r t w o r e a s ons . F i r st , i t i s a n a c t i v -

i ty - b a s e d f r a m e w o r k e n c o m p a s s i n g th e m a j o r a c t iv i ti e s t o b e c o n d u c t e d t o d e v e l o p

a t e c hn o l og y s tr a te gy . S e c ond , it s tr e s s e s t ha t t he s t r a te gy d e v e l o pm e n t p r o c e s s

c om pr i s e s o f a s e t o f in t e r r e l a t e d s t a ge s a nd a c t i v i t ie s t ha t a re a i m e d a t t he p r e s e n t

a n d f u t u r e e v a l u a ti o n o f a v a il ab l e a n d n e e d e d k n o w l e d g e a n d c o m p e t e n c e s , w h i c h

c o u l d i m p a c t o n t h e c o m p e t i t iv e p o s i t i o n o f t h e o r g a n i z a ti o n . A n a d a p t e d v e r s i o n

o f t h is f r a m e w o r k i s p r e s e n t e d in F i g u r e 1 , S i n c e w e a re i n t e r e s te d in t h e e m p i r i c a l

r e l a ti o n s h i p b e t w e e n t e c h n o l o g y m a n a g e m e n t a c ti v it ie s a n d m a r k e t p o s i t io n , t h e

f o c u s w i ll b e o n t h e f i r s t t w o a c t i v it y s ta g e s a s d e f i n e d b y B o n e a n d S a x o n .

F i g u r e 1

T e c h n o l o g y S t r a t e g y F r a m e w o r k

Current

Position

Diagnostics

9 I d e n t i f y in g

t e c h n o l o g y

capabi l i t ie s

( sk i l ls , f ac i l i t ie s ,

p r o c e s s e s )

9 I d e n t i f y in g o wn

c o mp e t i t iv e

p o s i t io n

9 I d e n t i f y p r o d u c t

r o a d m a p s

Future

Position

Technology

strategy ootion s

9 T e c h n o l o g y

m o n i t o r i n g

9 T e c h n o l o g y

f o r e c a s t in g

9 De te r min e

fu ture

c o mp e t i t iv e

o p t io n s

9 De f in e fu tu r e

o p t io n s f o r

t e c h n o lo g ie s

S t r a t e g y

Formulation

Technolot~v

stratet v and road

maps

9 Ident i fy fu ture

t e c h n o l o g y

p o s i t io n

9 Cr e a t iv e ly

r e v ie w n e w

o p p o r tu n i t i e s

9 P l a n h o w t o

a c h ie v e th e

f u tu r e o p t io n

l m p l e m e n t a t i o n ~

Qrganizatiqnan~l

resource

9 P la n in te r n a l

a n d e x te r n a l

s p l i t o f

t e c h n o l o g i e s

9 P la n r e s o u r c e s /

o r g a n iz a t io n to

a c h ie v e s t r a t e g y

9 P la n in d iv id u a l

p r o g r a m s

Ov e r v ie w c u r r e n t

t e c h n o l o g y

capabi l i t ie s

Ov e r v ie w f u tu r e

o p t io n s a n d

imp l ic a t io n s

T e c h n o l o g y

s t r a t e g y a n d

r o a d m a p s

S o u r c e : A d a p t e d f r o m B o n e a n d S a x o n ( 2 0 0 0 ) .

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

5/18

4 2 K n o w l e d g e , T e c h n o l o g y , P o l i c y / F a l l 2 0 0 5

In ternal Technology Audi t

The f i rs t s t a ge in the t e c hno logy s t r a te gy p r oc e s s i s t o d i a gno se , t ha t i s, t o de t e r -

m i n e a n d e v a lu a t e t h e c u r r e n t t ec h n o l o g i c a l c o r e c o m p e t e n c e s a n d c a p a b il it i es o f

the o r ga n iz a tion . I n o the r wor ds , a pa rt o f t he f i rs t s t a ge i s c ond uc t ing a n in t e r na l

t e c hno log y a ud i t. As a r gue d by Kha l i l (2000), c o r e c om pe te nc e is a f unda m e n ta l

concep t in the formu la t ion of a technolog y s tra tegy s ince i t r e f lec ts the inn er s t rength

upon w h ic h a s t r a te gy is bu il t. P r a ha la d a nd H a m e l ( 1990) m a in ta ine d tha t t he c o r e

c om pe te nc e s o f a n o r ga n iz a tion a re the c o l l e c t ive l e a r n ing in the o rga n iz a t ion ,

espec ia l ly how to coord ina te d ive rse prod uc t ion sk i l l s and in tegra te mu l t ip le s t reams

of t e c hno lo g ie s , wh e r e a s c a pa b il i ti e s a r e a s e t o f bus ine s s p r oc e s se s s t r at e g ic a lly

und e r s tood ( S ta lk e t a l ., 1992: 66 ) . The r e f o r e , c om pe te nc e s a nd c a pa b i li t ie s a r e

d i s tinc t, bu t c o m ple m e n ta r y c onc e p t s.

Au d i t ing the in t e r na l t e c hno log ic a l c ompe te nc e s a nd c a pa b i l i t ie s de no te s de f in -

ing the o r ga n iz a t ion 's c u r r e n t t e c hn ic a l sk i l ls ( e . g ., a spe c i a l m e thod o f so f twa r e

de s ign , a spe c i f i c c he m ic a l syn the si s p r oc e dur e , o r a un ique w a y o f e st a b l ish ing

la rge -sca le sys tem in tegra t ion) , qua l i ty of f ac i l i t ie s ava i lab le (p lan t , equipment ,

te s t f ac i l i t ie s , and labora tor ie s ) , and organiza t iona l s t ruc tures and bus iness pro-

c e s se s ( e . g ., p r oduc t a nd p r oc e s s de ve lopm e n t , t e c hno log y t ra ns fe r ). T yp ic al a c -

t iv it ies appl ied a re technolog y audi t s , core com peten ce assessments , and in te l lec tua l

proper ty audi t s .

A t e c hno logy a ud i t is a n a na lys i s c ond uc te d to ide n t i f y the s t r e ng ths a nd w e a k-

ne sse s o f t he t e c hno log ic a l a sse ts o f a n o r ga n iz a t ion . I t s ma in a im i s to e va lua t e a n

o r ga n iz a t ion ' s pos i t i on in t e c hno logy r e l at ive to i ts c om pe t i to r s a nd the c u r r e n t

s ta te o f t he a r t. I t e nc omp a sse s no t on ly a s se s sme n t s o f p r odu c t a nd p r oc e s s t e c h -

no log ie s , bu t a l so o f s e r v i c e a nd m a r ke t ing t e c hno log ie s . C or e c om pe te n c e a s ses s -

m e n t i s t he m e a su r e m e n t a nd e va lua t ion o f the o r ga n iz a t ion 's a b i l it i e s t o c oo r d ina t e

a d ive r se s e t o f p r oduc t ion sk i ll s a nd in t e g r at e d i f f e re n t f lows o f t e c hno log ie s . An

in te ll e c tua l p r ope r ty a ud i t p r ov ide s a n e va lua t ion o f t he in t a ng ib l e a s se t s o f a n

organiza t ion . I t he lps to quant i fy the va lue o f these asse ts to the ex ten t tha t such

va lue depends on the lega l r igh ts to these asse ts . The audi t inves t iga tes and as-

se s se s the s t r e ng ths a nd w e a kne sse s in t he p r oc e dur e s u se d to p r o t e c t e a c h in t a n -

g ib le a sse t and s ecure appropr ia te in te l lec tua l prop er ty r igh ts . Wh ere approp r ia te ,

t he a ud i t f u r n i she s too l s t o pu t a dd i t i ona l p r oc e s se s in p l a c e , ma ke imp r ove m e n t s

to e x i s t ing p r oc e s se s , a nd t a ke c o r r e c t ing s t e ps to he lp e nsu r e a pp r op r i a t ion o f

fu ture in te l lec tua l prope r ty r igh ts .

The a pp l i c a t ion o f t he se in t e r na l a ud i t ing a c t iv i t ie s bo i l s dow n to a n e va lua t ion

o f in t e r na l s t re ng th a nd w e a kne sse s o f t he t a ng ib le a nd in t a ng ib le t e c hno log ic a l

asse ts ( see a lso : Fa llah , 1997; Take i , 1985). Orga niza t ions pe r fo rm ing these ac t iv i -

t i es a r e m or e a wa r e o f t he s t r eng ths o f t he i r own t e c hno log ic a l kno wle dge ba se s ,

wh ic h e na b le the m to f o r m u la t e a m or e f oc u se d t e c hno log y st ra t egy , wh ic h c ou ld

impr ove the i r suc c e s s in t he ma r ke t . The r e f o r e , ou r f i r s t hypo the s i s r e a ds :

H I : Conduc t ing an in ternal technology audi t i s pos i t ive ly assoc ia ted wi th

the im provem ent o f the re la t ive ma rke t pos i t ion o f organiza tions

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

6/18

Oe r le m a n s Ro o k s a n d P r e to r iu s 4 3

Competit ive Position Analysis

A se c on d se t o f a c tiv i ti e s pe r f o r m e d in the d i a gnos t i c s t a ge r e l a t e s t o t he ide n t i -

f i c a t ion o f t he c u r r e n t c om pe t i t i ve pos i t i on o f t he o r ga n iz a t ion . Af t e r a l l , t he t e c h -

no log ic a l c omp e te nc e s a nd c a pa b i l it i e s c u r r e n t ly a va i la b le i n t he o r ga n iz a t ion a r e

c onve r t e d to c o r e p roduc t s o r p r oc e sse s , wh ic h in tu rn m a y be e m bo d ie d in one o r e

m or e e nd p r oduc t s o r s e r v i c e s. The s e e nd p r odu c t s a nd se r v i c e s l ink the o r ga n iz a -

t ion to it s cus tom ers . Th ere fore , an impo r tan t ac t iv i ty in th is s tage i s m arke t ana ly-

s is . Und e r the a s sumpt ion tha t f o r t h i s a na lys is a ma r ke t i s de f in e d f r om a n ( e nd )

use r pe r spe c tive , t hat i s, c om pe t ing p r oduc t s o r s e r v i c e s a r e t hose p r od uc t s o r s e r -

v i c e s , wh ic h pe r f o r m c o mp a r a b le f unc t ions a nd u t i l it i es f o r buye r s r e ga r d le s s i n

wh ic h se c to rs t he se p r oduc t s o r s e r v i c e s a r e p r oduc e d , a n inve s t iga t ion o f t he c r i t e -

r ia t ha t i n f lue nc e u se r pu r c ha se be ha v io r i s o f imp or t a nc e . Exa m ple s o f t he c r i t e ri a

to be ana lyz ed a re cos t , p r ice , co lor , con ven ienc e , ingred ien ts , qua l i ty , and speed

of de l iver y , s e r v i c e ba c kup , o r a l a rge p r odu c t po r t f o l io . Ad d i t iona l t op ic s t o b e

resea rched in a ma rke t ana lyses a re cur ren t m arke t s ize , ma rke t segm enta t ion , marke t

t re n d s , a n d d e m o g r a p h i c s a n d e c o n o m i c d e v e l o p m e n t s i m p a c t i n g o n p u r c h a s e b e -

havior .

C o m p l e m e n t a r y t o m a r k e t an a l ys i s is c o m p e t i t o r an a ly s is , w h i c h c a n b e d e f i n e d

a s the p r oc e s s tha t i nvo lve s c o l l e c t ing , a na lyz ing a nd a c t ing on in f o r m a t ion a nd

kno wled ge about com pe t i tors and the comp et i t ive envi ronm ent (Kha l i l , 2000) . S ince ,

se e n f r om a p r oduc e r pe r spe c tive , c omp e t i to r s a r e t hose f i r m s tha t s e l l subs ti t u te s

on a s a m e ma r ke t , th i s a na lys i s p r odu c e s no t o n ly in f o r ma t ion on the ove r a l l ma r -

ke t s t r uctu r e , bu t a l so on the p os i t i on o f a n o r ga n iz a t ion r e la t ive to o the r a c to r s

ac t ive in the marke t . Indu s t ry ana lys is r e fe r s to an inves t iga t ion in the pos i t ion of

a n o r ga n iz a t ion in the va lue c ha in . As P o r t e r (1980 , 1985b) c onv inc ing ly ha s a r-

gue d , th i s pos i t ion i s a n impor t a n t de t e r m ina n t o f a f i r m s c om pe t i t i ve pos i t ion

s inc e i t r e f le c t s t he l e ve l o f c on t r o l a n o r ga n iz a t ion ha s ove r the t e c h no log ie s ( p r od -

uc t , p r oduc t ion , m a r ke t ing , a nd d i sposa l t e c hno log ie s ) t ha t c on t r ibu te to p r oduc -

ing a nd m a r ke t ing a p r oduc t o r s e r v i c e . B y e va lua t ing the s t r e ng th a nd w e a kne sse s

o f i ts c u r r e n t pos i t i on in the va lue c ha in , a n o r ga n iz a t ion c a n de t e r m ine to w ha t

ex ten t the ba rga in ing pow er o f suppl ie rs an d d is t r ibu tors i s a f fec t ing i t s com pe t i -

t ive advantage .

C on duc t ing ma r ke t , com pe t i to r , a nd indus t r y a na lys i s i nc r e a se s the kno wle dge

a nd a wa r e ne ss o f a n o r ga n iz a t ion on i t s c u r r e n t c om pe t i t i ve pos i t ion . P a c ke d w i th

th is kn ow le dge a nd a wa r e ne ss , a n o r ga n iz a t ion i s a b l e t o be t t e r pos i t i on i t s e l f r e l a -

t ive to o the r a c to rs i n i ts bus ine s s e nv i r onm e n t , a nd to de c ide m or e in f o r m e d on

how to ma na ge i t s c on t r o l ove r r e l e va n t t e c hno log ie s , f o r e xa mple by me a ns o f

forward , backward , or hor izonta l (d is ) in tegra t ion (Kha l i l , 2000) . An imp roved m arke t

pos i t ion c ou ld be the r e su l t o f a pp ly ing the r e su l t s o f c om pe t i t i ve pos i t i on a na lys i s

( see for example : Mol ina e t a l . , 2004; Leavy, 2003; Coburn e t a l . , 2002) . There -

fore , the se con d hypothes is r eads :

H2: Conducting a competit ive po sition analysis is po sitively ass ocia ted with

the improvement o f the relative m arket po sition o f organizations

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

7/18

4 4 K n o w l e d g e , T e c h n o l o g y , P o l ic y / F a l l 2 0 0 5

External Technology udit

Bes ides d e t e rm in ing the cu r ren t t echno log i ca l pos i t ion o f an o rgan i za ti on , a

neces sa ry i npu t fo r t he t echno log y s tr a tegy p roces s i s an overv i ew and under s t and -

ing of fu ture t echnolog ical opt ions and thei r imp l ica t ions , tha t i s, to perfo rm an

ex t e rna l t echno logy aud it . S uch ov erv i ews can b e used t o ga in a be t t e r under s t and -

ing of the threats and o ppor tuni t i es that have a prob abi l i ty to impa ct on es tab l i shed

t echno log i es , p roduc t s and marke t s , and , a s a r e sul t, o f t he na tu re and m agn i tude o f

changes ne eded . S ince t echno logy is caus ing ma jo r changes i n soc i e ty and o rgan i -

zat ions , determining fu ture t echnology s t ra tegy opt ions i s v i ta l to top manage-

men t , s i nce i t w i l l p rov ide i n fo rmat ion on t he s i ze o f an o rgan i za t i on ' s t echno logy

gap, that is , the d i f feren ce betw een an organ izat ion ' s current t ec hno logy pos i t ion

and w here i t shou ld o r cou ld be i n t he fu tu re . O rgan i za ti ons can cond uc t s evera l

act ivi ties to inve st igate future te chn olog y s t rategy opt ions. The l i terature (Bu rgelm an

et al ., 1996; Khal i l , 2000; Phi l l ips , 2001 ) sug gests several act ivi t ies aim ed at creat-

i ng image s o f t he t echno log i ca l fu tu re such as t echno logy mo n i to r i ng and s can -

n ing , t echno logy fo recast ing and fo res igh ti ng , and com pet i t i ve ( t echno log i ca l )

in te l l igence.

Typically , t ech no logy mon i to r ing and s cann ing i s an ac t iv i ty a ime d a t o bse rv ing

the dev e lopm en t o f a l r eady ex i s ti ng and em erg ing t echno log i es , wh ich a re new to

the organ izat ion . I t inc ludes search , eva luat ion of a l t ernat ive poss ib i l i t ies and thei r

impac ts , and a co nc lus ion g roun ded on an as ses smen t o f p rog res s and i t s imp l i ca -

t ions over t ime. This ac t iv i ty has been app l ied for ra i s ing d ive rs i fy ing indus t r ia l

oppo r tuni t i es (Vicente and Palop , 1996) , ident i fy ing the po ss ib i l it i es o f research

on l a ser ho log raph i c l enses conduc t ed by an un ive r s it y fo r t he au tom ot ive s ec to r

(Anon ym ous , 2000) , m on i to r i ng t echno log i ca l deve lop m en t s i n t he energ y s ec to r

(Ash ton e t al ., 1991), and inv es t igat ing the adva nces in spe ech recog ni t ion and

ar t i fi c ia l in te l l igenc e (Hala l, 2004) . Techn ological forecas t ing can b e d ef i ne d as

the desc r i p t ion o r p red i ca t i on o f a fo reseeab l e techno log i ca l i nnova t ion , spec i f ic

sc i en t if i c r e f i nem en t , o r l i ke ly s c ien t i f ic d i s covery , t ha t p rom i ses t o s e rve som e

usefu l func ti on , w i th som e i nd ica t i on o f t he m os t p robab le t ime o f occu r re nce

(Prehoda, 1967).

Therefore , t echnological forecas ting is abo ut sens ing trends , pressures a nd em erg-

ing capabi l i ti es , in terpre t these in t erms of organ izat ional need , ind icat ing the l ikely

o f i n t e rna l f i nanc i a l support fo r R&D programs , and p red i c t ing t he fo rm o f pos -

s ib le innovat ions and thei r probable t ime scale . Typical t echn iques used are am ong s t

o thers , t rend ext rapola t ion , Delph i forecas t s and , scenar io meth ods . Wh ere as t ech-

no log i ca l fo recas t ing dea l s w i th p red i c t i ng p robab l e pa ths o f t ech no log i ca l deve l -

opmen t , t echno log i ca l fo res igh t ing t akes a (ve ry ) l ong - t e rm p er spec t i ve and t ri e s

to an t ic ipate s igni f icant changes in socie ty , the envi ronment , the economy, and

t echno logy tr ends , w i th t he a im to i den t i fy m os t l i ke ly deve lopm en t pa ths . Conse -

quent ly , the accurac y o f the l a t t er ac t iv i ty i s far lower. As argue d by L em os an d

P or to (1998) , t echno log i ca l fo recas ti ng t echn iques a re o f t en app l i ed i n com bina-

t ion w i th ( t echn ological ) comp et i t ive in te l l igenc e act iv i t ies . C om pet i t ive in te l li -

gence i s bas i ca ll y a fu tu re o r i en t ed ex t ens ion o f com pe t i t o r ana lys i s (W r igh t e t a l. ,

2002) . Ac t i v i t i e s pe r fo rmed a re a imed a t t he co l l ec t i on o f i n fo rmat ion on how

comp et i to r s dea l w i th cus tomers an d t he i r ( fu tu re ) needs and pe rcep t i ons . A dd in g

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

8/18

O e r l e m a n s R o o k s a n d P r e t or i u s 4 5

t he a d j e c tive ' t e c hno log ic a l ' imp l i e s t ha t t he i n f o r m a t ion c o l l e c t ion a l so de a l s w i th

the t e c hno log ie s tha t c om pe t i t o r s u se t o a n t i c ipa te t he se ( f u tu r e ) c us tom e r ne e ds

a nd pe r c e p t ions . The r e su lt s o f bo th t ype o f i n t e l l i ge nc e a r e u se d a s a n inpu t t o t he

t e c hno log y s t ra t e gy de c i s ion - m a k ing p r oc e s s ( Ta sk in e t a l. , 2004 ) .

C on duc t ing a c t iv it i es a s de sc r ibe d a bove r e su l ts i n a n ov e r v i e w o f r e le va n t t e c h -

nolog ica l op t ions , w hich can ass is t in (Burg e lm an e t a l ., 1996) s t r a teg ic dec is io n-

m aking on m ajor r eor ien ta t ions of com pan y pol icy (e.g ., bus iness and R D s t ra tegy)

a n d t h e i m p r o v e m e n t o f o p e r at io n a l d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g , e s p e c i a ll y w i t h r e g a rd t o t h e

R D po r t fo l io a nds it s d i r e c t ion o f de ve lop m e n t , R D p r o j e c t s e l e c t ion , a nd r e -

sou r c e a l loc a t ion be twe e n t e c hno log ie s . I n sum, i t a l l ows a n o r ga n iz a t ion to ge t

be t t e r i n f o r me d a bou t pos s ib l e de ve lopme n t s i n t he t e c hno log ic a l f u tu r e , wh ic h

c ou ld gu ide i t to a m or e f a vo r a b le ma r k e t pos i ti on . The a bove l i ne o f r e a son ing

leads to H ypo thes is 3 :

H3: Conducting an external technology audit is positively associated with

the improvement of the relative market position of organizations.

Interaction between Internal and External Technology Audits

The in t e r r el a t e d na tu r e o f t he a c t iv it i es pu t f o r wa r d in t he t e c hno logy s t r a t e gy

f r a me wor k , wh ic h w a s de p ic t e d in F igu r e 1 , sugge s t s t ha t i n t e r a c t ion e f fe c t s a r e

p l a usib le . Espe c i a ll y , i nnova t ing f ir m s c om bin in g in t e r na l a nd e x t e r na l t e c hn o log y

a ud i ts pos s ib ly ou tpe r f o r m o r ga n iz a t ions t ha t on ly a pp ly on e o f bo th ( Ha le y , 2000 ;

Gregory , 1996; Ford , 1998) . The a rgument runs as fo l lows . F i rms conduc t ing e i -

t he r in t e r na l te c hno logy a ud i t s o r e x t e r na l t e c hno log y a ud i ts a r e we l l i n f o r m e d

a bou t t he i r c u r re n t t e c hno log ic a l pos i t i ons o r a bo u t t he i r f u tu r e t e c hno logy op -

t ions , r e spe c tive ly . A l tho ugh innova t ing f i r ms c ond uc t ing one o f bo th a ud i t s ha ve

c l e ar k n o w l e d g e a n d i n f o rm a t i o n a d v a n t a g es o v e r f i r m s n o t p e r f o r m i n g o n e o f

the se a ct iv i t ie s , t he a c tua l c om bina t ion o f bo th a ud i t s c ou ld l e a d to s t r onge r c om -

pe t i t i ve a dva n ta ge s t ha t t r a ns l a t e i n impr ove d ma r ke t pos i t i ons . Af t e r a l l , f i r ms

posse s s ing know le dge a nd in f o r m a t ion a bou t t he i r c u r r e n t t e c hno lo gy pos i ti on a nd

the i r f u tu re t e c hno logy op t ions ha ve a c l e a r v i e w on the m a gn i tu de o f t he i r t e c h -

no logy ga p . Th i s a wa r e ne s s e na b le s t he m to f o r mu la t e a we l l - i n f o r m e d a nd go a l -

d i r e c t e d t e c hno log y s tr a te gy tha t w i l l he lp t he m to b r idge the e x i s t i ng ga p . H e nc e ,

Hypothes is 4 r eads :

H4: Conducting both an internal and an external technology audit is posi

tively associated with the improvement of the relative market position of

organizations.

Technology Manager

B one a n d S a xon ( 2000) a r gue tha t t he p r e se nc e o f a n e m ploye e r e spons ib l e f o r

the ma na ge me n t o f t e c hno logy i s a n impor t a n t p r e c ond i t i on f o r suc c e s s f u l t e c h -

no logy s t r at e gy p roc e s ses . S uc h a n e m ploye e o r e m p loye e s ( i .e . , a t e c hn o log y ma n -

a ge m e n t te a m) m a y pe r f o r m se ve r a l func t ions . F ir s t, t e c hno logy ma na ge r s c a n g e t

s ign - on . S e c ond , t he y a r e a b le t o ge ne r a t e a nd s t imu la t e i n t e r na l imp le m e n ta t ion

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

9/18

4 6 K n o w l e d g e , T e c h n o l o g y , P o l i c y / F a l l 2 0 0 5

champions. Third, they are able to create a process that is lasting. Fourth, they can

act as a recognizable focal point for all relevant stakeholders. Since the presence of

a technology manager in an organization probably will lead to a more well struc-

tured technology strategy process and a more clearly directed technology strategy,

an innovation firm will have a competitive advantage over innovating organiza-

tions lacking such an official (see also: Randall, 2004; Jones, Herschel and Moesel,

2003; Hauschildt and Schewe, 2000). Therefore, Hypothesis 5 runs as follows:

H5: The presence of a specific person for the management of technology in

organizations is positively associated with the improvement of the relative

market position of organizations

Control Variables

The estimates that will be presented in one of the next sections will contain two

control variables. The first control variable is organizational size. Size could per-

form two functions in our theoretical framework. On the one hand, conducting

internal and external technology audits and competitive position analysis may be

dependent on size, that is, larger firms may have a higher propensity to perform

these type o f activities. Hence, the effects of the technology strategy process indi-

cators are corrected for firm size. On the other hand, larger firms have as com-

pared to smaller firm more resources at their disposal, which they could spend on

for example marketing activities. Thus, larger firms are better equipped to improve

their relative market position.

An organization's market position could be improved simply because it recently

bought another firm, which could lead to an autonomous increase of sales and

market share, that is to its (financial) performance (DeLong, 2003; Ramaswamy

Waegelein, 2003; Ramaswamy, 1997). Models have to be controlled for such an

event.

The above lines of reasoning can be summarized in a research model, which is

presented in Figure 2.

R e s e a r c h M e t h o d

To test our hypotheses empirically we make use of the South African Innovation

Survey 2001 (SAIS2001). The SAIS2001 questionnaire was based on the Euro-

pean Community Innovation Survey but adapted to the South African context. Al-

terations concerned a stronger focus on engineering activities as a form o f innovative

behavior and more attention for non-innovating organizations. The population of

firms in the survey consisted of all South African firms in manufacturing and ser-

vices with 10 or more employees that conducted economic activities in the period

1998-2000. As a sampling frame the Reedbase Kompass database (August 2000

version) was used. This database contains 16,931 South African firms with a known

number of employees.

The empirical context of our research is the South African economy. To get an

impression of the business landscape of the country, we briefly describe some fea-

tures o f its economy. South Africa's GDP in 2004 is estimated at about 175,300

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

10/18

Oe r le m a n s Ro o k s a n d P r e to r iu s 4 7

F i g u r e :

R e s e a r c h M o d e l

I n t er n a l T e c h n o l o g y A u d i t

External Technology udit

Competit ive Posit ion Analysis

T e c h n o l o g y M a n a g e r

S i z e

A c q u i s i t i o n o f o t h e r f i r m

I m p r o v e m e n t o f

relative

m a r k e t p o s i t io n

m i l l i o n R a n d ( G D P i n c o n s t a n t 1 9 9 5 m a r k e t p r ic e s ). C o m p a r e d to c o m p a r a b l e

1 9 9 4 f i g u r e s, t h e S o u t h A f r i c a n e c o n o m y e x p e r i e n c e d a 3 0 g r o w t h o f G D P. O f f i -

c ia l e m p l o y m e n t i n S o u t h A f r i c a n d r o p p e d f r o m 5 ,3 m i l li o n in 1 9 9 4 t o a b o u t 4 , 6

m i l l i o n in 2 0 0 2 . B e t w e e n 1 9 7 0 a n d 1 9 9 0, t h e i n d u s tr i al s t r u c tu r e o f t h e c o u n t r y

c h a n g e d co n s id e r ab l y . I n 1 9 7 0 , a b o u t 3 0 o f a ll j o b s c o u l d b e f o u n d in a g r ic u l -

t u r e , 30 i n m a nu f a c t u r i ng , a nd 39 i n t he s e r v i c e s e c to r . I n 1990, t he f i gu r e s

w e r e : 14 ( a g r i c u lt u r e ) ; 32 ( m a nu f a c t u r i n g ) ; 54 ( s e r v i c e s ) r e s pe c t ive l y , s i g -

n a l i n g a d e v e l o p m e n t t o a s e r v i c e e c o n o m y .

I n S A I S 2 0 0 1 s t r a ti f ie d s a m p l i n g w a s u s e d a s t h e s a m p l i n g t e c h n i q u e ( s e e

O e r l e m a n s , P r e t o r iu s & B u y s ( 2 0 0 1 ) f o r a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e s a m p l i n g

p r o c e d u r e s ) . T h e p o p u l a t i o n o f S o u t h A f r i c a n f i r m s w a s d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e d i ff e r -

e n t s ize c lasses . T a k i n g th e n u m b e r o f e m p l o y e e s a s a n i n d i c a t io n o f t h e s i z e o f a

f i r m , t he f o l l ow i ng t h r e e s tr a ta w e r e d i s t i ngu i s h e d :

S t ra t u m l : i r m s w i t h 11 to 2 0 e m p l o ye e s; S t r a t u m 2 : 2 1 - 5 0 e m p l o ye e s a n d ;

S t ra tum 3: more than 50 employees .

D a t a c o l l e c t io n p r o c e s s s t a rt e d i n D e c e m b e r 2 0 0 1 , w h e n a b o u t 7 , 0 0 0 q u e s t i o n -

n a i r e s w e r e m a i l e d t o s a m p l e d S o u t h A f r i c a n f i r m s i n m a n u f a c t u r i n g a n d s e r v ic e s .

T h e q u e s t io n n a i r e w a s s e n t, i n c l u d i n g a l e tt e r o f r e c o m m e n d a t i o n b y t h e S o u t h

A f r i c a n M i n i s te r o f A r t s , C u l t u r e , S c i e n c e a n d T e c h n o l o g y , t o t h e m a n a g i n g d i r e c -

t o r s o f t h e s a m p l e d f ir m s . F i r m s w e r e g i v e n t h e o p t i o n to c o m p l e t e a w e b - b a s e d

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

11/18

4 8 K n o w l e d g e , T e c h n o l o g y , P o l ic y / F a ll 2 0 0 5

e l e c t ro n i c v e r s i o n o f t h e q u e s t io n n a i r e o r t o f il l i n t h e p a p e r v e r s i o n o f q u e s t i o n -

na i r e a nd s e nd i t ba c k by pos t a l m a i l t o t he r e s e a r c h t e a m . I n M a y 2002 , t he r e -

s e a r c h t e a m de c i de d t o c ha ng e t he da ta c o l l e c t ion s tr a te gy be c a us e t oo f e w c om pl e t e d

q u e s t i o n n a i r e s c a m e i n . T h e r e f o r e , t h e p o s ta l s u r v e y i n g p r o c e s s w a s e n d e d a n d a

s t ra t e g y o f d i re c t s u r v e y i n g b y t e le p h o n i c i n te r v i e w a n d e - m a i l w a s i m p l e m e n t e d .

A t o ta l o f 6 1 7 f i r m s o f t h e 7 , 3 3 9 i n t h e s a m p l e f i l l e d in a n d r e t u r n e d t h e q u e s -

t io n n a i re . T h e p e r c e n t a g e o f f i r m s t h a t r e s p o n d e d w a s t h u s 8 .4 % . T h i s i s a r a th e r

l o w f i g u r e , e v e n w h e n w e c o n s i d e r t h a t r e s p o n s e f i g u r e s i n o r g a n i z a ti o n a l r e s e a rc h

o f t e n a r e r a t he r l ow ( s e e f o r e xa m pl e K a l l e be r gh , 1996 ). W e t he r e f o r e de c i d e d t o

s u r v e y th e n o n - r e s p o n s e g r o u p t o d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r th i s g r o u p d i f f e re d f r o m t h e

r e s p o n s e g r o u p . A t e l e p h o n i c in t e r v ie w o f 4 6 2 f i r m s w a s c o n d u c t e d . S o m e q u e s -

t io n s w e r e a s k e d a b o u t s p e c i f ic r e a s o n s n o t to r e s p o n d a n d a b o u t s o m e f i r m c h a r -

a c t e ri s ti c s , li ke f o r e xa m pl e R& D a c ti v it y . T h e r e s pon s e t o the no n - r e s p ons e s u r ve y

w a s v e r y h i g h ( 9 0 % ) . N o n - r e s p o n d i n g f i r m s i n d i c a t e d th a t t h e ir r e as o n s f o r n o t

pa r t i c i pa t i ng i n t he s u r ve y f e l l i n t o t w o c a t e go r i e s . E i t he r t he y s t a t e d t ha t t he i r

o r g a n i z a t io n d i d n o t r e ce i v e a c o p y o f th e q u e s t io n n a i r e ( 5 2 % ) , o r a l a c k o f t i m e

r e s u l te d i n n o n - p a r t ic i p a t i o n ( 3 3 % ) . A m o n g s t o t h er s , n o n - r e s p o n d i n g f i r m s w e r e

a s k e d w h e t h e r th e y h a d t e c h n o l o g i c a l i n n o v a t io n s in t h e p e r i o d 1 9 9 8 - 2 0 0 0 a n d t o

w h a t e x t e n t t h e ir R & D a c t iv i ti e s w e r e o f a c o n t i n u o u s n a tu r e . O f c o u r s e , th e s a m e

q u e s t i o n s w e r e a s k e d t o t h e r e s p o n d i n g o r g a n i z at io n s . A c o m p a r i s o n o f th e r e -

s p o n s e a n d t h e n o n - r e s p o n s e g r o u p r e v e a l e d n o s i g n i f i c a n t d i f fe r e n c e s .

I n t h is s t u d y , w e f o c u s o n a s u b s e t o f t h e r e s p o n s e g r o u p , n a m e l y f i r m s w i t h

t e c hno l og i c a l i nnova t i ons , t ha t i s , o r ga n i z a t i ons t ha t ha d p r oc e s s , p r od uc t o r s e r -

v i c e i n n o v a t io n s in t h e p e r i o d 1 9 9 8 - 2 0 0 0 . I n th e r e s p o n s e g r o u p 3 1 9 o f t h e 6 1 7

f i r m s ( 51 . 7% ) i nd i c a t e d tha t t he y ha d t e c hno l og i c a l i nnova t i on s i n t h i s pe r i od .

M e a s u r e s

O u r d e p e n d e n t v a r ia b le , i m p r o v e d r el a ti v e m a r k e t p o s i t io n , w a s m e a s u r e d b y

m a k i n g u s e o f t h e f o ll o w i n g q u e s t i o n in th e q u e s t io n n a i r e : C o m p a r e d to t h e m a r -

k e t l e a d e r i n y o u r f i r m ' s l in e o f b u s i n e s s , h o w h a v e t h e i n n o v a t i o n s r e p o r t e d i n

q u e s t i o n s 2 a - 2 c a f f e c t e d

y u r

f i r m ' s r e la t iv e m a r k e t p o s i t io n i n t h e p e r i o d 1 9 9 8 - -

2 0 0 0 ? . R e s p o n d e n t s c o u l d in d i c a t e o n a f i v e p o i n t sc a le h o w t h e i r f ir m ' s p o s i t i o n

c ha ng e d : ' w o r s e ne d s ubs t a n t i a l ly ' ( 1 .2%) , ' w o r s e n e d t o a sm a l l e x t e n t ' (6 . 1%) , ' no

c h a n g e ' ( 1 7 .5 % ) , ' i m p r o v e d t o a sm a l l e x te n t ' ( 3 7 . 2 % ) , a n d ' i m p r o v e d s u b s ta n -

t ia l ly ' ( 3 8 % ) . S i n c e th e c a t e g o r ie s ' w o r s e n e d ' a n d ' i m p r o v e d to a s m a l l e x t e n t ' ar e

c l o s e t o t h e c a t e g o r y ' n o c h a n g e ' , w e d e c i d e d t o c o n s t r u c t a d u m m y v a r ia b l e I M -

P RO V E ( 1 = s ubs t a n t ia l l y i m p r ove d r e l at ive m a r k e t pos i t i on ( 38%) , 0 = no i m -

p r o v e m e n t o f r e l at iv e m a r k e t p o s i t io n ( 6 2 % ) ).

T h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e c o n t a i n e d a l is t o f q u e s ti o n s a b o u t t e c h n o l o g y a n d i n n o v a t i o n

m a n a g e m e n t a c t iv i t ie s . T a b l e 1 p r e s e n t s t he s e a c t i v it i e s a nd t he f r e que nc y i n w h i c h

i n n o v a t in g f i r m s p e r f o r m t h e m .

E a c h o f t h e t h r e e t h e o r e ti c a l v ar ia b l es ' e x t e rn a l t e c h n o l o g y a u d i t ' , ' c o m p e t i t i v e

p o s i t i o n a n a ly s i s ' a n d ' i n te r n a l t e c h n o l o g y a u d i t' i s m e a s u r e d a s a d u m m y v a ri a b le ,

s u c c es s iv e l y E X T A U D I T , C O M P O S , a n d I N T A U D I T . I f o n e o r m o r e o f th e t e c h -

n o l o g y m a n a g e m e n t a c ti v it ie s i n d i c a ti n g t h e th e o r e t ic a l v a r ia b l e w a s c o n d u c t e d

( s e e T a b l e 1 ) t he n t he d um m y va r i a b le t a ke s on t he va l ue 1 , o t he r w i s e i t t a ke s t he

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

12/18

Oerlemans Rooks and Pretorius 49

Table 1

T h e P r o p o r ti o n o f Fi rm C o n d u c t i n g T e c h n o l o g y

a n d I n n o v a t i o n M a n a g e m e n t A c t i v i t i e s

Proportion of innovating

Theoretical variable TIM activity firms cond ucting activity

External technology aud i t Technology m oni to r ing 55

a nd s c a nn ing

Technologyforecasting 35

and fore-sighting

C om peti t iv e technological 49

intelligence

Co mp et i t ive pos i t ion analys is Co m pet i tor analys is 72

Ind ustr y analysis 78

M arket analys is 85

In terna l t echnology audi t Techn ology/ innov a t ion

audi t o f ow n organiza t ion

Core com pe tence asses sment

of ow n organiza t ion

Intellectual pro pe rty au dit

of ow n organiza t ion

37

62

36

va l ue 0 . A d d i t i ona l l y a n i n t e r a c t ion va r ia b l e , E X T _I N T , r e p r e s e n t i ng t he i n t e r a c -

t io n b e t w e e n e x t e r n a l t e c h n o l o g y a u d i t a n d i n t e r n a l t e c h n o l o g y a u d i t w a s c o n -

s tr u c te d . T h i s i n t e r a c ti o n v ar ia b l e is c o m p u t e d a s t h e p r o d u c t o f E X T A U D I T a n d

I N T A U D I T .

T w o c on t r o l va r i a b l e s w e r e e m p l o ye d i n t he a na ly s i s . O r ga n i z a t i ona l s i z e w a s

m e a s u r e d a s th e n u m b e r o f e m p l o y e e s in t h e y e a r 2 0 0 0 . T o a d j u st f o r t h e s k e w n e s s

o f t h e d i st r ib u t i o n o f t h e n u m b e r o f e m p l o y e e s , t h e v a r ia b l e S I Z E i s c o n s t r u c t e d a s

t h e n a t u ra l l o g a r i th m o f th e n u m b e r o f e m p l o y e e s . T h e s e c o n d c o n t r o l v a r ia b l e i s

w h e t h e r o r n o t t h e f ir m b o u g h t a n o th e r f i r m i n t h e p e ri o d 1 9 9 8 - 2 0 0 0 . T h e d u m m y

v a r ia b l e B U Y (1 = f i r m b o u g h t o t h e r f i r m , 0 = f i r m d i d n o t b u y a n o t h e r f i r m ) w a s

b a s e d o n a s t ra i g h t fo r w a r d q u e s t io n w h e t h e r th e f i r m b o u g h t a n o t h e r f i r m i n th e

p e r i o d 1 9 9 8 - 2 0 0 0 . T h e d u m m y v a ri ab l e M A N A G E R i n d i ca t e d w h e t h e r t h e r e w a s

a s p e c i f ic p e r s o n i n t h e f i r m r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e m a n a g e m e n t o f t e c h n o l o g y a n d

i n n o v a t io n (1 = t e c h n o l o g y m a n a g e r p r e s e n t in f i r m , 0 = n o m a n a g e r p r e s e n t i n

f i rm) .

T a b l e 2 p r e s e n t s t he va r i a b le s u s e d i n t he a na l y s i s . A f r a c t i on o f 38 pe r c e n t o f

t h e r e s p o n d e n t s in o u r s a m p l e i n d i c a t e d t h a t th e i r f i r m i m p r o v e d t h e i r m a r k e t p o s i -

t i on s ubs t a n t i a l l y . Bo t h e x t e r na l a nd i n t e r na l t e c hno l ogy a ud i t s w e r e qu i t e o f t e n

c o n d u c t e d b y t h e f i r m s : 7 2 a n d 7 4 , r e sp e c ti v e ly . M a r k e t a n a l y s is w a s m o s t

o f t e n c a r r ie d o u t ( 8 5 ) . O n a v e r a g e, t h e f i r m s i n o u r s a m p l e e m p l o y e d 1 , 21 7 p e r-

s o n s . I n 2 0 0 0 , t h e la r g e st f i r m i n o u r s a m p l e e m p l o y e d 9 0 , 5 1 4 p e r s o n s . A t o t al o f

1 8 o f t h e f i r m s in o u r s a m p l e b o u g h t a n o t h e r f i r m i n t h e p e r i o d 1 9 9 8 - 2 0 0 0 . T h e

i n n o v a t i n g f i r m s in o u r s a m p l e r a t h e r o f t e n e m p l o y e d t e c h n o l o g y m a n a g e r s (6 9 ) .

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

13/18

5 0 K n o w l e d g e , T e c h n o l o g y , P o l i c y / F a l l 2 0 0 5

T a b l e 2

S u m m a r y S t a t i s t i c s o f t h e V a r i a b l e s U s e d i n t h e A n a l y s i s

N u m b e r o f S t an d a r d

V ar ia ble o b s e r v a ti o n s M e a n D e v i a t i o n M i n i m u m M a x i m u m

IMPROVE 235 0.38 0.49 0 1

EXTAUDIT 217 0.72 0.45 0 1

COMPOS 226 0.93 0.25 0 1

INTAUDIT 213 0.56 0.50 0 1

EXT_INT 206 0.56 0.50 0 1

SIZE 234 5.18 1.65 1.10 11.41

BUY 232 0.19 0.40 0 1

MANAGER 230 0.70 0.46 0 1

R e s u l t s

Table 3 compares the intensity with which the different technology and innova-

tion management activities are conducted with a numb er o f firm characteristics.

It turns out that innovating organizations performing a higher number of these

activities: (1) are larger organizations; (2) in 2000, exported a higher proportion of

their sales; (3) had higher percentages of specialists in their workforce; (4) had

higher percentages of higher educated employees. Interestingly, innovating firms

that conducted a higher number o f technology and innovation manag ement activi-

ties are not the more R&D intensive organizations, since no statistically sign ificant

differences could be observed.

Since the dependent variable IMPROVE is a dichotomous variable, we make

use of a multivariate logistic regression model. Table 4 presents the estimated lo-

gistic regression coefficients for two models. In these models, we controlled for

the fact that firms are clustered within sectors. In Mode l 1 only the main effects are

included, whereas in Model 2 the interaction effect is added to the main effects of

Model 1. According to a likelihood ratio test both models fit the data well. After

T a b l e 3

S o m e C h a r ac te r is ti cs o f F ir m s C o n d u c t i n g T e c h n o l o g y

a n d I n n o v a t i o n M a n a g e m e n t A c t iv i ti e s

Firm Nu m ber of TIM-activit ies AN OV A

Cha racteristics (mean s) 0-3 4-6 7-9 (Krusk al-Wa llis H)

Number of employees 2000 261 1, 60 0 1,325

Export ratio 2000 12% 17% 31%

R&D effort 4.2% 4. 0% 6.3%

Growth employment 16% 4.8% 10.2%

Percentage of specialists 18% 19% 26%

Percentage of higher educated employees 16% 20% 30%

23.890****

16.743 ***

0.489

1.204

4.780*

12.486 **

* = p < 0.10; ** = p < 0.05; *** = p < 0.01; **** = p < 0.001

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

14/18

Oe r le m a ns , Ro o k s , a nd Pr e to r ius 5 1

T a b l e 4

L o g i s ti c R e g r e s s i o n A n a l y s e s o f I m p r o v e d M a r k e t P o s i t i o n n = 2 03 ; s t a n d a rd

e rr or s a d j u s t in g f o r c l u s t er i n g o f f i r m s w i t h i n s ec t or s; l i s t w i s e d e l e t i o n o f

c a s e s w i t h m i s s i n g v a l u e s ).

M O D E L 1 M O D E L 2

Lo gi t S ta nd a r d Lo gi t S ta nd a r d

V a r ia b le Coeff ic ient Error p va lue Coeff ic ient Error p va lue

INTER CEPT 0,387 0,921 0.674 1,300 1,023 0,204

EXT AU DIT -0.196 0,221 0.375 -1,867 0,708 0,008

CO M PO S 0.401 0.517 0.439 0,594 0.476 0.211

INT AU DIT 0.278 0.230 0.226 -1.126 0.519 0.030

M A N A G ER 0.011 0.456 0.456 -0.061 0.435 0.887

EXT_INT 2.538 0.884 0.004

Control

va r i ab l es

SIZE -0.269 0,100 0,007 -0.329 0,103 0.001

BU Y 0.305 0,381 0.423 0,344 0.385 0.372

G o o d n e s s o f

fit

stat ist ics

W ald chi2

pro b > chi2

23 .92 (6 degrees o f f r eedom )

0.0005

73 .12 (7 degrees o f f r eedom )

0.0000

f it ti n g t h e m o d e l , w e p e r f o r m e d r e g r e s s i o n d i a g n o s t i c s . A n i n s p e c t io n o f t h e P e a r s o n

r e s i d u a l s a n d l e v e r a g e v a l u e s (P r e g i b o n , 1 9 8 1 ) r e v e a l e d n o p r o b l e m s i n t h e m o d e l

fi t .

T a b l e 4 p r e s e n t s t h e l o g it c o e f f i c i e n t s . T o b e a b l e t o i n t e r p r et t h e c o e f f i c i e n t s w e

h a v e t o t r an s f o r m th e c o e f f i c ie n t s t o s o - c a l le d o d d s r a ti o s ( H o s m e r L e m e s h o w ,

2 0 0 0 : c h a p t e r 3 ). T h e o d d s o f a p o s it i v e o u t c o m e a r e d e f i n e d a s t he p r o b a b i l i t y o f

a p o s it iv e o u t c o m e d i v i d e d b y o n e m i n u s t h e p r o b a b i l i ty o f th a t p o s i ti v e o u t c o m e .

T h e o d d s r a t io i s d e f i n e d a s th e r a t io o f t h e o d d s f o r a p o s i t i v e o u t c o m e t o th e o d d s

o f a n eg a t iv e o u t c o m e . O d d s r a ti o s h a v e f o u n d w i d e u s e a s th e y a p p r o x i m a t e h o w

m u c h m o r e l i k e l y (o r u n l i k e l y ) it i s, u n d e r c e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s , f o r th e o u t c o m e t o b e

presen t .

I n M o d e l 1 th e m a in e f f ec t s o f E X T A U D I T , C O M P O S , I N T A U D I T , a n d M A N -

A G E R a re t e s te d . N o n e o f th e c o e f f i c ie n t s o f t h o s e v a r ia b l e s d i f fe r s s i g n i f i c a n tl y

f r o m z e ro . H e n c e , H y p o t h e s e s 1 t o 4 a r e n o t c o n f i r m e d b y o u r re s u lt s. W e f i n d n o

e v i d e n c e t ha t a n e x te r n a l t e c h n o l o g y a u d i t , a c o m p e t i t i v e p o s i t i o n a n a l y s i s , a n i n -

t er n al t e c h n o l o g y a u d it , o r t h e p r e s e n c e o f a t e c h n o l o g y m a n a g e r h a s a n e f f e c t o n

i m p r o v i n g r e l a t i v e m a r k e t p o s i t i o n . T h e o n l y s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t ( p = 0 . 0 0 7 )

v a r i a b le w i t h a n e g a t iv e s i g n i s S I Z E , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t s m a l l e r f i r m s t e n d t o h a v e a

h i g h e r p r o b a b i l i t y t o i m p r o v e r e l a ti v e m a r k e t p o s i t io n .

I n M o d e l 2 t h e in t e ra c t io n e f f e c t b e t w e e n E X T A U D I T a n d 1 N T A U D I T , E X T _ I N T ,

i s a d d e d t o t h e e q u a t i o n . T h e l o g it c o e f f i c i e n t o f th i s i n t e r a c ti o n e f f e c t is p o s i t i v e

a n d h i g h l y s i g n i f ic a n t ( p = 0 . 0 0 4 ) . H e n c e H y p o t h e s i s 5 i s c o n f i r m e d . T o b e a b l e to

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

15/18

5 2 K n o w l e d g e , T e c h n o l o g y , P o l ic y / F a ll 2 0 0 5

i n t e rp r e t t he c oe f f i c ie n t , we f i rs t ha ve to c om pu te the sum o f t he c oe f f i c i e n t o f t he

m a in e f f ec t o f EXTA UD I T a nd the in t e r a c tion e f fe c t EX T_I NT , w h ic h g ive s 0 .671

a s a r e sul t. Af t e r t he e xpone n t i a t ion o f t h is n um be r we o b ta in the od ds r a t io , wh ic h

is 1 .96 . Th is te l l s us tha t an ex te rna l techn olo gy audi t wi l l be about tw ice as e f fec -

t ive in imp r ov ing r e l a tive ma r ke t p os i t ion i f it is c o m bine d w i th a n in t e rna l t e c h -

no logy a ud i t , t he n w he n i t is no t c om bine d w i th a n in t e r na l aud i t. I n M ode l 2 the

s igns o f t he va r ia b le s i nd ic a t ing se pa r at e i n t e rna l a nd e x te r na l t e c hno logy a ud i t s

a re s ta t i s t ica l ly s ign i f ican t and nega t ive . These resu l t s can be in te rpre ted as fo l -

lows . I n the p r e se n c e o f t he in t e r a c t ion e f f ec t , wh ic h ind ic a t e s tha t f i r m s c o m bine

in t e rna l a nd e x te r na l te c hno logy a ud i t s, c on duc t ing e i the r on ly a n in t e rna l o r a n

e x te r na l t e c hno log y a ud it p r oduc e s n e ga t ive e ff e c ts . O n ly kno w ing wh a t the c u r -

r e n t o rga n iz a t iona l t e c hno logy pos i ti on is o r on ly know ing wh ic h t e c hno lo gy op -

t ions a re ava i lab le in the fu ture resu l t in bo th c ases in an i l l -d i rec ted techno log y

s t ra t e gy tha t im pa c t s ne ga t ive ly on the r e l a t ive m a r ke t pos i t i on o f i nnova t ion o r ga -

n iz a tions . M or e ove r , t he se f ind ings s t re s s t he im por t a nc e o f a n in t e g r a t e d t e c hno l -

ogy s t ra tegy process .

F i r m s i z e i s a s ign i f i c a n t p r e d ic to r o f whe the r o r no t a n innova t ing f i r m im-

proves i t s r e la t ive marke t pos i t ion . The odds ra t io i s 0 .72 , ind ica t ing tha t la rge r

f i r ms a r e l e s s l i kely to im pr ove the i r ma r ke t pos i t i on tha n sma l l e r f i r ms . Th i s r e -

su lt c a n be e x p la ine d by the f a c t t ha t l a r ge fi r ms o f t e n a l r e a dy posse s a s ign i f i c a n t

sha r e o f the m a r ke t , a nd thus i t is mo r e d i f f i c u l t fo r t he m to e n la r ge th is sha r e o f

the m a r ke t subs t an t ia lly . Our r e su lt s do no t i nd ic a t e tha t bu y ing o f o the r f i r ms , o r

the p r e se nc e o f t e c hno log y ma na ge r s ha s a n e f f e c t on ma r ke t p os i ti on .

C o n c l u s i o n s a n d D i s c u s s io n

The m a in a im o f th i s pa pe r wa s a n e m pi r i c a l e xp lo ra t ion o f t he t e c hno logy s t ra t-

e gy - p e r f o r m a nc e r e la t ionsh ip a t t he l e ve l o f t he innova t ing f i r m. I n the pa pe r , a

t h e o re t ic a l f r a m e w o r k w a s d e r iv e d f r o m t h e t e c h n o l o g y m a n a g e m e n t a n d s t ra t eg y

l i te r a tu r e in wh ic h t e c hno lo gy s t r at e gy a c t iv i t ie s we r e r e l a t e d to f i r m pe r f o r m a nc e .

S e ve r a l hypo the se s w e r e de r ive d on the e f f e c t s o f c onduc t ing t e c h no log y s t r at e gy

a nd m a na g e m e n t a c tiv i ti e s on the im pr ove m e n t o f t he r e la t ive ma r k e t pos i ti ons o f

innova t ing f i r ms .

Ou r r e su lt s g ive r is e t o som e in t e r e s t ing c on c lus ions a nd d i sc uss ions . The f i rs t

t h r e e hypo the se s a s su m e d tha t c onduc t ing in t e r na l a nd e x te r na l t e c hno logy a ud i ts ,

a nd c om pe t i t ive pos it i on a na lys i s s e pa ra t e ly w ou ld impa c t on the im pr ove m e n t o f

the r e la t ive m a r ke t pos i t ion o f i nnova t ing f ir ms . How e ve r , non e o f the se hyp o th -

e se s we r e e m pi r i c a l ly c on f i r me d . The f i rs t m ode l on ly p r od uc e d a s t a t is t ic a l ly s ig -

n i f i c a n t s i z e e f f e c t i n d i c a t i n g t h a t s m a l l e r f i r m s h a d a h i g h e r p r o b a b i l i t y o f

impr ov ing the i r re l a tive ma r ke t pos i t i on . The se r e su l t s s igna l t ha t c ond uc t ing un r e -

l a t ed t e c hno lo gy s t r at e gy a c tiv i ti e s p r odu c e inc o m ple t e know le dge inpu t s f o r a n

organiza t ion s techno logy s t rategy . Subsequen t ly , f i rms a re le ss ab le to techno logi -

c a l ly pos i t i on the mse lve s a de qua te ly a nd to f o r mu la t e a nd im p le m e n t we l l - d i r e c t e d

s t rateg ies . Inves t iga t ing e i the r cur ren t techn olo gy pos i t ions or poss ib le fu ture tech-

no logy op t ions p r oduc e s in su f f i c i e n t c ombina t ions o f d i f f e r e n t t ype s o f knowl -

e dge to de s ign a s t r a te g ic t e c hno log ic a l de ve lopm e n t pa th f o r a n o r ga n iz a t ion .

The impo r t a nc e o f c ombin ing spe c i f ic t e c hno log y s t ra t egy a c t iv it i es wa s s t re s se d

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

16/18

Oe r le m a n s Ro o k s a n d P r e to r iu s 5 3

b y t h e f i n d i n g s o f o u r s e c o n d m o d e l i n w h i c h t h e i n te r a ct io n e f fe c t o f c o n d u c t i n g

i n te r n a l a n d e x t er n a l t e c h n o l o g y a u d i t s tu r n e d o u t t o i n f l u e n c e t h e i m p r o v e m e n t o f

a n i nno va t i ng f i r m s r e l a t ive m a r ke t po s i t i on i n a pos i t i ve w a y. T h i s r e s u l t h i gh -

l i gh t s t ha t t he t e c hno l ogy s t r a t e gy p r oc e s s i s t r u l y a p r oc e s s i n w h i c h d i f f e r e n t

a c t i v i ti e s ha ve t o be i n t e g r a t e d i n o r de r t o be b e ne f i c i a l .

O n t h e b a s is o f t h e a b o v e , t h r e e c o n c l u s i o n s c a n b e f o r m u l a t e d . F i rs t, c o n d u c t -

i ng t e c hn o l o gy s tr a t e gy a c t i v i ti e s pa ys o u t . S e c ond , ou r f i nd i n gs s t r e ss t ha t t he

t e c h n o l o g y p r o c e s s e s s h o u l d b e a w e l l - st r u c t u r e d p r o c e s s i n w h i c h s p e c i f i c a c ti v i-

t ie s a re c o n d u c t e d , a f i n d i n g o f i m p o r t a n c e t o p r a c t i ti o n e r s i n t h e f i e l d o f t e c h n o l -

o g y m a n a g e m e n t . T h ir d, i t c a n b e c o n c l u d e d t h a t th e c o m b i n a t i o n o f s p e c i f ic

t e c hno l ogy s t r a t e gy a c t i v i t i e s , t ha t i s i n t e r na l i n c om bi na t i on w i t h e x t e r na l t e c h -

n o l o g y a u d i t s , is r e le v a n t t o f i r m p e r f o r m a n c e . P r a c t i t io n e r s c a n b e n e f i t f r o m t h i s

f i n d i n g s i n c e i t w i ll e n a b l e t h e m t o d i r e c t r e s o u r c e s t o t h e s e k i n d s o f a c t iv i ti e s a n d

no t to o the rs .

L a s tl y , w e p r o v i d e s o m e s u g g e s t i o n s f o r f u tu r e r e s ea r c h . T h e e m p i r i c a l m o d e l s

i n t h is p a p e r u s e d r e la t iv e l y s t r a ig h t f o r w a r d m e a s u r e s o f t e c h n o l o g y s t ra t e g y a c -

t i v i t i e s . T h e s e m e a s u r e s c o u l d b e m a d e m o r e s o p h i s t i c a t e d b y l o o k i n g m o r e i n

d e p t h a t t h e a c t iv i ti e s ta k i n g p l a c e w i t h i n f o r i n s t a n c e t e c h n o l o g y m o n i t o r i n g o r

f o r e ca s ti n g . W h i c h t e c h n i q u e s a n d t o o l s a r e a p p l i e d ? H o w is t h e c o l l e c t e d i n f o r-

m a t i o n p r o c e s se d ? T h e s e a n d o t h e r q u e s ti o n s c o u l d e n r i c h o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f

t he t e c hno l ogy s t ra t e gy p r oc e s s . T h i s pa pe r f o c us e d p r i m a r i l y a t t he f i r s t t w o s t a ge s

o f t h e B o n e a n d S a x o n t e c h n o l o g y s tr a t eg y f r a m e w o r k . F u t u r e r e s ea r c h c o u l d c o n -

c e n t ra t e o n t h e s t r at e g y f o r m u l a t i o n a n d t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n p r o c e s s. F u r t h e r m o r e ,

B o n e a n d S a x o n s m o d e l i s s e q u e n t ia l . H e n c e , t h e m o d e l s u g g e s t s t h a t a c ti v it ie s

s h o u l d b e p e r f o r m e d i n a s p e c i f i c o r d er . B u t d o s p e c i f ic s e q u e n c e s o f a c ti v i ti e s

r e al ly m a t t e r a n d a r e o t h e r s e q u e n c e s d e t r i m e n t a l f o r t h e o u t c o m e s o f t h e t e c h n o l -

o g y s t r a te g y p r o c e s s ? A n s w e r i n g t h e s e a n d r e l a te d q u e s t i o n s d e m a n d s a l o n g i t u d i -

n a l r e se a r c h d e s i g n , w h i c h c o u l d b e a n o t h e r i n t e r e s ti n g r e s e a r c h a v e n u e t o e x p l o r e .

C o m b i n e d w i t h t h e f i n d i n g s p r e s e n t e d a n d d i s c u s s e d in t h i s p a p e r , t h is w o u l d l e a d

t o a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e t e c h n o l o g y s t ra t e g y p r o c e s s e s b e n e f i c i a l to r e s e a r c h e rs

a nd p r a c t i ti one r s .

R e f e r e n c e s

Anonymous, (2000). Outsourcing Rese arch and De velop me nt. Strategic Direction, 16, 27-29 .

Ashton, W.B., Kinzey, B.R. Gu nn Jr., M.E. (1991). A Structured A ppro ach for M onitorin g Science

and Technology Developments. International Journal o f Technology Managem ent, 6, 91-111.

Bone, S. Saxon, T. (2000). De velo ping Effe ctive Technology Strategies. Research T echnology

Management, 43, 50-58.

Brockhoff , K. (1996). Technology M anagem ent in the C om pany o f the Future. TechnologyAnalysis

Strategic M anagement, 8. 175-189.

Burgelman, R.A. Ro senb loom , R.S. (1989). Technology Strategy: An Ev oluti ona ry Pro ces s Per-

spective. In Burgelman, R.A. Ro senb loom , R.S. (Eds.) Research on Technological Innova-

tion, Managem ent and P olicy. Greenwich, CT 4: JAI Press, 1-23.

Burgelman, R.A., Maidique, M.A. Wheelwright, S.C. (1995). Strategic M anagement of Technol-

ogy and Innovation. Boston: I rwin McGraw-Hil l .

Carayannis, E,G., (2000). Strategic Managem ent o f Technological Learning. Boca Raton, Florida:

CRC Press LLC.

Coburn, M.M ., Greenwood, D.J . Matteo, M.R. (2002). Sup porting Strategy with Co m petitiv e

Analysis. Research Technology Managem ent, 45(5), 43-47.

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

17/18

5 4 K n o w l e d g e , T e c h n o l o g y , P o l i c y / F a ll 2 0 0 5

Da Silveira , G.J .C. (2002) . Imp rovem ent Trajector ies in Op erat ions and Technology M anagem ent:

Concept, Process and Content Issues.

Technology Analysis Strategic M anagem ent,

14, 22 7-

240.

Deeds, D .L., Decarol is , D. & C oom bs, J .E. (1997) . The Im pac t of Firm -specif ic Capabil i t ies on the

Am ount o f Capita l Raised in an Init ia l Public Offering: Evidence o f the Telecom mun icat ion

Equ ipmen t Industry .

Managem ent Science,

12, 1663-1677.

Delong, G. (2003). Does L ong-Term Performance of Mergers M atch Ma rket Expecta t ions? Evi-

dence fro m the US Banking Industry .

Financial Managem ent,

32(5), 5-25.

Dussauge, E , Hart, S. & Ramananysoa, B. (1992). Strategic Technology M anagem ent. London: W iley.

Fallah, M .H. (1997) . Proc ess Audit: Fro m C om pliance to Self-managem ent . International Journal

o f Technology Management, 14(1,2,3), 277-286.

Ford, S. (1988). De velop Your Technology Strategy. Long Range Planning, 21, 85-95.

Gre gory, M.J., Probert, D.R. & Cowell, D.R . (1996). Auditing Technology M ana gem ent Processes.

International Journ al o f Technology Managem ent, 12(3) , 306-31 9.

Halal, W.E. (2004) . The Intel ligent In ternet : T he Prom ise of Sma rt Com puters and E-C om merce .

The F uturist, 38, 27-32.

Haley, G.T. (2000). Intellectual Prop erty Rights and Foreign D irect Investm ents in Em ergin g Mar-

kets. M arketing Intelligence Planning, 18(5), 273-280.

Hauschild t , J . & Schewe, G . (2000). Gatek eeper and Process Promotor: K ey Persons in Agile and

Innovative Organizations. International Journal o f Agile M anagement Systems, 2(2) , 96-102.

Ho sm er, D.W. & Lem eshow, S. (2000).

Ap plied Logistic Regression.

Ne w York: Wiley.

Jones , N.B., Herschel , R.T. & M oesel , D.D . (2003) . U sing Kn ow ledge Cham pions to Faci li ta te

Knowledge M anagement .

Journal o f Knowledge Management,

7(1 ), 4 9-6 3.

Kallebergh, A ., Kn oke, D., Marsden, EV. & Spaeth, J.L. (1996). Organizational Prop erties and Prac-

tices. In A. K alleberg , D. Knoke, EV. Mars den & J.L Spaeth (Eds), Organizations in Ame rica:

Analyzing Their Structures and Human Resources Practices,

pp. 3-22. Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.

Khalil, T. (2000).

Managem ent o f Technology. The Key to Competitiveness and Wealth Creation.

Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Leavy, B. (2003). A ssessin g Your Strategic Alternatives from both a M arket Position and Co re Co m -

peten ce Perspective. Strategy Leadership, 31(6) , 29-35 .

Lefebvre , L.A., Mason, R. & Lefebvre , E. (1997) . The Inf luence Prism in SMEs: The Power of

CE O's Perceptions on Technology Policy and its Organizational Im pacts. Management Sci-

ence,

4 3 ,8 5 6 - 8 7 8 .

Lem os, A.D . & Porto, A.C. (1998). Technological Forecasting Techniques a nd Co m petitive Intelli-

gence: Tools for Im pro ving the Innovation Process. Industrial Mana gemen t + Data Systems,

98, 330-341.

McG ee, J. & D owling, M. (1994) . U sing R& D C ooperat ive Arran gem ents to Leverage Manageria l

Experience: A S tudy of Technology-intensive Ne w Ventures.

Journ al o f Business Venturing, 9,

33-48 .

Molina, M .A., Pino, I.B. del, Rodriquez, A. (2004). Industry, Man agem ent Ca pabilitie s and Firm s'

Competitiveness: An Empirical Contribution. Managerial a nd Decision Economics, 25(5) , 26 5-

272.

Oerlemans, L.A .G., Pretorius, M.W ., Bu ys, A.J., Ro oks, G . (2004). Industrial Innovation in South

Africa, 1998-2000.

Pretoria: Un iversity o f Pretoria.

Phillips, EY . (2001 ). Market-Oriented Technology Managem ent. Innovating for Pro fit in Entrepre-

neurial Times. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Porter, M.E. (1980). Com petitive Strategy: Techn iques fo r Analyzing Industries an d Comp etitors.

Ne w York: Free Press.

Porter, M.E. (1985a). Technology and Com petitiv e Ad vantag e. Journ al o f Business Strategy, 5 , 6 0 -

78.

Porter, M.E. (1985b).

Competitive Advantage.

Ne w Y ork: Free Press .

Porter, M.E. (1990). Competitive Advantage o f Nations. Johannesburg: Macmillan.

Prahalad, C.K. & Ham el, G. (1990) . The Core C omp etences of the Corporat ion.

Harvard Business

Review, May-June, 79-9 1.

Pregibon, D. (1981). L ogistic R egres sion Diagnostics.

Annals o f Statistics, 9, 7 05-724.

8/9/2019 art%3A10.1007%2Fs12130-005-1004-0

18/18

O e r l e m a n s R o o k s a n d P r e t o ri u s 5 5

Prehoda, R .W. (1967). Designing the Future--The Role of Technological Forecasting.London: C hilton

Books.

Ramaswamy, K.P. (1997) . The P erforman ce Imp act of Stra tegic Similar i ty in H orizonta l M ergers .

Academy of Management Journal,

40(3), 697-715.

Ramasw amy, K.P. Waegelein, J.E (2003). Firm Financial Perform ance Following Mergers. Re-

view of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 20(2), 115-126.

Randall, D. (2004). Crisis of Disruptive Ima ginatio n. Strategy Leadership, 32(4), 55-57.

Sharma , B. (2003). R D Stra tegy and Austra lian M anufactur ing Industry: An Em pir ical Invest iga-

tion of Em phasis an d Effectiveness. Technovation,2 3 ,9 2 9 - 9 3 7 .

Souitaris, V. (2002) . Technological T rajector ies as Mo derators o f Firm-level D eterminants of Inno-

vation. Research Policy,3 1 ,8 7 7 - 8 9 8 .

Stalk , G. , Evans, E Shulman, L.E. (1992) . Com peting on Capabili ties: T he New Rules of Co rpo-

rate Strategy. Harvard Business Review,March-Apr i l , 57 -69 .

St il lman, H.S. (1997) . How ABB Decides on the B est Technology Investments . Research Technol-

ogy Management,

40, 14-22.

Takei, E (1985). E valuation Method fo r Engineering Activ i ty through com parison with com peti-

tion. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management,2, 63-70.

Taskin, H., Adali, M.R. Ersin, E. (2004). Technological In telligence and Co mp etitive Strategies:

An Application Study with Fuzzy Logic.

Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing,

15, 417 -429 .

Turvani , M. (2001) . Microfoundations of Know ledge Dy nam ics within the Firm. Industry and Inno-

vation, 8(3), 309 -323.

Twiss, B. Go odridg e, M. (1989). Managing Technology or CompetitiveAdvantage. Pitman.

Vicente, J.M. Palop, E (1996). Technology Monitoring and Industrial Divers ification: A Div ersi-

f ica t ion Project of an Endogamic Mo noclonal Industria l Fabric by Dissem inat ing Innovation

Opportunities. International Journal of Technology Management, 12, 449-46 1.

W ilbon, A.D . (1999). An Em pirical Investigation o f Technology S trategy in Co m pu ter Softw are

Initial Public O ffering Firms. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 16, 147-

169.

Wright, S., Pickton, D.W., Callow, J. (2002). Com petitiv e Intelligence in U K Firms: A Typology.

Marketing Intelligence Planning,

20, 349-360.

Zahra, S.A. Covin, J.G. (1993). Business Strategy, Technology Policy and Firm Perfo rm ance .

Strategic Management Journal,

14, 451-4 78.

Zahra , S .A. (1996) Technology Stra tegy and Financia l Performance: Examining the Moderat ing

Role of the Firm's C omp eti t ive Environment. Journal of Business Venturing, 11, 189-219.