Key Factors Predicting Firm’s Technological Capability of Malaysian Manufacturing Industry from Technology Transfer Perspective.

Author(s)

Siti Aishah Md Hasan , Prof. Dr Abdullah Ibrahim ,

Download Full PDF Pages: 37-49 | Views: 361 | Downloads: 92 | DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3461486

Volume 4 - September 2015 (09)

Abstract

The current global economy is being transformed into a knowledge-based economy where continuous updating of technology and improving firm’s technological capabilities are of major concern. As technologies capabilities go up, it translates into better performance. Malaysia was on track towards becoming a developing country in strategic industrial sectors such as electrics and electronics, automotive, technology information, and biotechnology. In fact, Malaysia faces daunting challenges to improve its technological capabilities and gear its economy on a path to higher growth, and transition it to a higher level of development. The objectives of this study is to identify the key factors contributing to the development of firm’s technological capabilities and enhancing firm’s technology transfer performance. The result of this study shows that 52% of the selected key factors predicting the firm’s technological capability, and indicates important means for Malaysian manufacturing firms to gain higher performance and competitive advantage.

Keywords

Technological Capabilities, Technology Transfer, Manufacturing Firms

References

  1. Aragon-Correa, J. A., Garcia-Morales V. J. and Cordon-Pozo. E. 2005. Leadership and organizational learning’s role on innovation and performance: lessons from Spain. Industrial Marketing Management. 36: 349-359.
  2. Archibugi, D. and Coco, A. 2004. A new indicator of technological capabilities for developed and developing countries (ArCo). World Development. 32(4): 629-654.
  3. Avolio, B. J., and Bass, B. M. 2002. Developing potential across a full range of leadership cases on transactional and transformational leadership. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  4. Baum, J. A. C., Calabrese, T. and Silverman, B. S. 2000. Don’t go it alone: Alliance network composition and start-ups’ performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal. 21(3): 267-294.
  5. Byrne, B.M. 2001. Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  6. Chesbrough Henry. 2003. Open Innovation. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.
  7. Cheung, C.M.K. and Lee, M.K.O. 2010. A theoretical model of intentional social action in online social networks. Decision Support System. 49(1): 24-30.
  8. Chow, W.S. and Chan, L.S. 2008. Social network and shared goals in organizational knowledge sharing. Information Management. 45(7): 24-30.
  9. Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates
  10. Duysters, G. and Hagedoorn, J. 2000. Core competencies and company performance in the worldwide computer industry. The Journal of High Technology Management Research. 11(1): 75-91.
  11. Department of Information Malaysia. 2006. National Automotive Policy. June 2006. Percetakan Warni Sdn. Bhd.
  12. Ernst, D. and Kim, L. 2002. Global production networks, knowledge diffusion, and local capability formation. Research Policy. 31: 1417-1429.
  13. Fornell, C. and Cha, J. 1994. Partial least squares. In R.P. Bagozzi (Ed.). Advanced methods in marketing research. Cambridge: Blackwell, 52-78.
  14. Garcia-Muina, F. and Navas-Lopez, J. 2007. Explaining and Measuring Success in New Business: The Effect of Technological Capabilities on Firm Results. Technovation. 27(1-2): 30-46.
  15. Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M, Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. 2013. A primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
  16. Harborne, P. and Johne, A. 2003. One leader is not enough for major new service development: results of a consumer banking study. The Service Industry Journal. 23(3): 22-39.
  17. Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sinkovics, R.R. 2009. The use of Partial Least Squares path modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing. 20: 277-319.
  18. Ilesanmi, F. 2012. Cashless Policy: Disconnects Must be Fixed - Adeyemi Nigeria CommunicationsWeek. Retrieved 23/9/2014, from Communicationsweek Media Limited (Nigeria) www.nigeriacommunicationsweek.com.ng/e-guest/cashless-policy-disconnects- must-be-fixed-adeyemi
  19. Isobe, T., Makino, S., and Montgomery, D. B. 2008. Technological capabilities and firm performance: The case of small manufacturing in Japan. Asia Pacific Journal of Management. 25: 413-428.
  20. Jochen, S. 2014. Leadership and innovation capability development in strategic alliances. Leadership and Organization Development Journal. 35(5): 442 – 469
  21. Jung, D. 2001. Transformational and transactional leadership and their effects on creativity in groups. Creativity Research Journal, 13: 185 – 95.
  22. Karaoz, M. and Albeni, M. 2005. Dynamic technological learning trends in Turkish manufacturing industries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 72: 866-885
  23. McColl-Kennedy. J.R. and Anderson, R. D. 2002. Impact of leadership style and emotions on subordinate performance. The Leadership Quarterly. 13: 545-559.
  24. Kim, Y. 1998. Technological capabilities and Samsung Electronics’ international production network in East Asia. Management Decision. 36(8): 517-527.
  25. Kumar, U., Kumar, V. and de Grosbois, D. 2008. Development of technological capability by Cuban hospitality organizations. International Journal of Hospitality Management. 27: 12-22.
  26. Kumar,V., Kumar U. and Persaud A. 1999. Building technological capability through importing technology: The case of Indonesian manufacturing industry. Journal Of Technology Transfer. 24(1): 81-96
  27. Laursen, K. and Salter, A. 2004. Searching high and low: What types of firms use universities as a source of innovation? Research Policy. 33: 1201-1215
  28. Lee, C., Lee, K. and Pennings, J. M. 2001. Internal capabilities, external networks, and performance: A study on technology-based ventures. Strategic Management Journal. 22(6): 615-640.
  29. Mani, S. 2000. Policy instruments for stimulating R&D in the enterprise sector: The contrasting experience of two MNC dominated economies from Southeast Asia. Maastricht: United Nations University, Institute for New Technologies.
  30. MATRADE. 2010. Malaysia External Trade Statistics: Preliminary Release. November 2010 (online). http://www.matrade.gov.my (03 May 2011).
  31. Marjolein C. and Romijn, H. 2004. Technological Learning in Small Enterprise Clusters: Conceptual Framework and Policy Implications, In: Mani, S. and Romijn, H. Eds. Innovation, Learning and Technological Dynamism of Developing Countries, UNU Press, Tokyo and New York. pp. 135-157.
  32. McEvily, S.K., Eisenhardt, K.M. and Prescott, J.E. 2004. The global acquisition, leverage, and protection of technological competencies. Strategic Management Journal. 25: 713-722.
  33. MIDA. 2012. Malaysia: Performance of the Manufacturing and Services Sectors 2011. (online). http://www.mida.gov.my (4 July 2012).
  34. MITI. 2002. Majlis menandatangani MoU Pemindahan Teknologi dan Perolehan Lesen Pengeluaran –Xcell ATS (M) Sdn. Bhd., Pan Pacific Glenmarie, Shah Alam. (online).http://www.miti.gov.my (13 November 2010).
  35. MITI. 2009. Trade and Investment Bulletin, Fourth Quarter, 2009. (online) http://www.miti.gov.my (13 November 2010).
  36. Monopoloulos, D., Dimitratos, P., Young S. and Lioukas, S. 2009. Technology sourcing and performance of foreign subsidiaries in Greece: The impact of MNE and local environmental contexts. Management International Review. 49(1): 43-60.
  37. Morrison, A., Pietrobelli, C. and Rabellotti, R. 2007. Global Value Chains and Technological Capabilities: A Framework to Study Learning and Innovation in Developing Countries. Department of International Development. University of Oxford. SLPTMD Working Paper Series, 005.
  38. Mustapha, R. and Abdullah, A. 2000. Malaysia transitions toward a knowledge-based economy. The Journal of Technology Studies. 30(3): 51-61.
  39. Narayanan, S., and Rasiah, R. 1992. Malaysian electronics: The changing prospects for employment and restructuring. Development and Change. 23(4): 75-99.
  40. Nieminen, M. and Kaukonen, E. 2001. Universities and R&D networking in a knowledge-based economy, a glance at Finnish developments. Sitra Reports, Series 11.
  41. Nunnally, J. and Barstein, I. 1994. Psychometric Theory. McGraw-Hill, NY.
  42. Okejiri E . 2000.`Foreign technology and development of indigenous technological capabilities in the Nigerian manufacturing industry’, Technology in Society ,22, pp 189-199
  43. Ortega, M. 2009. Competitive strategies and firm performance: Technological capabilities’ moderating roles. Journal of Business Research. 63(12); 1273- 1281.
  44. Panda H and Ramanathan P. 1996.Technological Capability Assessment Of A Firm In The Electricity Sector. Technovation. 16(10): 561-588.
  45. Peng, M. W. and Delios, A. 2006. What determines the scope of the firm over time and around the world? An Asia Pacific perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Management. 23(4): 385-405.
  46. Phan, P. H. and Peridis, T. 2000. Knowledge creation in strategic alliances: Another look at organizational learning. Asia Pacific Journal of Management. 17(2): 201-222.
  47. Razli Che Razak, and Adam Mat. 2011. The Influence of organizational learning capability on success of technological innovation (Product) implementation with moderating effect of knowledge complexity. International Journal of Business and Social Science. 2(17): 217- 225.
  48. Ramayah, T. and Mohamad, O. 2010. Internationalisation of Malaysian contractors. Journal of International Business & Entrepreneurship Development. 5(1): 18-27.
  49. Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. and Will, A. 2005. SmartPLS 2.0 (beta), available at www.smartpls.de (assessed October, 2013).
  50. Rogers, E.M. 1995. Diffusion of innovations: Simon and Schuster
  51. Rothaermel, F. T. 2001. Incumbent’s advantage through exploiting complementary assets via inter- firm cooperation. Strategic Management Journal. 22: 687-699.
  52. Rush, H., Bessant, I. and Hobday, M. 2007. Assessing the technological capabilities of firms: Developing a policy tool. R&D Management. 37(3): 221-236.
  53. Sazali, A. W., Raduan, C. R., Jegak, U. and Haslinda, A. 2009. The effect of absorptive capacity and recipient collaborativeness as technology recipient characteristics on degree of inter-firm technology transfer. Journal of Social Sciences. 5(4): 423-430.
  54. Sekaran, U. 2003. Research methods for business. A skill building approach. 4 th ed. NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
  55. Varis, M. and Littunen, H. 2010. Types of innovation, sources of information and performance in entrepreneurial SMEs. European Journal of Innovation Management. 13(2): 128-154.
  56. Wignaraja, G. 2002. Firm Size, Technological Capabilities and Market-Oriented Policies in Mauritius. Oxford Development Studies. 30(1): 87–104.
  57. World Economic Forum (WEF). 2010. The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011. Geneva, Switzerland. (online). http://www.weforum.org (9 November 2010).
  58. World Economic Forum (WEF). 2011. The Global Competitiveness Report 2011-2012. Geneva, Switzerland. (online). http://www.weforum.org (4 December 2011).
  59. World Economic Forum (WEF). 2012. The Global Competitiveness Report 2012-2013. Geneva, Switzerland. (online). http://www.weforum.org (25 December 2012).
  60. World Bank. 2009. Malaysia Productivity and Investment Climate Assessment Update. August 2009. Kuala Lumpur: Percetakan Nasional Malaysia Berhad.
  61. Yukl, G. 2002. Leadership in Organizations. (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice- Hall
  62. Zhuang, Y and Lederer, A.L. 2006. A resource-based view of electronic commerce. Information & Management. 43: 251–261

Cite this Article: