A study on the relationship among technological learning and technological capability for Information Service industry in Taiwan

• Main Authors: FengTeTai, 封德台
• Other Authors: LaiShyhBao
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2000
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/37775673817338538758

博士 === 國立政治大學 === 企業管理學系 === 88 === Since the Asian Finance Storm in 1997, it’s effect that the economic development model focusing on production in the past is inapplicable. The competitivity of American companies which tries to make progress in software R＆D, information service and creativity is getting better than that of Janpan companies which major in physical hardware. With the advance in software industry in Taiwan, the annual gross sales of those companies is doubled every five years from 1990. The main topic of this paper is to find out the element of information service company development. And it’s deduced to for purposes as following 1. Explain the individual domains of internal and external activities in technology learning and the existed interactive attributes. Assist organization to verse in technology-related knowledge. 2. Research the content and measurement of the organizational technology capability 3. Explain the relationship among technology learning and technology capability with physical research result. 4. Consolidate the logical relationship among technology learning and technology capability, and offer suggests of organization-related strategical decision. The research structure and hypotheses of this paper are mainly based on the literatures briefed as following: 1. Learning and Organization Learning (1) Learning means that individuals acquire inside and outside knowledge form experience of life and adjust themselves to outside environment. Bower & Hilgard (1981) emphasize that learning is behavioral and potential transformation resulting from duplicate experience in some situation, but the individual talent and temporary phenomena are excluded from measurement. Thus “ lasted progress of transformation” is an essential condition. (2) Argyris & Schon (1978) and Fiol & Lyles (1985) categoryize organiztion learning into two distinct : Low-level organiztion learning and Hign-level organiztion learning Low-level organiztion learning : repetitive and regular activities which is explained and controlled easily in progress under existed organiztional structure and rules. High-level organiztion learning : Activities that transform the whole organizational rules and norms. 2. Technology Learning Special resource and internal capability are the advantage of company’s competivity. The company’s resource which is valued, scarce, hard to imitate and replaced source of competitive advantage Bierly & Chakrabarti (1996) emphasize that the engrossing “technology capabilty” and “organization capability” are not overtaked easily in long term. So they define the technology learning as the acquirement and progress of explicit and tacit knowledge which is helpful in R&D of new products or improvement of the existed products. 3. The measurement of core capability and core rigidities 1. the knowledge and skill of employees 2. physical technique system 3. managemnet system 4. value According the literatures mentioned above, this paper set up three main variables described as following : 1. The range of technology learning (1) Internal learning a. Individual learning Individuals learn from their work groups, the other [parts of the organization, and the environment b. Intrafuncional learning Specialized work groups are formed to perform homogenous functional task and personal experience and knowledge is open shared, and new members to the group bring in valuable new information c. Interfunctional learning Work groups can also learn from the other parts of the organization by formal and informal communication d. Multilevel learning Knowledge flows from top management down to the lower levels of the organization and vise versa (2) External learning a. Customer learning The complexity and evolving nature of customers’ needs necessitates continuous customer learning from the organization b. Competitor learning Organizations within an industry learn together, especially in new innovations c. Network learning Organizations learn from firms in related and supporting industries d. Institutional learning The institutional environment of firms constrains their strategic behavior and needs learning 2. The depth of technology learning (1) Low-level learning (2) High-level learning 3. Technology Capability (1) the knowledge and skill of employees include firm-specific techniques and scientific understanding (2) physical technique system include accumulating, codifying and structuring knowledge from employees, (3) managemnet system formal and informal approach of knowledge structuring (4) value the companies’ personality The sample of the study is the 451 members of CISA (Information service industry association of ROC) , except the member specializing in human resource training, consulting service and magazine issue. There are 101 questionary returned The sample companies are demonstrated as the following: Company’s Age Sample Number Percentage Employee Number Sample number Percentage ~ 1 year 6 .0 ~ 10 4 4.0 1 ~ 3 years 16 15.8 10 ~ 29 15 14.8 4 ~ 6 years 13 12.8 30 ~ 49 14 13.9 7 ~ 9 years 12 11.9 50 ~ 99 19 18.8 10 ~ years 54 53.5 100 ~ 49 48.5 total 101 100.0 total 101 100.0 Number of staff inSoftware R&D department Sample number Percentage ~ 10 27 26.7 10 ~ 29 30 29.7 30 ~ 49 16 15.8 50 ~ 99 21 1.9 100 ~ 16 15.9 total 101 100.0 R&D Personnel Sample number Percentage Licensed Staff number Sample number Percentage ~ 10 % 6 5.9 ~ 10 % 49 48.5 11 ~ 25 % 11 10.9 11 ~ 25 % 32 31.7 26 ~ 50 % 2 21.8 26 ~ 50 % 13 12.8 51 ~ 75 % 24 23.8 51 ~ 75 % 5 5.0 76 ~ 100 % 38 37.6 76 ~ 100 % 2 2.0 total 101 100.0 total 101 100.0 And the statistic of the variables are described as the following Variables Mean Standard Deviation Individual Learning 4.0792 0.8388 Intrafuctoinal Learning 3.9109 0.7085 InterfunctionalLearninig 3.9736 0.6955 Multilevel Learning 3.8185 0.7461 Customer Learning 4.0644 0.6988 Competitor Learning 3.9505 0.9631 Network Learning 3.8515 0.7796 Institutional Learning 3.6106 0.9334 The depth of Technology Learning 3.7673 0.7780 Physical techniqueSystem 3.9950 0.8170 Management system 3.5990 0.8603 Knowledge and skill of employees 3.4703 0.7265 Value 3.8942 0.7109 And the result of T test is listed as the following Variables Overall learning(n=70) Bounded learning(n=31) T value T test Individual Learning 4.4714 3.1935 9.922 *** Intrafuctoinal Learning 4.2071 3.2419 8.103 *** InterfunctionalLearninig 4.1857 3.4946 5.163 *** Multilevel Learning 4.1000 3.1828 6.899 *** Customer Learning 4.3357 3.4516 7.204 *** Competitor Learning 4.3286 3.0968 7.325 *** Network Learning 4.1786 3.1129 8.149 *** Institutional Learning 3.7000 3.4086 1.455 NS Variables High-level(n=60) Low-level(n=41) T value T test The depth of Technology Learning 4.2917 3.000 14.220 *** Variables Capable(n=76) Incapable(n=25) T value T test Physical techniqueSystem 4.3092 3.0400 9.073 *** Management system 3.8421 2.8600 5.670 *** Knowledge and skill of employees 3.7138 2.7300 7.220 *** Value 4.1187 3.2115 6.613 *** *** present p < 0.001 NS present nonsignificant From the experiment, this paper induce that: 1. there are two distinct model of the depth of the technology learning in software industry in Taiwan : Low-level Learning and High-level Learning, and the companies of high-level learning are better than those of low-level learning in improvement and innovation 2. There are two ranges of technonlogy learning : overall learning and bounded learning, and the technology capability of the overall learning companies is higher than that of the bounded learning companies distinctly. 3. the relationship among the range of technology learning and the depth of technology learning is interactive , close and positive correlation. The statistic of the result of research is descrbed as the following Hypotheses Result of experiment Explanation There is significant difference between companies in different technology learning range Support There is significant difference There is significant difference between companies of different technology learning depth Support There is significant difference There is significant difference in mix of different technology learning range and technology learning depth Partly support There is significant difference