The approach will be to study the fast evolving use of technology in fashion, especially related to creating innovative materials in the clothing business. From discussing nano technology as well as embedded sensors, we shall try to take a look at the evolution of technology in fashion garment construction. Special mention will be given to companies like Intel who are working with designers to create innovative fabrics and material prototypes. We shall also touch upon the use of technology to create unique and rare products that cannot be recreated and hence have a lot of value associated with them.

By adopting transactional social commerce functions from mobile apps, individuals can sell products and services directly to friends on their contact list. This drives micro entrepreneurs with fewer than ten employees and less than a €2million annual balance (European Union Law, 2013) to become key drivers for economic growth (Paoloni & Dumay, 2011). In particular, individuals aged 18-34 become inspired by images on social networks for clothing and fashion products. Hence, fashion products are popular business items for micro-entrepreneurs. Despite potential benefits for social commerce, micro-fashion entrepreneurs in many countries are still unaware of apps’ use in social commerce to sell products, and to create and manage social capital for their business. This exploratory research aimed to investigate how micro-fashion entrepreneurs adopt transactional-focused social commerce and utilize social capital embedded in network ties for their marketing and sales, based on innovation diffusion and social capital theory. Research questions included: (1) How do micro-fashion entrepreneurs adopt social commerce? (2) How does social capital in network ties contribute to marketing and sales in social commerce? To answer these research questions, qualitative data from phone interviews with 16 micro-fashion entrepreneurs selling fashion products through WeChat in China were analyzed, adopting a thematic analysis. Data indicated micro-fashion entrepreneurs have positive attitudes, based on their experience and knowledge of WeChat. They adopt social commerce to (1) sell products in a new way, (2) connect with customers, and (3) reduce financial risk, while an innovative channel for entrepreneurship. Also, operating a business through WeChat required less time commitment compared with brick and mortar, and online stores, because accessing services like WeChat have payment systems, share images and messages. Free calls and messages are already available. The interview data demonstrated micro-entrepreneurs have an advantage when adopting social network ties in WeChat and implementing social capital embedded in marketing sales networks. Structural, relational, and cognitive capital contribute to micro-entrepreneurs’ marketing and sales interactively. An individual could access target customers, based on networks already established social media platforms and facilitate entrepreneurs’ adoption of social commerce. Also, since trust, shared goals, and languages exist on these network ties, there exists an increase for entrepreneurs’ accessibility to use social commerce to initiate their business, while decreasing business operating expenses, promoting products, and building relationships with customers. In addition, relational capital built by interactions with each customer brings cognitive capital to promote products and strong network ties.

This study employs the resource-based view to understand how product strategy influence export performance. According to the organizational learning perspective, moreover, the ability to manage existing assets and capabilities and the development of new capabilities are arguably among the most relevant innovation success factors. Based on these theoretical backgrounds, a model is proposed to analyze the effects of cost leadership and differentiation strategy on export performance, as well as the moderating effects of exploitative and exploratory innovation capability. Using survey data from Korean exporters, the findings indicate that the cost leadership and differentiation strategy enhance export performance. While exploitative innovation capability strengthens the relationship between cost leadership strategy and export performance, exploratory innovation capability enhances the link between differentiation strategy and export performance. Introduction The trade-off between cost leadership strategy and differentiation strategy is of importance and presents a key challenge to exporters because it is intrinsically related to innovation (Gebauer, 2008; O’Cass et al., 2014). Nevertheless, resources are limited, and firms must make choices in their allocation and determine the extent to which they will emphasize one strategy over another (Danneels, 2007; Lant, Milliken, & Batra, 1992). Although the individual roles of product strategies or innovation capabilities on export performance have attracted considerable attention (e.g., Hortinha, Lages, & Lages, 2011; Lages, Silva, & Styles, 2009; Molina-Castillo, Jimenez-Jimenez, & Munuera-Aleman, 2011), few studies have assessed their integrating impact - that is, the difference in the strengths of the relationships between cost leadership or differentiation strategy and innovation. Drawing on resource based view, we examine how innovation capabilities related with the relationship between cost leadership and differentiation strategies and exporters’ performance. Thus, we consider the moderating role of two distinct capabilities - exploratory innovation and exploitative innovation - on the relationships between product strategies and export performance. Exploratory innovation includes activities aimed to enter new product-market domains, while exploitative innovation activities improve existing product-market domains (He &Wong, 2004). The objectives of this study are to explore (1) impacts of cost leadership strategy and differentiation strategy on export performance, (2) moderating effects of exploitative and exploratory innovation capability on the relationship between product strategy and export performance, and (3) these relationships in the context of Korean exporters. The Korean exporting firms are more concentrated on international markets because of limited size of domestic market (Nugent & Yhee, 2002). These characteristics of Korean exporters are more useful to examine the effect of product strategy and product innovation capability of firms on export performance in international markets. Conceptual Background Product Strategy and Competitive Advantage Porter (1980) argues that a firm can achieve a higher level of performance over a rival in one of two ways: either it can supply an identical product or service at a lower cost, or it can supply a product or service that is differentiated in such a way that the customer is willing to pay a price premium that exceeds the additional cost of the differentiation. A cost leadership strategy is designed to produce goods or services more cheaply than competitors by stressing efficient scale of operation. When a firm designs, produces, and sells a comparable product more efficiently than its competitors as well as its market scope is industry-wide, it means that the firm is carrying out the cost leadership strategy successfully (Campbell-Hunt, 2000). Thus, the primary thing for a firm seeking competitively valuable way by reducing cost is to concentrate on maintaining efficiency through all activities in order to effectively control every expense and find new sources of potential cost reduction (Dess & Davis, 1984). The differentiation strategy provides value to customers with the unique attributes or perceptions of uniqueness, and characteristics of a firm’s product other than cost. The firm pursuing differentiation seeks to be unique in its industry along some dimension that is valued by customers, which means investing in product R&D and marketing (Porter, 1980). Rather than cost reduction, a firm using the differentiation needs to concentrate on investing in and developing such things that are distinguishable and customers will perceive (Gebauer, 2008). Overall, the essential success factor of differentiation in terms of strategy implementation is to develop and maintain innovativeness, creativeness, and organizational learning within a firm (Dess & Davis, 1984; O’Cass et al., 2014; Porter, 1985). Innovation Capability in International Markets A firm’s ability to compete in the long term may lie in its ability to integrate product strategy and its existing capabilities, while at the same time developing fundamentally new ones (Lavie & Rosenkopf, 2006). Simultaneous investments in the exploitation of existing product innovation capabilities and the exploration of new ones may help create a competitive advantage (Soosay & Hyland, 2008). Organizational learning represents the development of knowledge that influences behavioral changes and leads to enhanced performance (Crossan, Lane, & White, 1999; Fiol & Lyles, 1985). Product innovation is a tool for organizational learning and, thus, a primary means of achieving its strategic renewal (Danneels, 2002; Dougherty, 1992; O’Cass et al., 2014). Exploration pertains more to new knowledge - such as the search for new products, ideas, markets, or relationships; experimentation; risk taking; and discovery - while exploitation pertains more to using the existing knowledge and refining what already exists; it includes adaptation, efficiency, and execution (March, 1991). Exploration and exploitation compete for the same resources and efforts in the firm. With a focus on exploring potentially valuable future opportunities, the firm decreases activities linked to improving existing competences (Levinthal & March, 1993; March, 1991). In contrast, with a focus on exploiting existing products and processes, the firm reduces development of new opportunities. However, firms must develop both exploratory and exploitative capabilities because returns from exploration are uncertain, often negative, and attained over the long run, while exploitation generates more positive, proximate, and predictable returns (Levinthal & March, 1993; March, 1991; Özsomer & Gençtürk, 2003). Researchers have shown that both types of learning are essential to enhancing firm performance (Leonard-Barton, 1992; March, 1991). In this study, we use exploration and exploitation to describe two innovation-related capabilities that are critical elements on the relationship between product strategies and export performance. International markets are turbulent and diverse with respect to customer needs, cultures, and competitiveness; therefore, innovation assumes a primary role (Kleinschmidt, De Brentani, & Salomo, 2007). Firms can leverage their innovations by securing business opportunities in those markets and thus increase their innovative capabilities (Knight & Cavusgil, 2004). Through exploratory innovation, firms develop new competences and thus enhance superior export performance by product strategies (Teece, Pisano, & Shuen, 1997). Exploitation activities are also important to exporters because they facilitate the lower-risk extension of export operations. By searching for solutions in the existent competence base, exploitative innovation increases efficiency and productivity. Accordingly, this study based on organizational learning perspective to support the idea that innovation capabilities are a vehicle for a product strategy, and achieving superior export performance. We advance the literature by allowing for a role of product strategies while also considering moderating effects of innovation capabilities. Moreover, we provide insights into how choices about emphasizing one product strategy over another relates the balance between exploration and exploitation. Hypotheses Product Strategy and Export Performance Porter’s cost leadership and differentiation strategies have been linked to the achievement of superior performance by many studies (Campbell-Hunt, 2000; Dess & Davis, 1984). A firm that successfully pursues a cost leadership strategy emphasizes “aggressive construction of efficient-scale facilities, vigorous pursuit of cost reductions from experience, tight cost and overhead control, avoidance of marginal customer accounts, and cost minimization in areas like R&D, service, sales force, advertising, and so on” (Porter, 1980: 35). A firm can, therefore, gain a competitive advantage over its rivals by having significantly lower cost structures in an industry without ignoring other areas such as product and service quality (Amoako-Gyampah & Acquaah, 2008). Thus, the maintenance of a strong competitive position for an organization pursuing a cost leadership strategy places a premium on efficiency of operations and scale economies that enable them to achieve and sustain their performance for a considerable period of time. In addition, with a cost leadership strategy, firms focus on reducing costs through operational efficiency. For example, they might exploit existing facilities and learn how to reduce costs through automation, modernization, capacity utilization, or economies of scale. Efficiency, control, planning, and variance reduction represent the key elements of a cost leadership strategy, and a typical example of a cost leadership strategy involves the implementation of an experience curve, on which cumulative production determines reductions in unit production costs. Firms engage in economies of scale and/or scope when they apply their knowledge and facilities from existing product lines to product line extensions. The associated positional advantage is a cost advantage pertaining to the firms’ value offering and is based on the product’s price–perceived value proposition in the export market. Hypothesis 1: Cost leadership strategy is positively associated with export performance. A firm that pursues a differentiation strategy may attempt to create a unique image in the minds of customers that its products are superior to those of its competitors (Miller, 1988). A firm creates these perceptions through advertising programs, marketing techniques and methods, and charging premium prices. Moreover, a firm may pursue a differentiation strategy by creating a perception in the minds of customers that its products possess characteristics that are unique from those of its competitors in terms of differences in design, physical attributes/features, and durability (Gebauer, 2008). Differentiation strategy aims to generate more outwardly focused product innovations that offer customers product differences that shape a distinctive value offering that is more responsive to their needs (Hughes, Martin, Morgan, & Robson, 2010; O’Cass et al., 2014). The associated positional advantage is a product or market differentiation advantage pertaining to the superior brand, quality, design, and product features that differentiate the firms’ value proposition from its competitors in the export market. Hypothesis 2: Differentiation strategy is positively associated with export performance. Moderating Effects of Innovation Capability From the generation of new ideas through to the launch of a new product, exploration and exploitation play a vital role in product innovation (Rothaermel & Deeds, 2004). Organizations can decide to use existing organizational competences to realize short-term results, or create new competences that may foster the development of innovations in the longer term (Atuahene-Gima, 2005). Both types of capabilities are considered to be dynamic in nature (Winter, 2003), given that their purpose is to transform existing resources into new functional competences that provide a better match for the firm's environment (Voss, Sirdeshmukh, & Voss, 2008). Although both exploitative and exploratory capabilities related to cost leadership and differentiation strategies, because of those different roles of capabilities in innovation process, the effects of those innovation capabilities on the relationship between product strategy and export performance might be different. In case of cost leadership strategy, firms focus on using and developing existing capabilities, promoting improvements in existing components and building on existing technological elements (Benner & Tushman, 2003; Rust et al., 2002). Similarly, exploitative innovation is aimed at improving existing product-market domains. The cost leadership strategy creates value through existing competences or competences that have been slightly modified (Voss et al., 2008). It promotes a routine-based and repetitive approach to organizational changes (Rust et al., 2002). Because exploitative innovation builds on existing knowledge and extends existing products and services for existing customers (Soosay & Hyland, 2008), exploitative capabilities helps firms pursuing cost leadership strategy to reap the benefits of improvement they make to their products and to continue making incremental improvements (Brucks, Zeithaml, & Naylor, 2000), which are designed to allow the firm to continue its superior performance (Griffin, 1997). Hypothesis 3: Exploitative innovation capability moderates the relationship between cost leadership strategy and export performance positively. Compared to cost leadership strategy, differentiation strategy is characterized by radical change, risk and experimentation and that allows for the creation of new methods, relationships, and products. Because exploration focuses mainly on trying to create variety, to adapt and hence exploit ever-decreasing windows of opportunity (Soosay & Hyland, 2008), this capability is more beneficial to the kind of product innovativeness to the firm (Augusto & Coelho, 2009). When exporters pursue differentiation strategy for acquiring new knowledge and developing new products and services, exploratory capability helps to engage new insight into the design of new features and benefits of a given product, that product is guaranteed to contain new ideas (Cho & Pucik, 2005; Yalcinkaya et al., 2007). In contrast with exploitation aimed at improving existing product-market domains, explorative innovation requires fundamental changes in the way an organization operates and represents a clear departure from existing practices (Menguc &Auh, 2006). Hypothesis 4: Exploratory innovation capability moderates the relationship between differentiation strategy and export performance positively. Discussion Focusing on product strategy through the application of the RBV has provided theoretical insights as well as empirical evidence as to which capabilities are required to achieve these critical product strategy outcomes. The support from this study provides further evidence of the usefulness of applying the RBV to the export setting and should encourage researchers to examine the other aspects of export strategy. Based on organizational learning perspective, in addition, this study found that exploratory and exploitative innovation capability are essential to the firm because they act as vehicles for renewing product strategy to achieve superior export performance. By considering product strategy with exploration and exploitation simultaneously, we present a new perspective of the roles of these product strategies in the development of firms’ innovation capabilities. Our results indicate that cost leadership and differentiation strategy are pivotal in ensuring a proper balance between exploratory and exploitative innovations. One of the main implications for managers is that both exploratory and exploitative product competences should consider in parallel when developing product strategy. The findings underscore the need for managers to invest in cost leadership and differentiation strategy to ensure the development of exploration and exploitation. Therefore, resource allocation decisions should, consider the firm's needs for innovation capabilities and, on the other hand, be guided by the firm’s product strategy. Exporters operate in highly complex environments, characterized by high levels of technological and market uncertainties and highly diverse and dispersed customers (Kleinschmidt et al., 2007; Mohr & Sarin, 2009). Therefore, in addition to the product strategy toward the development of innovations using state-of-the-art technologies, managers of these firms need a similarly strong focus on understanding both current and potential exporting markets. By acknowledging the need for product strategy, managers can ensure the balanced innovation capabilities.

This preliminary qualitative research investigates how stylistic innovation affects sales performance of small arts and crafts firms in business-to-business and business-to-consumer markets in Taiwan. Specifically this research examines entrepreneurial cognitive complexity, which is the cognitive structure of an entrepreneur on his or her social world, and its interplay with stylistic innovation, particularly the changes of design in appearance or symbolic meaning of products, and strategic decisions of five Taiwanese small arts and crafts firms. Applying cognitive mapping to determine the cognitive contents, structures and also their relations of the entrepreneurs in making decision related to stylistic innovation, this research examines how owners of small Taiwanese arts and crafts firms specifically seek, interpret and internalize information and knowledge on style and design in the new product development and innovation processes. Research results show that the domain specific cognitive complexity of the entrepreneur influences the selection of relevant and appropriate dimensions in stylistic innovation. Entrepreneurs’ strategic decision to target at the business-to-consumer (customer-oriented or designer-driven) or business-to-business (mainly designer-driven) markets and also the buyer-seller relationship will affect the seeking, interpretation and internalization of information and knowledge in the process of stylistic innovation. Respondents targeting at business-to-business markets tend to have a higher level of cognitive complexity, compared with those targeting at business-to-consumer markets. Research results tend to suggest that the higher level of cognitive complexity, the greater the sales turnover. Future research should determine the relationship between cognitive complexity and marketing performance.

The purpose of this study is to review the relationship between managerial system and incremental innovation, and the mediating effect of knowledge transfer in small business. In order to verify and achieve the purposes mentioned above, questionnaire data were gathered and analysed from 255 enterprise managers in western Kangwon-do province. Empirical survey's findings are as follows; First, CEO's support and education/training appeared to be positively related with knowledge transfer. Second, managerial system and knowledge transfer appeared to be positively related with incremental innovation. Third, knowledge transfer had mediating effect on the relationships of CEO's support-incremental innovation and education/training-incremental innovation.

본 연구는 기술협력의 중요한 동기인 ‘학습’ 관점에서 기업이 다양한 파트너 유형과 협력하는 것이 혁신성과에 도움이 되는지, 그리고 이 관계에서 학습에 영향을 줄 수 있는 흡수역량(absorptive capacity)과 전유성(appropriability)의 조절효과를 분석하였다. 다양한 협력 파트너와 협력하는 것은 다양한 파트너가 가진 지식, 정보를 습득한다는 점에서 혁신성과에 긍정적인 효과를 줄 것이라고 가정하였다. 또한, 학습을 촉진하는 흡수역량은 파트너 다양성과 혁신성과 간의 관계를 긍정적으로 조절하고, 보유한 기술을 보호하려는 수단인 전유성은 파트너로부터의 학습을 저해하는 요인으로 작용할 수 있기 때문에 다양한 파트너와 협력하는 제휴 포트폴리오와 혁신성과 간의 관계에서 흡수역량과 전유성의 조절효과를 분석하였다. 2010년 기술혁신조사 제조업 부문 데이터 중에서 우리나라 주력 산업인 기계⋅자동차 업종을 대상으로 실증 분석을 한 결과, 다양한 유형의 기술협력 파트너와 협력하는 것은 혁신성과에 긍정적인 영향을 주고, 전유성의 조절효과가 있는 것으로 나타났다.

연구개발의 비용과 속도가 증가하고 있는 현대의 경쟁환경에서 기술혁신을 창 출하기 위해 필요한 모든 자원 및 역량을 갖추는 것은 불가능에 가까우며 이와 같은 환경은 연구개발협력의 필요성을 강조한다. 따라서 본 논문은 지식의 보호수단인 전유성이 연구개 발협력과 그 성과물인 제품혁신성과에 어떤 영향을 미치는지 분석하였다. 동시에 이 관계를 정부 연구개발지원이 어떻게 조절하고 영향을 미치는지 탐색적으로 실증분석 하였다. 연구결과, 전유성이 연구개발협력을 경유하여 제품혁신성과에 미치는 간접효과는 정부의 재무적, 직접적, 간접적 연구개발지원 각각의 유형 모두에서 공통적인 패턴을 보였다. 전유성 이 수직적 연구개발협력을 경유하여 제품혁신성과에 미치는 조건부간접효과는 정부 연구개 발지원의 강도가 일정수준 이상에서 증가하면 할수록 그 효과 역시 증가하였다. 반면, 수평 적 연구개발협력을 경유한 조건부간접효과의 경우 모든 정부 연구개발지원 강도에서 유의하지 않았다. 혁신과 관련된 정부 연구개발지원 정책을 조절변수로 설정하여 조절된 매개분석을 수행한 다면, 정책의 유의한 정책강도 및 그에 따른 성과를 분석할 수 있다. 따라서 본 논문의 활용 은 정부 연구개발지원의 평가와 효과적인 정책수립에 기여할 것으로 판단된다.

The external R&D, which includes the adoption of the external technology and knowledge in addition to the internal R&D, is one of important factors for the innovation. Especially for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), the external R&D has been considered as a key factor to carry out the innovation more efficiently due to the limitations of their resources and capacities. However, most of extant studies related to external R&D have focused on analyzing the influence of external R&D on innovation outputs or outcomes. Only a few studies have explored the impact of external R&D on the innovation efficiency. This study therefore investigates whether the external R&D effects the industry’s innovation efficiency and productivity. On this study, we used Korean manufacturing industry data of SMEs from 2012 to 2014 and employed a global Malmquist productivity analysis technique, which is based on the Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), to assess the innovation efficiency and productivity. Innovation performances of external R&D group and internal R&D group are compared. Then, the sectoral patterns of both innovation efficiency and productivity are analyzed with respect to the technological intensity, which is introduced by OECD. The results show that the gap of innovation efficiency between external and internal R&D groups has gradually decreased because of the continuous improvement of the external R&D group’s performance, while the external R&D group lag behind the internal R&D group. In addition, patterns of the innovation efficiency and productivity change were different depending on the technological intensity, which means that the higher the technological intensity, the greater the effect of external R&D.

The external R&D, which includes the adoption of the external technology and knowledge in addition to the internal R&D, is one of important factors for the innovation. Especially for small and medium-sized enterprises(SMEs), the external R&D has been considered as a key factor to carry out the innovation more efficiently due to the limitations of their resources. However, most studies related to external R&D have focused on innovation outputs or outcomes. Only a few studies have explored the impact of external R&D on the innovation efficiency. This study therefore investigates whether the external R&D effects the industry’s innovation efficiency and productivity. On this study, we used Korean manufacturing industry data of SMEs from 2012 to 2014 and employed a global Malmquist productivity analysis technique, which is based on the Data Envelopment Analysis(DEA), to assess the innovation efficiency and productivity. Then, the sectoral patterns of both innovation efficiency and productivity are analyzed with respect to the technological intensity, which is introduced by OECD. We show that the gap of innovation efficiency between external and internal R&D groups has gradually decreased because of the continuous improvement of the external R&D group’s performance, while the external R&D group lag behind the internal R&D. In addition, patterns of the innovation efficiency and productivity change were different depending on the technological intensity, which means that the higher the technological intensity, the greater the effect of external R&D.

지난 50년 동안 혁신 분야는 학문의 정착과 진화의 시기를 지나왔다. 시간이 흐름에 따라 연구 주제의 범위가 확장되고 다양해지고 있으며, 양적 측면에서도 증가 추세를보이고 있다. 혁신 분야와 같이 다학제적인 분야에서 새로운 연구 주제를 탐색하고, 기존 연구의 흐름을 파악하는데 있어 연구 현황 및 동향에 대한 포괄적인 이해는 필수적이다. 본 연구에서는 텍스트 마이닝 기법을 이용해 2000년부터 2015년까지의 국외 혁신 분야의 연구 현황 및 동향을 거시적인 관점에서 분석하였다. 분석 결과, 혁신 분야에서는 전통적인 주제와최근에 주목받고 있는 주제를 중심으로 연구가 이루어지고 있었으며, 일부 전통적인 주제에서 학문의 분화 현상이 나타났다. 연구 결과는 지난 16년 동안 혁신 분야에서 나타난 연구 주제의 현황 및 동향에 대한 이해를 도모할 것이며, 연구자들에게 새로운 패러다임이 정착하고진화해가는 과정을 학술적 관점에서 통찰할 수 있는 기회를 제공할 것이다.

본 연구는 원자력기술의 혁신특성을 심층조사 함으로써 4세대 원자력에너지기술의 전환 시 발생 가능한 이슈를 이해하고 한국의 정책현황을 분석하여 4세대 원자력에너지기술의 성공적 안착을 위한 시사점을 도출하였다. 이는 현재 세계 5강의 원자력에너지기술강국인 한국에서 4세대 원자력에너지기술의 도래에도 지속가능한 경쟁력을 유지하기 위한중요한 정책적인 시사점으로 활용할 수 있을 것으로 사료된다. 정성적 문헌연구방법을 통해 원자력기술혁신에 관한 문헌들을 조사한 결과, 4세대 원자력에너지기술의 전환에 영향을 미치는 요인은 크게 4가지로 확인할 수 있었다. 이는 장기간의안정적인 자원 할당, 혁신을 위한 이해당사자 간의 지속적인 상호작용, 완전한 시스템을 위한 기술과 노하우의 축적, 적용 및 실증을 위한 정책적인 시장이었다. 이를 한국의 4세대 원자력에너지기술과 연관한 정책을 대상으로 적용하여 사례분석을 한 결과, 현재 4세대 기술이기술개발의 초기단계에서 실증단계로 넘어가는 시점임을 감안하더라도 연관한 정책은 실증과 운영을 위한 전문인력의 체계적인 양성 방안, 사회적 수용성과 저항에 대한 대응, 실증에대한 구체적인 계획 수립, 4세대 원자력시스템을 적용하기 위한 정책적인 시장을 제안하는장기적인 노력, 이해당사자들 간의 구체적이고 지속적인 상호작용을 적극 장려하는 것이 체계적으로 필요함을 제시하였다.

본 연구는 의료분야 사용자 혁신을 아이디어 도출-연구개발-상용화 및 창업의세 단계로 분류하고, 각 단계별로 혁신의 성공에 미치는 핵심요인의 조합을 30개 국내 사례에 대한 퍼지집합 질적 비교분석을 통해 파악했다. 아이디어 단계에서는 사용자 인적 네트워크상에서 그 가치를 평가하고, 연구개발 단계로의 이행을 위한 자원을 제공해 주는 것이 중요했다. 연구개발 단계에서는 급진적 혁신은 기술역량, 자원 접근성, 정부지원이 모두 갖추어져 있거나 우수한 혁신 네트워크에 아이디어가 도입된 경우 발생했다. 상용화/창업의 경우급진적 혁신은 연구개발과 같이 세 조건이 모두 갖춰진 경우 발생했으며, 점진적 혁신은 기술역량이 탁월한 개인이 소규모 정부지원 또는 주변 자원을 활용해 이루어졌다. 민간기업의사용자 혁신 전략과, 정부 지원 정책의 효과, 효율성을 모두 제고할 수 있는 사용자 혁신의틀을 제공했다는 점에 현실적 의미가 있다. 학술적으로는 사용자 혁신 단계별 핵심요인 조합을 규명하고, 퍼지집합 질적 비교분석방법을 적용한 첫 연구라는 의의가 있다.

생명과학산업으로서의 식품산업은 품질혁신 및 효율성 향상을 위해 제약산업과 마찬가지로 중요 공정변수(process parameter)나 품질에 영향을 미치는 특성(quality attribute)을 실시간으로 또는 신속하게 효율적으로 분석하거나 측정하 는 도구 및 수단이 매우 중요하다. 실시간 또는 연속적으로 신속하게 분석하는 방법으로는 그동안 FT-IR, Raman, NIR microspectroscopy 법이 널리 사 용되어왔다. 이는 분광광도법과 현미경관찰을 조합하여 분자정보를 미세구조수준에서 큰 공간해상도로 얻는 분석기 이며, 정성 및 정량 둘다 가능하다. 대부분 주위 온도 및 압력에서 시료처리 없이 습 혹은 건 상태 그대로 이용하므로 식품에서도 오래전부터 시료의 in situ 성분 동정 등에 이용되어 왔다. In situ는 "on site" 혹은 "in position" 및 "in place"로 번역되는 라틴어원의 문구로, 물리, 화학 및 생물학 분야에서는 ‘어떤 현상이 다른 계로의 이동없이 또는 시험 원래조건의 변화없이 동일장소에서 측정하는 방법’을 의미한다. 화학에 서는 전형적으로 "in the reaction mixture"의 의미로, 많은 공정들이 중간체들을 혼합물상태에서 in situ 합성하며, 생의 약공학에서도 많은 단백질 나노겔들을 in situ 중합법으로 제조한다. 화학공학에서는 주로 공장의 현장에서 수행되는 조작 혹은 절차를 의미한다. 또, 최근 제약산업의 새로운 패러다임으로 알려진 설계기반 품질고도화(QbD)의 공정분석 기술(PAT)에서 사용하는 분석기도 이러한 in situ 분석도구라 할 수 있다. 이들 in situ 분석법은 새로운 분석도구들의 개발로 최근들어 여러 분야에서 더욱 다양하게 이용되고 있으며, 시료의 파괴없이 분자정보를 얻어 기능 및 성분 탐 색과 동정이 가능할 뿐 아니라 공정 중의 신속한 분석도 가능하여 품질 및 공정을 혁신하는 데 큰 역할을 할 수 있다. 본 특강에서는 각종 in situ 분석과 정량, 공정이용 등의 연구사례를 개괄적으로 살펴보고, 실제로 그동안 본인이 직 접 기술개발혁신이나 산학공동연구 등에서 이용하였고, 또 성과로서 경험한 이들 개념의 분석법 적용 및 신규 방법의 개발사례를 소개하였다.

The regional innovation center (RIC) has been closely linked with college or university of the region in the capacity of research collaboration and business activities. In this relationship, the role of college or university becomes utmost important especially in developing countries. This study intends to redirect the role of regional university in Samarkand, Uzbekistan. The tasks for reformulating the agricultural university are associated with the curriculum, the capacity building of faculty, and the operation system of RIC. Finally, this paper suggests that the divided departments of the university should be merged to improve the quality of education and research. Also the university need to focus on extension for agri-business and strengthening lecturer’s competency for development of professional human capitals.

프라이버시 콘텐츠를 활용한 서비스가 일상이 되어버렸고, 기술은 더 더욱 진화되며 부지불식간에 개인의 사생활을 엿보고 있다. 하지만 이러 한 기술이나 서비스를 법이나 제도로 막는다는 것 자체가 어불성설(語不 成說)이다. 그렇다고 우리가 역사적으로 많은 투쟁과 희생을 통해 얻은 프라이버시권을 포기할 수 없으며 절대로 포기되어져서도 안 된다. 이러 한 문제의식을 바탕으로 본 고에서는 사인이 가지는 프라이버시권와 공 권력의 정당화요소로서 공익, 그리고 영업의 자유와의 갈등·충돌관계를 분석하고 그 조화방안을 모색해 보고자 하였다. 그간 이러한 갈등과 충 돌을 해결하고자 하는 공권력의 설계가 헌법상의 기본 원칙하에 이루어 지기 보다는 단편적·선제적 방식이 잦았다. 따라서 여러 차례 공권력 발동의 근거가 되는 규제실패를 격어야 했으며 그러한 결과는 의도하지 못한 부작용만 초래하면서 관련 산업에 타격을 주고, 공권력에 대한 국 민적 공감대를 상실시켰다. 뿐만 아니라 이러한 공권력 행사는 국내사업 자에 한정되는 반쪽짜리 공권력으로 전락하여 결국 불평등 집행으로 인 해 자국민의 사기저하를 불러일으키며 국가에 대한 신뢰도를 약화시키는 결과만 초래하였다. 공권력은 공익이라는 가치를 법치주의에 의해 구현 함으로서 정당화된다. 뿐만 아니라 그러한 공익가치의 실현을 위한 공권 력 행사의 내용은 반드시 비례원칙을 준수하여야 한다. 따라서 이러한 충돌을 해결하는 기본원리로서 본 논문을 다음을 제안하였다. 공익과 사 익간의 갈등에 대하여는 비례원칙이 적용되어야 하며, 사익간의 갈등에 대하여는 사적자치의 원칙을 존중하되, 사인간의 기본권 충돌의 조정은 이익형량의 원칙과 규범조화적 해결원칙에 따라야 한다. 본 연구는 이러 한 원칙 하에서 카카오톡 감청사례 , 잊힐 권리 , 무인항공기 를 둘러싼 프라이버시와, 공익 그리고 영업의 자유의 충돌에 있어서 조화방안을 모 색해 보았다.

본 논문은 2016년 하계 학술대회 발표 자료로서, 중견 기업에서의 ERP 시스템 구축 시 사전 설계 활동으로서의 PI컨설팅을 포함한 ERP 구축과 PI 활동 없이 ERP가 구축된 ERP 서비스에 대하여 두 집단간의 서비스 품질을 분석하고 비교하고자 한다. 이를 위하여 일반적인 오프라인에서의 서비스 품질 평가 모형인 SERVQUAL 모형과 IT 환경에서 서비스 품질을 분석하는 E-S-QUAL 모형 등의 다양한 연구모형을 참조하여 서비스 품질 모형(Service Quality Model)을 제시하여 두 집단에 적용하여 분석한다. 연구모형의 분석을 통해 PI 수행 여부에 따라 두 집단에 구축된 ERP 서비스 품질척도에 영향을 미치는 품질 결정 요인들을 식별하여 주요한 품질 결정 요인의 개선을 통한 ERP 서비스의 품질을 개선하고자 한다. 이러한 연구 과정을 통해 각 연구 모형과 요인들 간에 미치는 영향에 대한 결과를 분석하며, 분석 결과를 통하여 서비스 품질의 개선을 위한 경영적 시사점을 도출하고자 하는 목적으로 작성되었다.

With the fast pace of technological change, the role of innovation on a firm’s survival has received increased scholarly attention. This study investigates the relationship between a firm’s strategic orientations, exploration and exploitation, on innovation activity. Also, the synergy effects of four types of innovation: product, process, marketing, and organizational innovation are examined with the consideration of the level of innovativeness and the firm’s industrial category. The OECD Oslo Manual (2005) and the standard of OECD (2011) classification are used as a main source to define four different types of innovation and the industry category into high-tech and low-tech. This study uses data from 856 firms taken from the Korea Innovation Survey (KIS) 2014 which is the Korean version of the Community Innovation Survey (CIS). Since most of the measures are composed of multiple items, their reliability and the underlying dimensions of each measure are tested by principal component analysis (PCA). Structural equation modeling (SEM) is then used to carry out a simultaneous test the relationships among the constructs. The moderating effects of marketing and organizational innovation are examined through multi group analysis. Results indicate that exploration and exploitation have positive impacts on the product innovation and process innovation respectively. Also, a new process encourages firms to develop radical product innovation. In case of the moderating effect of marketing and organizatioanl innovation, there are some differences between high-tech and low-tech industry. For high-tech firms, the positive relationship between a new product and firm performance is increased with the introduction of marketing innovation. In case of low-tech firms, process innovation has direct and positive impacts on a firm’s performance with organizational innovation. The findings show that the synergy effect of innovation exists and its significance could be changed depending on an industrial category.

Supply and demand patterns have dynamically changed in recent years due to the increased global competition. Firms have selected quality and price as competition components and have accomplished corporate innovation in order to achieve competitive advantage. Innovation has been recognized as the way to enhance corporate competitiveness and to continuously grow in churning global competition (Homburg, Schwemmle, & Kuehnl, 2015; Moon, Miller, & Kim, 2013). Although innovation becomes a common means to improve a firm’s performance, it has the limitation of achieving a firm’s strategic goal as a long-term strategy. Thus, firms need to have more fine-grained strategies to survive in dynamically changing business environment, such as design innovation (Moon et al., 2015). For example, Apple has produced its products (e.g., iPhone, iPod and iPad) focusing on innovative product design to influence consumer purchase intention. Design can lead to a distinct competitive advantage (Bolch, 1995). Furthermore, product design can be used by firms to create amd enhance brand recognition, as well as to increase firms’ value (Mozota, 2002). Brand experience positively influences customer satisfaction and brand loyalty (Brakus, Schmitt, & Zarantonello, 2009). Thus, we assume that design experience and product innovation have a positive effect on consumers’ purchase behavior and customer value. However, while the importance of design innovation is recognized, it is not easy to apply the design innovation to marketing due to the lack of relevant research in the field. In fact, relevant research on the influence of innovative new product design and design experience on customer value is scarce. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate how brand experiences and innovative product design affect customer value. Successful innovation is accomplished by identifying customer needs first and developing innovative products to satisfy their needs (Hauser et al., 2006). Design is seen as the core of innovation and the moment when a new object is conceived of, devised, and shaped in a prototype form (Landwehr, Wentzel, & Herrmann, 2013). Verganti (2008) studies the concept of "user-centered design," which describes how companies can use design to improve their relationships with users and develop a better understanding of user needs. In this research, design innovation has three dimensions: aesthetic attributes, feature attributes, and emotional attributes. First, aesthetic attributes focus on the product design itself. The aesthetic appearance of a product has a large bearing on its potential market share (Liu, 2003). Second, feature attributes focus on the product features and functional aspects that are required to satisfy customer needs. Feature attributes enable performance that can give results in the operating process (Crawford & Di Benedetto, 2007). Third, emotional attributes focus on consumers’ feeling when they purchase a new product to satisfy their needs. Emotional attributes are generated by consumers’ experience when they purchase a new product in the store. The more the product design satisfies customer's emotional needs, the more customers’ attention is attracted to the purchase of a product (Mokarian, 2007). A product satisfying the aesthetic, feature, and emotional attributes through design innovation provides a new experience to customers (Desmet & Hekkert, 2007). A consumer’s purchase decision making is affected by both direct and indirect experience of using the product and the function of product (Brakus, Schmitt, & Zarantonello, 2009). Therefore, a designer comes to design the product, taking an interest in the experience that the product gives besides its shape and function. Product experiences occur when a customer interacts with the product ̶ for example, when customers search for, examine, and evaluate products (Hoch, 2002). The product experience can be direct, i.e. when there is physical contact with the product (Hoch & Ha 1986) or indirect, i.e. when a product is presented virtually or in an advertisement (Hoch & Ha 1986; Kempf and Smith 1998). Brand experience can be split into four dimensions (sensory, affective, intellectual, and behavioral), which are differentially evoked by various brands (Brakus, Schmitt, & Zarantonello, 2009). According to previous studies, these four experience dimensions (sensory, affective, intellectual, and behavioral experience dimensions) have an effect on customer satisfaction and customer loyalty. Customer value can be defined as the trade-off between the benefits and sacrifices as a customer purchases a product or service from a supplier (Ulaga & Chacour, 2001). Ulaga and Chacour presented three dimensions of customer value: product-related components, service-related components, and promotion-related components. The researchers argued that customer value could be an important strategic marketing tool to clarify a firm's proposition to customers. Product-related components are intrinsic product characteristics. Product quality is a key factor of relationship value (Ulaga, 2003). Customer value consists of product value and service value. Customer value can be enhanced by quality, diversity, payment, and service quality and decreased by price, convenience, and risk (Jarvenpaa & Todd, 2003). Service-related components include all aspects of service associated with the product. Various service components play an important role in differentiating a supplier's offering (Narus & Anderson, 1996). Promotion-related components include all items used to promote the product to the customer. For all purchasing processes, it is necessary to assess the perceived customer value, such as service quality and promotional quality (Qualls & Rosa, 1995). In the present study, we conducted a research survey with 300 subjects and analyzed the data. In order to test the reliability of questionnaire, Cronbach's alpha was used. In order to test the validity, an exploratory factor analysis was conducted. Measurement was made for 3 variables, i.e. design innovation, design experience, and customer value. Three variables (aesthetical attributes, feature attributes, and emotional attributes) were used for design innovation. Three types of attributes were introduced for a mobile phone design innovation. Four dimensions (sensory, affective, intellectual, behavioral) were measured using a technical design experience and a humanistic design experience. Three variables (product-related customer value, service-related customer value, and promotion-related customer value) were employed for customer value. The results of the analyses demonstrate that design innovation has a positive effect on design experience, while design experience has a positive effect on customer value. Aesthetic attributes of design innovation have a positive effect on technical design experience and humanistic design experience. Feature attributes have a positive effect on the technical design experience and the humanistic design experience. Emotional attributes have an effect on the technical design experience and the humanistic design experience. The technical design experience has a positive effect on product-related customer value, service-related customer value, and promotion-related customer value. The humanistic design experience has a positive effect on product-related customer value, service-related customer value and promotion-related customer value. This study will make it possible to empirically examine how customer's experience in design innovation affects customer value. Our results will provide a theoretical foundation for examining a relationship between variables regarding how design innovation influences customer value through design experience. It is intended to give a direction as to the design innovation of firms by clarifying and presenting antecedent factors having an effect that design innovation produces on customer value. The results of the present study will inspire designers to design in consideration of design experience. Finally, our study will provide marketers with guidelines as to how design experience can influence customer satisfaction and loyalty.

Design innovation is acquiring greater importance as consumers’ emotional needs grow ever greater and the cycle of technological innovation grows ever faster. Apple in particular led and strengthened this trend, achieving incomparable business success in the technology-driven electronics industry. However, although the importance of design innovation has increased, very little research has been done to explain the influence of design innovation on business success. This study aims to investigate the influence of design innovation attributes on perceptions, attitudes, and purchase intentions among designers and consumers. 408 designers and 464 consumers participated in an online survey that presented as stimuli four different smart watches. Design innovation attributes were evaluated based on the criteria of features, aesthetics, and ergonomics; consumer-perceived values were categorized as emotional, social, and functional. Regarding consumers attitudes, attitude toward product and attitude toward brand were measured separately. Overall results indicate that purchase intention among designers and consumers alike is influenced by their attitude toward product as well as brand. However, in the case of designers, these attitudes are most influenced by emotional value, while consumers are influenced by emotional as well as social values. Moreover, all three innovation attributes - namely, features, aesthetics, and ergonomics - affect designers’ perception of emotional value, but only aesthetics and ergonomics affect consumers’ emotional and social value. The study demonstrates three significant differences in the responses of designers and consumers. First, there is correlation of aesthetics and ergonomics to functional (price) value among designers, but not consumers. Second, there is correlation of functional (quality) value to attitudes toward product and brand for consumers, but much less or none at all for designers. Third, the influence of features on perception of emotional value is more pronounced among designers as compared to consumers. In conclusion, aesthetics and ergonomics are important design innovation attributes for consumers as well as designers, but the latter also attach significance to features. While perception of emotional as well as social value is important to consumers, designers consider only emotional value. It is anticipated that the relative importance of design innovation attributes will vary according to product categories and price ranges; therefore, further comparative studies will be meaningful in investigation of design innovation.