Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Knowledge Stock (knowledge + stock)
Selected AbstractsTwenty Years of the Journal of Product Innovation Management: History, Participants, and Knowledge Stock and FlowsTHE JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT, Issue 3 2007Wim Biemans The Journal of Product Innovation Management (JPIM) serves as a marketplace for science-based, innovative ideas that are produced and consumed by scholars and businesspeople. Now that JPIM has existed for 20 years, two intriguing questions emerge: (1) How has the journal evolved over time in terms of knowledge stock, that is, what are the characteristics of the growing stock of knowledge published by JPIM over the years; and (2) how has the journal evolved in knowledge flow, that is, how is JPIM influenced by other scientific publications and what is its impact on other journals? In terms of knowledge stock, over 35% of the articles published over the 20 years investigate processes and metrics for performance management. The next most frequently published area was strategy, planning, and decision making (20%), followed by customer and market research (17%). The dominant research method used was a cross-sectional large-sample survey, and the focus most usually is at the project level of the firm. The large majority of JPIM authors (60%) have a marketing background, with the remaining 40% representing numerous functional domains. Academics at all levels publish in JPIM, and though most authors hail from North America, the Dutch are a significant second group. JPIM was analyzed from a knowledge-flow perspective by looking at the scientific sources used by JPIM authors to develop their ideas and articles. To this end a bibliometric analysis was performed by analyzing all references in articles published in JPIM. During 1984,2003 JPIM published 488 articles, containing 10,314 references to journals and 6,533 references to other sources. Some 20% of these references (2,020) were self-references to JPIM articles. The remaining 8,294 journal references were to articles in 287 journals in the fields of management (25%), marketing (24%), and management of technology (14%). However, it should be pointed out that many domains were dominated by a limited number of journals. The second component of knowledge flow concerns the extent to which the ideas developed in JPIM are consumed by other authors. Again, bibliometric analysis was used to analyze data from the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) about citations to JPIM in other journals. For the period 1984,2005, the SSCI registered 7,773 citations to JPIM in 2,067 articles published in 278 journals (including the 2,020 self-citations in JPIM). The functional areas most frequently citing JPIM are management of technology (25%), marketing (15%), management (14%), and operations management and management science (9%). Again, several domains were found to be dominated by a limited number of journals. At the level of individual journals the analysis shows a growing impact of JPIM on management of technology journals. The knowledge-flow analysis demonstrates how JPIM functions as a bridge between the knowledge from various domains and the body of knowledge on management of technology. It suggests a growing specialization of the field of technology innovation management, with JPIM being firmly entrenched as the acknowledged leading journal. [source] Measuring Knowledge Stocks: A Process of Creative DestructionKYKLOS INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, Issue 3 2005Jürgen Bitzer Summary This paper proposes a new method for constructing R&D capital stocks developed to avoid the common assumption of a constant rate of knowledge depreciation, which implies wear and tear of knowledge. The method models the development of R&D capital stocks as a process of creative destruction linking the depreciation of knowledge to the emergence of new knowledge. A first empirical assessment of the new method , measuring the influence of R&D capital stocks on production in the manufacturing sectors of 12 OECD countries , produces plausible and robust results. [source] Short and long-run returns to agricultural R&D in South Africa, or will the real rate of return please stand up?AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, Issue 1 2000David Schimmelpfennig Abstract This paper briefly presents the results of a total factor productivity (TFP) study of South African commercial agriculture, for 1947-1997, and illustrates some potential pitfalls in rate of return to research (ROR) calculations. The lag between R&D and TFP is analyzed and found to be only 9 years, with a pronounced negative skew, reflecting the adaptive focus of the South African system. The two-stage approach gives a massive ROR of 170%. The predetermined lag parameters are then used in modeling the knowledge stock, to refine the estimates of the ROR from short- and long-run dual profit functions. In the short run, with the capital inputs treated as fixed, the ROR is a more reasonable 44%. In the long run, with adjustment of the capital stocks, it rises to 113%, which would reflect the fact that new technology is embodied in the capital items. However, the long-run model raises a new problem since capital stock adjustment takes 11 years, 2 years longer than the lag between R&D and TFP. If this is assumed to be the correct lag, the ROR falls to 58%, a best estimate. The paper draws attention to the possible sensitivity of rate of return calculations to assumed lag structure, particularly when the lag between changes in R&D and TFP is skewed. [source] In Search of the Classics: A Study of the Impact of JPIM Papers from 1984 to 2003,THE JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT, Issue 4 2010Wim Biemans The Journal of Product Innovation Management (JPIM) was launched in 1984 and over its first two decades of existence evolved into the leading journal in the field of innovation and the management of technology. During these 20 years JPIM contributed to the field by publishing 488 academic papers. This paper is a follow-up study to an earlier study that looked at how JPIM evolved in terms of knowledge stock and knowledge flows during the first two decades (published in JPIM, March 2007). That paper looked at what was published during the first 20 years, which sources were cited, and which journals cited JPIM papers. This study takes a closer look at the impact of JPIM on the field of innovation and the management of technology by identifying the most classic papers published in JPIM during its first two decades of existence. This study used multiple research methods to identify 64 candidate potential classics from the 488 papers published in the first 20 years of JPIM's existence, to analyze how they differ from the other 424 papers published in the journal, and to investigate authors' motivations for writing these papers. Finally, using survey responses from the Product Development and Management Association (PDMA) membership and other academics in innovation and new product development, the research then determines which 5 of the 64 candidate papers are considered to be the "most classic" papers published and the factors driving that determination. The findings show that classic papers are those presenting a "pioneering idea" in the field that creates buzz in both the academic and practitioner worlds. High numbers of citations are indeed the outcome of these endeavors, but being a classic requires more than having high numbers of citations. Authors of the true classics generally have worked hard to disseminate their research, usually to both academics and practitioners, perhaps also contributing to the network buzz created by their findings. While one of the five most classic papers represented the first investigation into a particular stream of research, the other four were culminations of a significant body of research, providing a distinct summary of known information on a topic at the time they were published and a clear road forward for future research on the topic. These bodies of knowledge have yet to be superseded by other culminating papers. [source] Twenty Years of the Journal of Product Innovation Management: History, Participants, and Knowledge Stock and FlowsTHE JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT, Issue 3 2007Wim Biemans The Journal of Product Innovation Management (JPIM) serves as a marketplace for science-based, innovative ideas that are produced and consumed by scholars and businesspeople. Now that JPIM has existed for 20 years, two intriguing questions emerge: (1) How has the journal evolved over time in terms of knowledge stock, that is, what are the characteristics of the growing stock of knowledge published by JPIM over the years; and (2) how has the journal evolved in knowledge flow, that is, how is JPIM influenced by other scientific publications and what is its impact on other journals? In terms of knowledge stock, over 35% of the articles published over the 20 years investigate processes and metrics for performance management. The next most frequently published area was strategy, planning, and decision making (20%), followed by customer and market research (17%). The dominant research method used was a cross-sectional large-sample survey, and the focus most usually is at the project level of the firm. The large majority of JPIM authors (60%) have a marketing background, with the remaining 40% representing numerous functional domains. Academics at all levels publish in JPIM, and though most authors hail from North America, the Dutch are a significant second group. JPIM was analyzed from a knowledge-flow perspective by looking at the scientific sources used by JPIM authors to develop their ideas and articles. To this end a bibliometric analysis was performed by analyzing all references in articles published in JPIM. During 1984,2003 JPIM published 488 articles, containing 10,314 references to journals and 6,533 references to other sources. Some 20% of these references (2,020) were self-references to JPIM articles. The remaining 8,294 journal references were to articles in 287 journals in the fields of management (25%), marketing (24%), and management of technology (14%). However, it should be pointed out that many domains were dominated by a limited number of journals. The second component of knowledge flow concerns the extent to which the ideas developed in JPIM are consumed by other authors. Again, bibliometric analysis was used to analyze data from the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) about citations to JPIM in other journals. For the period 1984,2005, the SSCI registered 7,773 citations to JPIM in 2,067 articles published in 278 journals (including the 2,020 self-citations in JPIM). The functional areas most frequently citing JPIM are management of technology (25%), marketing (15%), management (14%), and operations management and management science (9%). Again, several domains were found to be dominated by a limited number of journals. At the level of individual journals the analysis shows a growing impact of JPIM on management of technology journals. The knowledge-flow analysis demonstrates how JPIM functions as a bridge between the knowledge from various domains and the body of knowledge on management of technology. It suggests a growing specialization of the field of technology innovation management, with JPIM being firmly entrenched as the acknowledged leading journal. [source] Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic ReviewBRITISH JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT, Issue 3 2003David Tranfield Undertaking a review of the literature is an important part of any research project. The researcher both maps and assesses the relevant intellectual territory in order to specify a research question which will further develop the knowledge base. However, traditional ,narrative' reviews frequently lack thoroughness, and in many cases are not undertaken as genuine pieces of investigatory science. Consequently they can lack a means for making sense of what the collection of studies is saying. These reviews can be biased by the researcher and often lack rigour. Furthermore, the use of reviews of the available evidence to provide insights and guidance for intervention into operational needs of practitioners and policymakers has largely been of secondary importance. For practitioners, making sense of a mass of often-contradictory evidence has become progressively harder. The quality of evidence underpinning decision-making and action has been questioned, for inadequate or incomplete evidence seriously impedes policy formulation and implementation. In exploring ways in which evidence-informed management reviews might be achieved, the authors evaluate the process of systematic review used in the medical sciences. Over the last fifteen years, medical science has attempted to improve the review process by synthesizing research in a systematic, transparent, and reproducible manner with the twin aims of enhancing the knowledge base and informing policymaking and practice. This paper evaluates the extent to which the process of systematic review can be applied to the management field in order to produce a reliable knowledge stock and enhanced practice by developing context-sensitive research. The paper highlights the challenges in developing an appropriate methodology. [source] | ||||||||||