Filetype PDF | Posted on 13 Sep 2022 | 3 years ago
Authentication
digital resources
124x Filetype PDF File size 0.20 MB Source: directory.umm.ac.id
Ž.
Journal of Operations Management 18 2000 719–737
www.elsevier.comrlocaterdsw
Atypology of project-level technology transfer processes
Gregory N. Stock a,),1, Mohan V. Tatikondab,1,2
a College of Business, Operations Management and Information Systems Department, Northern Illinois UniÕersity,De Kalb, IL 60115, USA
b Kenan-Flagler Business School, UniÕersity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, McColl Building, CB a3490, Chapel Hill,
NC27599-3490, USA
Abstract
Ž.
This paper develops a conceptual typology of inward technology transfer ITT , which explicitly considers technology
transfer at the project, rather than the firm, level of analysis. Building on extant technology management literature and the
organizational theories of information processing and interdependence, we carefully characterize the three dimensions of the
typology: the technology uncertainty of the technology that is transferred, the organizational interaction between the
technology source and recipient, and transfer effectiveness. Appropriate matches of technology uncertainty and organiza-
tional interaction result in four archetypal cases called Atransfer process typesB, which represent the most effective
approaches to technology transfer. Real-life examples of effective and ineffective matches are presented, and implications of
the typology for future research and practice are discussed. q2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Technology transfer; Technological innovation; Configurational research; Project management; Information processing theory;
Interdependence theory
1. Introduction over-runs in a product development effort. In this
Effective acquisition and utilization of new tech- case, the firm had limited interaction with the tech-
nology from an outside source can contribute greatly nology vendor, even though it was a risky and
to the operational success of a firm. We have ob- critical technology. In contrast, at a medical equip-
served in the field that acquiring and assimilating ment manufacturer, the acquisition and utilization of
new product and process technologies is often quite a new flexible manufacturing system led to produc-
difficult. For example, at one computer electronics tion of high quality parts in sufficient variety and
firm, the transfer and utilization of a new core volume within a reasonable timeframe. This occurred
product technology led to substantial delays and cost even though this was the first usage of an FMS by
that firm. In this case, the firm worked closely with
the FMS vendor throughout the transfer process and
) Corresponding author. Tel.: q1-815-753-9329; fax: q1-815- even had, as planned, vendor personnel on the shop
753-7460. floor for several weeks. Clearly, some transfers are
Ž.
E-mail addresses: gstock@niu.edu G.N. Stock , more successful than others.
Ž.
mohan–tatikonda@unc.edu M.V. Tatikonda . Technology transfer into the firm is a challenging
1 Both authors contributed equally to this paper. Their names
are listed in alphabetical order. and — we believe — a more often recurring opera-
2 Tel.: q1-919-962-0050; fax: q1-919-962-6949. tional problem. Organizations are emphasizing
0272-6963r00r$ - see front matter q2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Ž.
PII: S0272-6963 00 00045-0
()
720 G.N. Stock, M.V. TatikondarJournal of Operations Management 18 2000 719–737
AfocusB on selected core conversion activities that basis. The technology transfer literature also does not
are their key competitive competencies. This results fully consider the nature of the technology to be
in the need for more interfaces with external organi- transferred, as it generally only considers a single
zations to source technologies as fewer product and Ž
technology attribute, if it does so at all e.g., How-
process technologies are developed or produced in- .
ells, 1996; Davidson and McFetridge, 1985 .
ternally. Supply chain management philosophies have The existing technology transfer literature con-
taken hold, suggesting that some firms need practical tributes important insights. However, to the best of
skills in upstream technology transfer if they wish to our knowledge, prior work does not systematically
routinely achieve functionally effective, low-cost, synthesize the many potentially relevant variables
time-efficient transfers. And some firms are actively into a single, unified, theory-based typology of the
responding to the increasing rate of technology inno- variety of project-level inter-organizational work
vation and technological options, meaning they could processes necessary to transfer different types of
Ž
more often source AriskyB technologies technologies technologies. Accordingly, this paper aims to con-
.
which have greater uncertainty from external orga- tribute to the operations management and technology
nizations. For all these reasons, in many firms tech- management literatures by developing a conceptual
nology transfer is no longer an occasional activity, framework of effective technology transfer at the
which can be managed in an ad-hoc fashion; rather, project level. The conceptual framework captures the
it is a recurring process, which requires purposeful nature of the technology to be transferred, the activi-
management supported by a well-developed portfolio ties and interactions across organization boundaries,
of organizational skills. and contingent relationships between technology and
Howshouldcompaniesactually go about conduct- organization, all at the project level of analysis. The
ing the transfer of individual product and process objective of this framework is to provide theoretical
technologies? In addressing this question, the tech- insight and practical guidance into selection of the
nology transfer literature primarily considers gover- best management approaches for transferring a tech-
nance forms, such as direct investment, joint venture, nology into an organization. Because the framework
Ž
direct sale or licensing Oxley, 1999; Kumar et al., addresses the transfer of technology into an organi-
.
1999; Davidson and McFetridge, 1985; Teece, 1977 . zation of interest, the framework is called the inward
This literature typically takes the perspective of a Ž.
technology transfer ITT typology.
source nation or firm, which wishes to gain eco- A typology is a conceptually derived classifica-
nomic value from sharing or selling proprietary tech- tion scheme where the classifications are Aideal
nologies, and generally considers the political, cor- types, each of which represents a unique combina-
porate or strategic level of analysis rather than an Ž
tion of organizational attributesB Bozarth and Mc-
Ž .
operational, project level Reddy and Zhao, 1990; Dermott, 1998 . A typology is an application of the
.
Contractor and Sagafi-Nejad, 1981 . This literature configurational approach to the study of an organiza-
focuses heavily on legal, contractual, and ownership tional phenomenon. This approach Aallows re-
Ž
issues regarding technology transfer Finan et al., searchers to express complicated and interrelated
.
1999; Reddy and Zhao, 1990 , generally following a relationships among many variables without resort-
transaction cost framework. The transaction cost ap- ing to artificial oversimplification of the phe-
proach, however, has shortcomings in many practical Ž.
nomenon of interestB Dess et al., 1993 . The config-
Ž.
contexts Contractor and Sagafi-Nejad, 1981 be- urational approach has been applied widely in the
cause it does not deeply examine the work-level Ž
fields of strategy and operations management e.g.,
inter-organizational issues involved in technology Miles and Snow, 1978; Porter, 1980; Schmenner,
transfer. A smaller subset of the technology transfer .
1986; Hill, 1994; Ward et al., 1996 , and is well
literature does adopt an inter-organizational focus suited to the study of organizational situations too
ŽGalbraith, 1990; Rebentisch and Ferretti, 1995; Gib- complex to be modeled adequately by bi-variate
. Ž
son and Smilor, 1991 , but this literature typically relationships Meyer et al., 1993; Bailey, 1994;
examines inter-organizational factors, such as com- .
Bozarth and McDermott, 1998 . Technology transfer
munication, only on an individual, unidimensional is an inherently multidimensional task characterized
()
G.N. Stock, M.V. TatikondarJournal of Operations Management 18 2000 719–737 721
by complex and interrelated relationships among fusion arises due to the diversity of meanings applied
many variables. This multidimensionality and multi- to similar words in the extant literature. The typol-
variate complexity is explicitly considered in the ogy is grounded in established organization theoretic
development of the ITT typology. perspectives: organizational information processing
The best known typology in operations manage- Ž.
theory OIPT and the theory of interdependence
Ž
ment is the product–process matrix Hayes and between organizations. Section 3 describes these
.
Wheelwright, 1979 , which identifies the matrix di- general theories, explains how they underlie the ab-
mensions of volume and variety. This typology iden- stract concepts of technology uncertainty and organi-
tifies along the matrix diagonal the best choice of zational interaction, and then applies these theories
operations process type by matching the volume and to the specific context of ITT. Section 4 synthesizes
variety of the product under consideration. Like the technology management literature and organizational
Ž
product–process matrix, the ITT typology see Fig. theory to identify key subdimensions underlying
.
1 identifies along the diagonal the best choice of technology uncertainty and organizational interac-
technology transfer process type by matching the tion. Section 5 describes the four transfer process
intrinsic technology uncertainty of the technology to types, which are ideal matches of technology uncer-
be transferred and the organizational interaction be- tainty and organizational interaction arrayed along
tween the technology source and recipient. There are the diagonal of Fig. 1. Section 6 presents real-life
four transfer process types Žarrayed along the diago- application examples of the ITT typology from an
.
nal : arms-length purchase, facilitated purchase, col- in-depth case study of a high-tech product develop-
laborative hand-off, and co-development. Each trans- ment effort. Implications for theory, future research,
fer process type represents the best match, or fit, and managerial application of the typology are ad-
between technology uncertainty and organizational dressed in Section 7.
interaction. Developing theoretically based specifica-
tions for the technology uncertainty and organiza-
tional interaction dimensions, as well as for each of 2. Definitions
the transfer process types, are key tasks of this paper.
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 Technology is Aany tool or technique, any product
provides definitions of key concepts regarding tech- or process, any physical equipment or method of
nology, transfer and effectiveness. This discussion is doing or making, by which human capability is
necessary because considerable terminological con- Ž.
extendedB Schon, 1967 . In the operations context,
Ž.
technology is technical knowledge or Aknow-howB
applied to improve an organization’s ability to pro-
Ž.
vide products and services Bohn, 1994 . Because
technical knowledge varies widely in degree of phys-
ical embodiment, a specific technology could be a
machine, an electrical or mechanical component or
assembly, a chemical process, software code, a man-
ual, blueprints, documentation, operating procedures,
a patent, a technique, or even a person. Improvement
includes extending, augmenting, refining or replac-
ing some elements of the organization’s operational
processes and value-adding capabilities in order to
achieve one or more functional objectives such as:
technical performance enhancement, capacity in-
creases, flexibility and variety increases, confor-
mance quality improvement, personnel skills devel-
opment, cost reduction, and task and process time
Fig. 1. The inward technology transfer typology. reduction.
()
722 G.N. Stock, M.V. TatikondarJournal of Operations Management 18 2000 719–737
The common thread among the many extant defi- ingly, it is useful to view technology transfer through
nitions of technology transfer is movement of the the lens of OIPT. This theory, which has an inher-
technology from one organization to another; that is, ently contingent perspective, underlies our typology
across the organizational boundary of the source and of technology transfer. OIPT explains that organiza-
Ž
recipient Bell and Hill, 1978; Keller and Chinta, tional tasks pose information-processing require-
.
1990; Bozeman and Coker, 1992 . However, charac- ments to the organization. Various means applied by
terizations of the initiation and conclusion of the the organization provide information-processing ca-
technology transfer process vary widely. We define pabilities. The degree to which requirements and
the starting point of the technology transfer process capabilities are appropriately matched determines the
to be the point in time immediately after the recipi- Ž.
quality of task outcomes Galbraith, 1973, 1977 .
ent’s decision to acquire a given technology has been While OIPT has a long history, it has only recently
made. Some characterize the conclusion of the tech- begun to appear in operations management research
nology transfer process as occurring simply once the Ž
Flynn and Flynn, 1999; Tatikonda and Rosenthal,
technology has moved across the organizational .
2000a .
Ž.
boundary Davidson and McFetridge, 1985 ; how- Organizational tasks vary in the degree to which
ever, we adopt an operational perspective by viewing the means to accomplish them are certain. Task
the actual utilization of the technology by the recipi- uncertainty is Athe difference between the amount of
ent organization as the concluding step in the tech- information required to perform the task and the
Ž
nology transfer process Gruber and Marquis, 1969; amount of information already possessed by the or-
. Ž.
Bell and Hill, 1978, Tsang, 1997 . Utilization is ganizationB Galbraith, 1977, p. 36 , and represents
more than simple physical receipt of the technology the quantity of knowledge or information that must
—it involves the actual implementation of the tech- be acquired and processed. In addition to the quan-
nology in a production process or its incorporation tity of information that must be processed, the qual-
into a new product. Therefore, for our purposes, the Ž.
ity or richness of the information is also important
technology transfer process consists of the inter- Ž.
Daft and Lengel, 1986 . Task-related characteristics
organizational activities employed to achieve both cause or contribute to task uncertainty. For example,
movement of technology across the organizational Ž.
Perrow 1967 identified, at an abstract level, that
boundary from the source to the recipient and its task variety and analyzability contribute to task un-
utilization by the recipient to achieve some specified certainty. An additional point to be recognized is that
functional objectives. In turn, the effectiveness of the task uncertainty is organization-specific: what is cer-
technology transfer process is the degree to which tain to one organization may be uncertain to another
the utilization of the transferred technology fulfills Ž.
Galbraith, 1977; Robey, 1986 .
the recipient firm’s intended functional objectives Organizations employ different organizational
within cost and time targets. means to process information and reduce task uncer-
tainty as the task execution progresses. Galbraith
Ž.
1977, p. 39 explains that Avariations in organizing
3. Organizational theory foundations modes are actually variations in the capacity of
organizations to process information and make deci-
Information processing is the purposeful genera- sions about events, which cannot be anticipated in
tion, aggregation, transformation and dissemination advanceB. The endpoints of the information process-
of information associated with accomplishing some ing capacity spectrum have been described as
Ž Ž
organizational task Tushman and Nadler, 1978; AmechanisticB and AorganicB organizations Burns
.
Robey, 1986 . Here, the task of interest is tech- andStalker, 1961; TushmanandNadler,1978;Keller,
nology transfer. Although specific sub-tasks, infor- .
1994 . Mechanistic organizations are efficient and
mation sources, and information transformation re- effective for lower levels of information processing
quirements may differ among technology transfer quantity and quality. Organic organizations are effi-
situations, all technology transfers involve some in- cient and effective for high levels of information
formation processing to conduct the transfer. Accord- processing quantity and quality. Poor task outcomes
no reviews yet
Please Login to review.
