Search results

Drawing on the work of Niklas Luhmann, the paper argues that technology can be viewed as a self-referential system which is autonomous from both human beings and other function systems of society. The paper aims to develop a philosophy of technology from the work of Niklas Luhmann. To achieve this aim, it draws upon the systems-theory work of Jacques Ellul, a philosopher of technology who focuses on the autonomous potential of technological evolution.

The paper draws on the work of Niklas Luhmann and Jacques Ellul to explore the theme of autonomous technology and what this means for our thinking about technological issues in the twenty-first century. Insights from these two thinkers and researchers working in the Luhmannian sociological tradition are applied to remote work.

The sociological approach of Luhmann, coupled with Ellul's insights into the autonomous nature of technology, can help us develop a systems theory of technology which takes seriously its irreducibility to human functions.

The paper contributes to the growing sociological literature that thematizes the Luhmannian approach to technology, helping us better understand this phenomenon and think in new ways about what technological autonomy means.

The paper brings together the work of Luhmann, Ellul and contemporary researchers to advance a new understanding of technology and technological communication.

The purpose of this paper is to present a conceptual framework of the relationship between technological transitions and hegemonic transitions in the international system from a historical perspective and discuss its consequences for technologically dependent countries and regions.

This paper analyzes the relationship between technological transitions and hegemonic transitions in the international system from a historical perspective. It then constructs four possible transition scenarios for China's international order and the USA's central role in defining the international order. IT closes with a discussion of how changes in ICT and global health public goods can impact China's position in the international order and opportunities for Latin America–China technology partnerships.

Historically, technological transitions and hegemonic transitions in the international system simultaneously occur, with the country winning the technological dispute emerging as the international system's hegemon. The USA and China are currently involved in technological races in several next-generation technologies. The outcome of these technological races will define each country's position in the international system in the coming decades and the transformations in the international order.

This paper is limited to discussing the technologies/sectors: ICT, specifically 5G, and AI technologies, and medical technologies with the potential of global public health goods. Research on other technologies/sectors will provide a deeper understanding of the likely outcomes of the current technological transition and its implications for the balance of power in the international system.

This paper makes a case for Latin American countries to (1) engage in a pragmatic bargain with China and the USA to establish technological partnerships in emerging technologies and (2) to develop national technology strategies aimed at promoting autonomous technology development capabilities.

This paper addresses the need for Latin America to take a strong stance for technological autonomy, stressing the differences in buying technology and making technology.

This paper presents an original framework of the relationship between technological transitions and hegemonic transitions in the international system. It discusses how technological leadership impacts the international order by establishing relations of technological dominance and technological dependency.

This paper addresses the geographical dimension of cross-border knowledge integration, expressed as the co-invention of patent filings and investigates the siting of patenting activities by major US corporations in China. Most importantly, the study looks into the patterns of international co-invention or the links of these locations to headquarters and other company subsidiaries.

The study explores the cases of six US multinationals that file international patent applications in China. The applications were analyzed based on the composition of invention teams and the locations of inventors.

The co-invented patent filings by US multinational enterprises (MNEs) in China demonstrate a high degree of US–Chinese subsidiary collaboration. Links with other subsidiaries are marginal, and at the same time, high levels of sole patenting by inventors in China point to competence-creating research and development (R&D) activities taking place.

The lack of subsidiary-subsidiary collaboration, especially subsidiaries in other emerging markets, indicates a less diversified strategy of leveraging internal networks of knowledge. This also implies that Chinese subsidiaries still lack attractiveness as partners in subsidiary-subsidiary co-invention. Only two companies in our sample, Procter & Gamble and Intel, demonstrate a highly diversified, integrated and transnational pattern of innovation management.

The paper contributes to the contextual understanding of the rich landscape of R&D activities of major US MNEs in China. By exploring these cases, the paper identifies a number of trends. First, the R&D activities in this sample are highly concentrated in technological clusters located in Beijing and Shanghai. Technological clustering is an important advantage of the innovation landscape in emerging markets. Second, the paper underscores the importance of differentiating between different types of co-invention. The patent applications in this sample tend to unite inventors mostly from the US and China, and so multi-country applications involving subsidiaries in other countries are rare. Thus, the level of integration outside the center-host bandwidth is low. However, Chinese subsidiaries demonstrate high levels of autonomy by filing single-country applications, which implies that they are building their own research identity.

The purpose of this paper is to answer the question of whether smartwatches will survive and gain their own niche within the consumer electronics market. Based on the stimulus–organism–response (S–O–R) framework, this study identifies and validates the impacts of both technological and fashion-related factors (interactivity, autonomy, visual aesthetics and self-expression) on product attachment towards smartwatches through user satisfaction and pleasure derived from their smartwatches.

The authors collected the survey data via online surveys from 198 respondents and tested measurement and structural models with the partial least square technique.

The authors found that both technological characteristics (interactivity and autonomy) and fashion-related characteristics (visual aesthetics and self-expression) have an impact on product attachment through pleasure.

Several other important characteristics of traditional wrist-watches such as durability or workmanship are not considered in this study, but should be included in future studies. The three-item measure of autonomy may be insufficient for more sophisticated wearable devices in the future. In future studies, the impact of product attachment on users’ continued usage should be examined.

This study provides important practical implications for smartwatch makers interested in product development, as users were found to consider fashion-related characteristics to be as important as technological characteristics.

This study is the first study that considers both aesthetic and technological factors for IT acceptance in the context of wearable devices. Also, instead of traditional IT acceptance measures such as continued use, this study investigates users’ product attachment, which is more relevant to the case of wearable devices.

The flexibility of corporations to adapt their strategy to a fast-changing environment can be a major source for competitive advantage and survival. While research mainly focuses on outcomes of this ability, little is known of how to foster it in organizations. Thus, by building on the upper echelons theory, the authors assume that the strategic flexibility of the company depends on the willingness and permission to change of the chief executive officer (CEO). To support the hypotheses, the authors apply the dimensions of commitment to change and work autonomy to the CEO and test for moderation under conditions of technological turbulence. The authors’ results based on medium-sized organizations in Germany show significant effects of both dimensions on strategic flexibility. In particular, under conditions of high technological turbulence, commitment based on loyalty and not on pressure together with autonomy on control and evaluation criteria is best suited to increase strategic flexibility. These insights extend the research literature and provide guidelines for CEOs and their supervisors alike.

This study aims to explore the role of frontline service employees’ (FSEs) awareness that their job can be substituted by smart technology, artificial intelligence, robotics and algorithms (STARA) in their job autonomy and proactive service performance and when these relationships can be buffered. Drawing on the cognitive appraisal theory of stress, the study examined the mediating relationship between FSEs’ STARA awareness, job autonomy and proactive service performance and the moderating effects of self-efficacy and resilience on this relationship.

The authors administered two-wave online surveys to 301 South Korean FSEs working in various service sectors (e.g. retailing, food/beverage, hospitality/tourism and banking). The Time 1 survey measured respondents’ STARA awareness, self-efficacy, resilience and job autonomy, and the Time 2 survey assessed their proactive service performance.

FSEs’ STARA awareness negatively affected their subsequent proactive service performance through decreased job autonomy. The negative association between STARA awareness and job autonomy was weaker when FSEs’ self-efficacy was high than when it was low. While the authors observed no significant moderation of resilience, the author found a marginally significant three-way interaction between STARA awareness, self-efficacy and resilience. Specifically, STARA awareness was negatively related to job autonomy only when both self-efficacy and resilience were low. When either self-efficacy or resilience was high, the association between STARA awareness and job autonomy became nonsignificant, suggesting the buffering roles of the two personal resources.

Given that the measurement of variables relied on self-reported data, rater biases might have affected the findings of the study. Moreover, the simultaneous measurement of STARA awareness, self-efficacy, resilience and job autonomy could preclude causal inferences between these variables. The authors encourage future studies to use a more rigorous methodology to reduce rater biases and establish stronger causality between the variables.

Service firms can decrease FSEs’ STARA awareness through training in the knowledge and skills necessary to work with these technologies. To promote FSEs’ proactive service performance in this context, service firms need to involve them in decisions related to STARA adoption and allow them to craft their jobs. Service managers should provide FSEs with social support and exercise empowering and supportive leadership to help them view STARA as a challenge rather than a threat.

Distinct from prior research on STARA awareness and employee outcomes, the study identified proactive service performance as a key outcome in the STARA context. By presenting self-efficacy and resilience as crucial personal resources that buffer FSEs from the deleterious impact of STARA awareness, the study provides practitioners with insights that can help FSEs maintain their job autonomy and proactive service performance in times of digitalization and automation.

Technology acquisition is a common phenomenon of acquiring external knowledge, but we have a limited understanding of conditions in which the acquirer integrates the target or not. On one hand, the acquirer may have a policy to integrate the target to benefit from its prior knowledge. On the other hand, the target may face challenges in continuing its knowledge creation and the acquirer may want to provide it autonomy to not disrupt it. This paper aims to identify conditions in which targets tend to be less integrated after acquisitions, allowing them to maintain more autonomy and contribute more to knowledge creation.

We test our arguments in the empirical setting of the global biopharmaceutical industry using a difference-in-difference approach on a longitudinal dataset of matched patents. We examine self-cites received by patents belonging to acquirers and the targets before and after the acquisitions.

We find that, on average, the targets’ prior patents do not receive more self-cites after the acquisition. We conclude that this is because their R&D activities are disrupted, suggesting a higher level of post-acquisition integration. However, more nuanced findings reveal that it may not be the case all the time. When the target has more research experience, is international or is specialized in complementary technologies, prior patents of targets continue to receive more self-cites after the acquisition. It indicates that the targets in such conditions continue knowledge creation, suggesting a lower level of post-acquisition integration.

Our findings contribute to post-acquisition integration research. While post-acquisition integration downside is common, we present conditions in which such a downside may be less likely. We highlight that the context of an acquisition may be an important determinant of the extent of integration of the target. Moreover, we supplement the integration research (cultural, structural and human resource and leadership perspectives of integration) by adding a knowledge-based perspective to it. Such dynamics have important implications for acquirers and targets in deriving value from the acquisition.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the link between R&D internationalization and finance decisions by providing survey evidence on the funding sources of R&D in light of recent perceptions of MNEs' decentralized knowledge-related competitiveness.

The study draws upon a survey of 83 decentralized R&D units located in countries outside the EU core of mature economies. Funding sources are classified as MNE-internal and external. Using simulation-based models, six ordered probit regression models were run with each funding source forming the dependent variable.

There are three significant findings. First, decentralized R&D funding relies mainly on MNE-internal sources. Second, decentralized R&D funding patterns reflect on the interdependencies within an overall MNE R&D strategy that is articulated through varied laboratory roles. Third, while the strategy-finance interaction is confirmed, the prevalence of parent funding is challenged. Instead, evidence recorded here suggests support for the decentralized, “subsidiary-focused” perspective that has recently regained a considerable momentum in the literature.

Notwithstanding that this study reinforces the interaction between strategic decisions and funding patterns, more work is required to identify the effects of other aspects of strategy on the funding sources of decentralized R&D activity. However, it is seemingly the first study that investigates MNEs' R&D financial decisions in economies outside the EU core, incorporating also a wide array of external funding sources.

Funding choices for decentralized R&D labs should be contingent upon their unique contribution to the competitive evolution of the MNE group. Further, R&D activity seems to leverage the autonomy of subsidiary managers.

This research is one of the very few empirical studies providing evidence on the funding sources of decentralized R&D laboratories, and suggests possible predictors that have not been put forward hitherto.

Drawing on organizational design theory and organizational learning theory, this paper aims to examine component technology (CT) and the interaction between CT and experiential learning (EL) effects on the degree of integration (DI) of cross-border technological acquisitions.

Using a sample of 267 firms consisting of 229 acquirer firms who started cross-border technological acquisitions from developed economies and 38 acquirer firms who initiated cross-border technological acquisitions from emerging economies over the period of 1993–2016, this study adopts a value chain framework to measure the acquirers’ acquisition integration degree for the investigation of the effects of CT and the interaction between CT and EL.

First, this paper finds CT in cross-border technological acquisitions exerting a positive influence on the acquirer firm’s likelihood of the DI implementation, in line with the organizational design theory. Second, in view of organizational learning theory, this study finds EL and the combined effect of CT and EL to have an inverse influence on the DI.

The results imply that the moderating role of EL significantly optimizes decision choices for an acquirer firm for integration implementation strategies in the form of DI, such as full integration (structural integration), partial integration and no integration (structural separation), which appears to be crucial for cross-border technological acquisitions.

This study contributed to international business strategies by shedding light on the importance of the DI for an acquirer firm that undertakes a cross-border technological acquisition with a CT target firm. This study explains why structural integration might be necessary in cross-border technological acquisitions regardless of the costs of disruption it imposes, as well as the contexts in which it becomes less important or unnecessary. The study disclosed that the increase in the likelihood of DI because of CT depends on the EL of the acquisition company in the host country environment and fluctuates with the prior acquisition knowledge and EL of the host country. Combining two cross-border technological acquisition’s literature streams, such as CT and EL, this study enlightens the importance of organizational learning theory and theory of organization design strategic direction making on acquisition integration implementation strategies.

This study aims to: identify organizational and environmental factors affecting strategic decision‐making speed; examine the relationship between those factors and innovation performance; and clarify the relationship between strategic decision‐making speed and innovation performance.

A survey was conducted on 73 large‐scale firms operating in the manufacturing industry in Turkey, in May 2006 and December 2006.

The research findings related to the linkage between participation and strategic decision‐making speed indicate that extensive participation accelerates the pace of decision making.

This survey was conducted on CEOs and top managers of large‐scale manufacturing firms operating in Turkey. Cultural differences may become evident from those findings. Also, results might be different if only small and medium‐size firms, or firms in different industries were used.

This survey is one of the first to examine the strategic decision speed and innovation performance relationship, revealing the positive effect of strategic decision speed on innovation performance. It is the first one to be conducted in an Eastern country like Turkey, filling the gap in the literature.