• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.21-46
• /
• 2004

Focusing on a product, this paper reconstructs the concept of technological systems first introduced by Carlsson and Stankiewicz (1991). Based on the model and our earlier works, we compare the salient features of technological systems for computer numerically controlled (CNC) machine tools in Korea, Sweden, and the United States.. We also try to measure the performance of the systems in an international comparison. Major findings are as follows: (1) The length of 'learning period' for local (national) technological system is substantial, even though it is a catching-up case. (2) The key success factor of the technological system appears to be the connectivity among various actors or infrastructures, rather than just the existence or formation of those. (3) In three countries' experience, the government played an important role in the formation of each own technological system. (4) The performance of Korea's technological system for CNC machine tools during the past two decades(1981-97) seems to be better than that of Sweden and the U.S. Lastly, many policy implication are presented.

• Journal of Information Technology Services
• /
• v.18 no.4
• /
• pp.171-190
• /
• 2019

This study comparatively analyzes the cases of CDMA (Code Division Multiple Access) and WIPI (Wireless Internet Platform for Interoperability) to find out the success and failure factors of technology policies in the field of mobile communication industry. For this purpose, the two cases are analyzed through a new analysis framework, which is made by combining System of Innovation with a range of variables derived from precedent studies, such as external environment, institutions, technological system, governance structure, and interactions of actors. The results of analysis show that in the CDMA case, the following factors led to success ; Korea made good use of the external opportunities in the early stage of digital communication technology and adopted a suitable governance structure for the technological system. Main actors in Innovation System had strong will for success and engaged in cooperative interaction. For the WIPI, however, the timing of technology policy was inappropriate and a unsuitable governance structure for technological system was chosen because of path dependence. The Innovation System failded to respond efficiently to the situation where conflicts among actors had intensified, US trade pressure had increased and innovative smartphones emerged. The results of this study provide the practical implications for the success of technology policy; namely it is important to choose a governance structure that suits the external environment and characteristics of technology and to activate cooperative interactions among actors in Innovation System.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.74-89
• /
• 1999

The purpose of this study is to identify in two aspects the relationship between standardization activities and technological development at the firm level. The first aspect is to analyze the relationship between the current Korean industrial standards system and the firm's technological development vis-a-vis quality standards. The analysis reveals that even if Korean firms recognize the importance of standards, the level of product quality of the KS mark is still lower compared to the average world level. The survey also reveals that the reasons for acquiring ISO and KS marks are mainly aimed at enforcing company image and increasing quality management mind, rather than to foster technological innovation. The second aspect explores how much Korean industrial standards (KS marks) affect the firm's technological development in the Process of standards acquisition activities. The survey results show that standardization activities have a less positive impact on technological innovation than on the maintenance of consistent production works.

• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.73-87
• /
• 2018

Creativity, entrepreneurship, and technological innovation orientation are key factors for technological innovation. The main driver of technological innovation in the enterprise is the executives of the firm. According to the Upper Echelons Theory of D.C. Hambrick(2007), the creativity of the managerial individual will be put into various aspects within the organization's innovation system. The organizational innovation system is positively influenced by the creativity of the executives, and is achieved by manifesting innovation orientation and technological innovation orientation with innovative performances. The purpose of this study is to investigate using Structural Equation Modeling(SEM), whether individual creativity of executives of 132 companies with research organizations among domestic semiconductor companies in Korea influences innovation performance of firms through entrepreneurship orientation and technology innovation orientation. We applied the personal creativity level measurement index, the entrepreneurial orientation measurement factor, and the technology innovation orientation measurement factor identified in the previous research literature. The results of the Structural Equation Modeling analysis show that the creativity of executives have a positive (+) relationship with the innovation performance of firms when they are only mediated by technological innovation orientation, and entrepreneurial orientation. On the other hand, the results of the SEM shows the direct effects between the creativity of executives and innovation performance are not statistically valid. As a result, the individual creativity of executives who lead the innovation of the firm, entrepreneurial orientation, and technological innovation orientation of the researcher organization are very important factors and an inseparable relationship for the successful innovation of the firms.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.37-75
• /
• 2001

Technological systems are defined as network(s) consisting of technological infrastructure, industrial organization, and institutional infrastructure. This paper reviews SEMATECH in the U.S. and VLSI Program in Korea as a technological system for semiconductor, which is an advanced technology. Several issues are addressed : how did they get started\ulcorner ; how have they been evolved\ulcorner ; how have the actors and institutions within the system interacted\ulcorner ; what role has the government played in that process\ulcorner Both systems were created by their government, respectively, and they have been evaluated as successful. However, while SEMATECH became complete eough in terms of technological infrastructure, industrial organization, and institutional infrastructure to generate sufficient increasing returns to develop in a self-reinforcing way, a series of VLSI program in Korea is still operated discontinuously under the government subsidy. SEMATECH is more flexible and stable than Korea's VLSI program in that the system has a centralized structure and has been managed and staffed by industry substantially. In addition, both cases show that a technological system may evolve having connections with foreign technological systems and local sub-systems beyond nations, regions and industries. Many other similarities, contrasts, and insights for technological policy from each country's experiences are presented.

• Proceedings of the Korea Technology Innovation Society Conference
• /
• 1999.11c
• /
• pp.163-177
• /
• 1999

Science and technology are regarded as public goods and knowledge in traditional innovation theory. Also, linear innovation model and technological determinism are derived from its theory. This is changed, however, in new innovation theory. Social shaping of technology is emphasized and interaction, network, system characters of innovation process are involved in its theory.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.265-289
• /
• 2009

This research analyzed regional innovation capabilities and technological activities of firms in Chungnam province of South Korea on the basis of a questionnaire survey of 64 regional manufacturing firms. The existence and level of regional innovation capabilities were measured by the perceptions of firms, a core actor in the regional innovation system. The analysis result revealed that research capabilities of academia, capabilities of R&D institutes, technological capabilities of industry, and governmental policy support were recognized as major capabilities of the regional innovation system. Regional proximity was also found to have significant influence on firms‘ sources of technological innovation and selection of collaboration partners. Practical as well as theoretical implications of the findings and future research directions were discussed at the last part.

• Journal of the Korea Safety Management & Science
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.47-63
• /
• 2018

The purpose of this research was to test the effects of technological innovation capability and technology commercialization capability on new product performance of the companies in electronics industry and the moderating role of perceived usefulness of government R&D support. For this study, Research data were collected through questionnaire instruments from the sample of 346 employees in 17 electronics companies of metropolitan area. The 305 sample was selected and analyzed by hierarchical regression technique. The results showed that technological innovation capability and technology commercialization capability had a positive effect on new product performance. And also found out perceived usefulness of government R&D support had the moderate roles between only technical innovation system our of three technological innovation capability factors and new product performance, and also between only manufacturing capability our of three technological commercialization capability factors and new product performance. With the research results, the implications for electronics company were discussed, and the directions for future research were suggested.

• Korean small business review
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.65-87
• /
• 2010

With the advent of knowledge-based society, the revitalization of technological innovation type SMEs, termed "inno-biz" hereafter, has been globally recognized as a government policymakers' primary concern in strengthening national competitiveness, and much effort is being put into establishing polices of boosting the start-ups and innovation capability of SMEs. Especially, in that the inno-biz enables national economy to get vitalized by widening world markets with its superior technology, and thus, taking the initiative of extremely competitive world markets, its growth and development has greater significance. In the case of Korea, the government has been maintaining the policies since the late 1990s of stimulating the growth of SMEs as well as building various infrastructures to foster the start-ups of the SMEs such as venture businesses with high technology. In addition, since the enactment of "Innovation Promotion Law for SMEs" in 2001, the government has been accelerating the policies of prioritizing the growth and development of inno-biz. So, for the sound growth and development of Korean inno-biz, this paper intends to offer effective management strategies for SMEs and suggest proper policies for the government, by researching into the effect of technological innovation capability and technology commercialization capability as the primary business resources on business performance in Korean SMEs in the light of market information orientation. The research is carried out on Korean companies characterized as inno-biz. On the basis of OSLO manual and prior studies, the research categorizes their status. R&D capability, technology accumulation capability and technological innovation system are categorized into technological innovation capability; product development capability, manufacturing capability and marketing capability into technology commercialization capability; and increase in product competitiveness and merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. Then the effect of each component on business performance is substantially analyzed. In addition, the mediation effect of technological innovation and technology commercialization capability on business performance is observed by the use of the market information orientation as a parameter. The following hypotheses are proposed. H1 : Technology innovation capability will positively influence business performance. H1-1 : R&D capability will positively influence product competitiveness. H1-2 : R&D capability will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H1-3 : Technology accumulation capability will positively influence product competitiveness. H1-4 : Technology accumulation capability will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H1-5 : Technological innovation system will positively influence product competitiveness. H1-6 : Technological innovation system will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H2 : Technology commercializing capability will positively influence business performance. H2-1 : Product development capability will positively influence product competitiveness. H2-2 : Product development capability will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H2-3 : Manufacturing capability will positively influence product competitiveness. H2-4 : Manufacturing capability will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H2-5 : Marketing capability will positively influence product competitiveness. H2-6 : Marketing capability will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H3 : Technology innovation capability will positively influence market information orientation. H3-1 : R&D capability will positively influence information generation. H3-2 : R&D capability will positively influence information diffusion. H3-3 : R&D capability will positively influence information response. H3-4 : Technology accumulation capability will positively influence information generation. H3-5 : Technology accumulation capability will positively influence information diffusion. H3-6 : Technology accumulation capability will positively influence information response. H3-7 : Technological innovation system will positively influence information generation. H3-8 : Technological innovation system will positively influence information diffusion. H3-9 : Technological innovation system will positively influence information response. H4 : Technology commercialization capability will positively influence market information orientation. H4-1 : Product development capability will positively influence information generation. H4-2 : Product development capability will positively influence information diffusion. H4-3 : Product development capability will positively influence information response. H4-4 : Manufacturing capability will positively influence information generation. H4-5 : Manufacturing capability will positively influence information diffusion. H4-6 : Manufacturing capability will positively influence information response. H4-7 : Marketing capability will positively influence information generation. H4-8 : Marketing capability will positively influence information diffusion. H4-9 : Marketing capability will positively influence information response. H5 : Market information orientation will positively influence business performance. H5-1 : Information generation will positively influence product competitiveness. H5-2 : Information generation will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H5-3 : Information diffusion will positively influence product competitiveness. H5-4 : Information diffusion will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H5-5 : Information response will positively influence product competitiveness. H5-6 : Information response will positively influence merits for new technology and/or product development into business performance. H6 : Market information orientation will mediate the relationship between technology innovation capability and business performance. H7 : Market information orientation will mediate the relationship between technology commercializing capability and business performance. The followings are the research results : First, as for the effect of technological innovation on business performance, the technology accumulation capability and technological innovating system have a positive effect on increase in product competitiveness and merits for new technology and/or product development, while R&D capability has little effect on business performance. Second, as for the effect of technology commercialization capability on business performance, the effect of manufacturing capability is relatively greater than that of merits for new technology and/or product development. Third, the mediation effect of market information orientation is identified to exist partially in information generation, information diffusion and information response. Judging from these results, the following analysis can be made : On Increase in product competitiveness, directly related to successful technology commercialization of technology, management capability including technological innovation system, manufacturing capability and marketing capability has a relatively strong effect. On merits for new technology and/or product development, on the other hand, capability in technological aspect including R&D capability, technology accumulation capability and product development capability has relatively strong effect. Besides, in the cast of market information orientation, the level of information diffusion within an organization plays and important role in new technology and/or product development. Also, for commercial success like increase in product competitiveness, the level of information response is primarily required. Accordingly, the following policies are suggested : First, as the effect of technological innovation capability and technology commercialization capability on business performance differs among SMEs; in order for SMEs to secure competitiveness, the government has to establish microscopic policies for SMEs which meet their needs and characteristics. Especially, the SMEs lacking in capital and labor are required to map out management strategies of focusing their resources primarily on their strengths. And the government needs to set up policies for SMEs, not from its macro-scaled standpoint, but from the selective and concentrative one that meets the needs and characteristics of respective SMEs. Second, systematic infrastructures are urgently required which lead technological success to commercial success. Namely, as technological merits at respective SME levels do not always guarantee commercial success, the government should make and effort to build systematic infrastructures including encouragement of M&A or technology trade, systematic support for protecting intellectual property, furtherance of business incubating and industrial clusters for strengthening academic-industrial network, and revitalization of technology financing, in order to make successful commercialization from technological success. Finally, the effort to innovate technology, R&D, for example, is essential to future national competitiveness, but its result is often prolonged. So the government needs continuous concern and funding for basic science, in order to maximize technological innovation capability. Indeed the government needs to examine continuously whether technological innovation capability or technological success leads satisfactorily to commercial success in market economic system. It is because, when the transition fails, it should be left to the government.

• Korean System Dynamics Review
• /
• v.15 no.4
• /
• pp.85-100
• /
• 2014

We propose a composite make or buy decision model considering both the transaction cost theory and the resource based view in the Korean defense industry using System Dynamics. We analyze relationship between core variables(transaction frequency, technological uncertainty, the level of technological dependency, technological level and acquisition ability for market information) and 'Make or Buy decision' focused on technological innovation capability. Based on the result, we propose the implications as follows : First, the defence industry needs more R&D investment. Second, it needs a balance between domestic(Make) and overseas(Buy) to increase the technological capability rapidly.