Conditions of the Quality of Relationships with Regard to Participants of the Quadruple Helise

• Autorzy: Anna Tomaszuk
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Purpose: The purpose of the article is to compare the attitudes of representatives of innovative enterprises toward the strength and importance of relationships in relation to different groups of participants in the quadruple helix (groups of enterprises, local government organizations, scientific organizations and business environment institutions). Design/methodology/approach: The presented analyses are concerned with the determinants of the quality of relationships of innovative enterprises in the quadruple helix. The research was conducted on a sample of 200 innovative enterprises using the CATI method. Four relationship constructs were studied - trust, commitment, satisfaction and communication. Findings: The results indicate that the most significant, both within strength and importance, are relationships with other enterprises, followed in turn by those with institutions of the business environment, local government and the scientific sphere. With respect to all participants in the quadruple relationship, the validity of the constructs is as follows: trust, satisfaction, commitment, communication (with commitment and communication being equally important in the case of business environment institutions). Analysis of the discrepancies in the responses indicated that the most statistically significant differences exist for the relationship with local government units. Research limitations/implications: The main limitation is the research sample and the limitations of the relationships established, especially with regard to scientific/research institutions and business environment institutions. Practical implications: The article indicates which constructs of relationship quality should be paid attention to by representatives of the various helix in managing relationships with innovative enterprises, and identifies which characteristics generate differences in their perception. Originality/value: The article undertakes to analyse the quality of inter-organizational relations through the prism of its constructs. The article is addressed to both representatives of enterprises and other participants in the quadruple helix. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Organization-environment relations; Organizational relationships; Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI); Innovative enterprises

PL

Relacje organizacja-otoczenie; Relacje organizacyjne; Metoda CATI; Przedsiębiorstwo innowacyjne

• Czasopismo: Zeszyty Naukowe. Organizacja i Zarządzanie / Politechnika Śląska
• Rocznik: 2023
• Numer: z. 180 Współczesne zarządzanie = Contemporary Management
• Strony: 669--682

Twórcy

autor

Anna Tomaszuk

• Bialystok University of Technology

Bibliografia

• 1. Afonso, O., Monteiro, S., Thompson, M. (2012). A Growth Model for the Quadruple Helix. Journal of Business Economics and Management, Vol. 13, Iss. 5, pp. 849-865, doi:10.3846/16111699.2011.626438.
• 2. Ahamed, A.F.M.J., Skallerud, K. (2013). Effect of Distance and Communication Climate on Export Performance: The Mediating Role of Relationship Quality. Journal of Global Marketing, Vol. 26, No. 5, pp. 284-300, https://doi.org/10.1080/08911762.2013.830170.
• 3. Athanasopoulou, P. (2009). Relationships quality: a critical review and research agenda. European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 43, No. 5/6, pp. 583-610, https://DOI:10.1108/ 03090560910946945.
• 4. Barry, J.M., Doney, P.M. (2011). Cross-cultural examination of relationships quality. Journal of Global Marketing, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 305-323, https://doi.org/10.1080/ 08911762.2011.602321.
• 5. Bednarzewska, K.E. (2016). Potrójna helisa jako model współpracy w budowaniu atrakcyjności inwestycyjnej miast. Organizacja i Zarządzanie, No. 2, pp. 5-20.
• 6. Blunsdon, B., Reed, K. (2003). The Effect of Technical and Social Conditions on Workplace Trust. International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 12-27, https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190210158493.
• 7. Bojar, M., Machnik-Słomka, J. (2014). Model potrójnej i poczwórnej helisy w budowaniu współpracy sieciowej dla rozwoju innowacyjnych projektów regionalnych. Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej. Seria Organizacja i Zarządzanie, no. 76, pp. 99-111.
• 8. Carayannis, E.G., Barth, T.D., Campbell, D. (2012). The Quintuple Helix innovation model: global warming as a challenge and driver for innovation. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 2, pp. 1-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/2192-5372-1-2.
• 9. Carayannis, E.G., Campbell, D.F. (2009). Knowledge creation, diffusion, and use in innovation networks and knowledge clusters. A comparative systems approach across the United States, Europe, and Asia. London: Praeger Publishers.
• 10. Carayannis, E.G., Campbell, D.F. (2011). Open Innovation Diplomacy and a 21st Century Fractal Research, Education and Innovation (FREIE) Ecosystem: Building on the Quadruple and Quintuple Helix Innovation Concepts and the "Mode 3" Knowledge Production System. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Vol. 2, Iss. 3, pp. 327-372. DOI:10.1007/s13132-011-0058-3.
• 11. Chorób, R. (2016). Potrójna helisa przykładem efektywnej kooperacji i przesłanką ekspansji więzi integracyjnych w agrobiznesie. Przedsiębiorczość i Zarządzanie, Vol. 17, Iss. 9, p. 1, pp. 23-35.
• 12. Chu, Z., Wang, Q. (2012). Drivers of Relationship Quality in Logistics Outsourcing in China. Journal of Supply Chain Management, Vol. 48, No. 3, pp. 78-96, DOI:10.1111/j.1745-493X.2011.03259.x.
• 13. Colapinto, C. (2011). Exploring academic entrepreneurship in the Milan area. Industry and Higher Education, Vol. 25, Iss. 1, pp. 1-7. DOI:10.5367/ihe.2011.0025.
• 14. De Bürca, S., Fynes, B., Roche, E. (2004). Evaluating Relationship Quality in a Business-to-Business Context. Irish Journal of Management, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 61-75.
• 15. de Wulf, K., Odekerken-Schröder, G., Iacobucci, D. (2001). Investments in consumer relationships: A cross country and cross-industry exploration. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 65, No. 4, pp. 33-50, https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.65.4.33.18386.
• 16. Doz, Y.L., Hamel, G. (2006). Alianse strategiczne. Sztuka zdobywania korzyści poprzez współpracę. Gliwice: Helion.
• 17. Etzkowitz, H. (1993). Technology transfer: the second academic revolution. Technology Access Report, Vol. 6, pp. 7-9.
• 18. Etzkowitz, H., Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The Triple Helix: university-industry-government relations: a laboratory for knowledge-based economic development. EASST Review, Vol. 14, pp. 14-19.
• 19. Etzkowitz, H., Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and "Mode 2" to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, Vol. 29, Iss. 2, pp. 109-123. DOI:10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4.
• 20. Etzkowitz, H., Zhou, Ch. (2007). Regional Innovation Initiator: The entrepreneurial University in Various Triple Helix Models. Singapore Triple Helix VI Conference Theme Paper.
• 21. Fynes, B., Voss, C., De Bürca, S. (2005). The Impact of Supply Chain Relationship Quality on Quality Performance. International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 96, No. 3, pp. 339-354, DOI:10.5923/j.logistics.20160501.02.
• 22. Gorbatyuk, A., Overwalle, G. van, Zimmeren, E. van (2016). Intellectual Property Ownership in Coupled Open Innovation Processes. IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, Vol. 47, Iss. 3, pp. 262-302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-016-0461-1.
• 23. Hajli, M.N. (2014). The role of social support on relationship quality and social commerce, Technological Forecasting & Social Change. Vol. 87, No. C, pp. 17-27, DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2014.05.012.
• 24. Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K.P., Gremler, D.D. (2002). Understanding relationship marketing outcomes. An integration of relational benefits and relationship quality. Journal of Service Research, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 230-247, https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1094670502004003006.
• 25. Heroux, L., Hammoutene, A. (2012). Relationship marketing in the American and Canadian export sectors: a matter of trust. The Journal of American Academy of Business, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 39-46.
• 26. Hilarowicz, A. (2017). Inteligentne specjalizacje - problematyka przywództwa. Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej. Organizacja i Zarządzanie, Vol. 105, pp. 85-95. DOI:10.29119/1641-3466.2017.105.3.
• 27. Holmlund, M. (2008). A definition model, and empirical analysis of business-to-business relationship quality. International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 1-46, http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09564230810855707.
• 28. Jiang, Z., Shiu, E., Henneberg, S., Naude, P. (2016). Relationship quality in business to business relationships - reviewing the current literatures and proposing a new measurement model. Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 297-313, https://doi.org/10.1002/ mar.20876.
• 29. Kopeć, A. (2020). Rozwój regionalny oparty na innowacjach przy zastosowaniu modelu poczwórnej helisy, a projekt Strategii Rozwoju Regionalnego 2030. Koncepcja rozwoju "Czwórmiasta". Zeszyty Naukowe Państwowej Wyższej Szkoły Zawodowej w Płocku. Nauki Ekonomiczne, Vol. 31, pp. 53-73.
• 30. Krot, K., Lewicka, D. (2016). Zaufanie w organizacji innowacyjnej. Warszawa: C.H. Beck.
• 31. Kumar, N., Scheer, L.K., Steenkamp, J.B.E. (1995). The Effects of Supplier Fairness on Vulnerable Resellers. Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 54-65, https://doi.org/10.1177%2F002224379503200107.
• 32. Łącka, I. (2018). Jednostka samorządu terytorialnego jako partner regionalnego systemu innowacji w modelach potrójnej i poczwórnej helisy. Nierówności Społeczne a Wzrost Gospodarczy, No, 56 (4), pp. 37-52. DOI: 10.15584/nsawg.2018.4.3.
• 33. Lages, C., Lages, C.R., Lages, L.F. (2005). The REQUAL scale: a measure of relationship quality in export market ventures. Journal of Business Research, No. 54, pp. 1040-1048, doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2004.03.001.
• 34. Leszczyński, G. (2014). Adaptacja w relacjach business-to-business. Uwarunkowania i efekty. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Poznaniu.
• 35. Lewicka, D., Krot, K., Książek, D. (2016). Metodyczne aspekty badania zaufania w naukach o zarządzaniu. Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie, no. 7(955), pp. 41-56, DOI: 10.15678/ZNUEK.2016.0955.0703.
• 36. Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The Triple Helix: an evolutionary model of innovations. Research Policy, Vol. 29, Iss. 2, pp. 243-255. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00063-3.
• 37. Leydesdorff, L. (2012). The Triple Helix, Quadruple Helix, ..., and a N-tuple of Helices: Explanatory Models for Analyzing the Knowledge-based Economy? Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Vol. 3, pp. 25-35. DOI 10.1007/s13132-011-0049-4.
• 38. Liang, T.-P., Ho, Y.-T., Li, Y.-W., Turban, E. (2011). What Drives Social Commerce: The Role of Social Support and Relationship Quality. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 69-90, https://doi.org/10.2753/JEC1086-4415160204.
• 39. Lindberg, M., Lindgren, M., Packendroff, J. (2010). The role of NGOs in supporting women's entrepreneurship. A study of a Quadruple Helix project in the Baltic Sea region. Quadruple Helix Reports, Vol. 4, pp. 3-14.
• 40. Macełko, M., Mendel, I. (2011). Living lab - koncepcja popytowego podejścia do innowacji. Organizacja i Zarządzanie, No. 2(14), pp. 111-125.
• 41. Mendel, I., Macełko, M. (2013). Miejsce i rola społeczeństwa obywatelskiego w regionalnych (eko)systemach innowacji. Organizacja i Zarządzanie, No. 2, pp. 79-95.
• 42. Mohaghar, A., Ghasemi, R. (2011). A Conceptual Model for Supply Chain Relations Quality and Supply Chain Performance by Structural Equation Modeling: a Case Study in the Iranian Automotive Industry. European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 456-470.
• 43. Nowak, D. (2015). Bariery rozwoju relacji kooperacyjnych. Problemy Zarządzania, Vol. 13, No. 1(50), p. 1, pp. 47-67. DOI 10.7172/1644-9584.50.3.
• 44. Park, H.W. (2014). Transition from the Triple Helix to N-Tuple Helices? An interview with Elias G. Carayannis and David F.J. Campbell. Scientometrics, Vol. 99, Iss. 1, pp. 203-207. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1124-3.
• 45. Roberts, K., Varki, S., Brodie, R. (2003). Measuring to quality of relationships in consumer services: an empirical study. European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 37, No. 1-2, pp. 169-196, DOI 10.1108/03090560310454037.
• 46. Ryciuk, U. (2013). Zaufanie międzyorganizacyjne - konceptualizacja, operacjonalizacja i pomiar. Przegląd Organizacji, No. 12, pp. 33-38, https://doi.org/10.33141/po.2013.12.06.
• 47. Sankowska, A. (2011). Wpływ zaufania na zarządzanie przedsiębiorstwem. Perspektywa wewnątrzorganizacyjna. Warszawa: Difin.
• 48. Skarmeas, D., Robson, M.J. (2008). Determinants of Relationship Quality in Importer-Exporter Relationships. British Journal of Management, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 171-184, DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2007.00537.x.
• 49. Stach, P. (2010). Jakość relacji z interesariuszami. Ekonomika i Organizacja Przedsiębiorstwa, No. 1, pp. 41-46.
• 50. Sudolska, A. (2011). Uwarunkowania budowania relacji proinnowacyjnych przez przedsiębiorstwa w Polsce. Toruń: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UMK.
• 51. Tomaszuk, A. (2022). Determinant of the relationship quality in the perspective of the enterprise - business environment institutions. Scientific Papers of Silesian University of Technology, No. 159, pp. 449-461, DOI:10.29119/1641-3466.2022.159.36
• 52. Tomaszuk, A., Wasiluk, A. (2021). Przedsiębiorstwo w poczwórnej helisie. Białystok: Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Białostockiej.
• 53. Tung, B., Carlson, J. (2013). Modelling a formative measure of relationship quality and its effects: evidence from the Hong Kong retail banking industry. Services Marketing Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 139-158, https://doi.org/10.1080/15332969.2013.770674.
• 54. Ulaga, W., Eggert, A. (2006). Relationship value and relationship quality: broadening the nomological network of business-to-business relationships. European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40, No. 3-4, pp. 311-327, https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560610648075.
• 55. Vieira, A.L., Winklhofer, H., Ennew, C.T. (2008). Relationship Quality: a literature review and research agenda. Journal of Customer Behaviour, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 269-291, https://doi.org/10.1362/147539208X386833.
• 56. Walter, A. (2003). Relationship-Specific Factors Influencing Supplier Involvement in Customer New Product Development. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 56, No. 9, pp. 721-733, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00257-0.
• 57. Walter, A., Ritter, T. (2003). The influence of adaptations, trust, and commitment on value-creating functions of customer relationships. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 18, No. 4/5, pp. 353-365, https://doi.org/10.1108/08858620310480250.
• 58. Whipple, J.M., Lynch, D.F., Nyaga, G.N. (2010). A buyer's perspective on collaborative versus transactional relationships. Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 39, pp. 507-518, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2008.11.008.
• 59. Woo, K., Ennew, Ch.T. (2004). Business-to-business relationship quality: an IMP interaction-based conceptualization and measurement. European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 38, No. 9/10, pp. 1252-1271, https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560410548960.
• 60. Wściubiak, Ł. (2019). Motywy współpracy międzyorganizacyjnej w działalności innowacyjnej - perspektywa przedsiębiorstw produkcyjnych w Polsce. Przegląd Organizacji, No. 8, pp. 12-18. https://doi.org/10.33141/po.2019.08.02.
• 61. Yu, G.J., Lee, J. (2017). When Should a Firm Collaborate with Research Organizations for Innovation Performance? The Moderating Role of Innovation Orientation, Size, and Age. The Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 42, Iss. 6, pp. 1451-1465. DOI: 10.1007/s10961-016-9469-4.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.29119/1641-3466.2023.180.34