본 논문에서는 에너지 섹터의 혁신성 제고를 위한 리빙랩(Living Labs) 활용 전 략 수립에 관한 탐색적 분석 연구를 수행하였다. 기존 연구문헌을 통해 이론적 배경이 되는 리 빙랩의 개념, 필수 구성요소, 혁신성 특성과 에너지 섹터의 혁신 이슈 유형을 확인할 수 있었 다. 이를 토대로 리빙랩 필수 구성요소의 맞춤형 전략 수립과 혁신성 제고와의 연관성, 에너지 섹터에서의 혁신 이슈에 대한 접근으로 리빙랩 활용 가능성에 대해 에너지 리빙랩 사례 연구 (해외 8건, 국내 1건)을 통해 분석되었다. 연구 결과, 리빙랩 필수 구성요소의 맞춤형 전략 수립 이 혁신성 제고에 동인으로 작용 될 수 있으며, 리빙랩이 에너지 섹터의 혁신 이슈(수요관리, 공급기술, 기술사업화 촉진 및 수용성, 기술정책)에 대한 접근 방법론으로 효과적으로 활용 될 수 있음을 확인되었다. 사례연구 결과 기반으로 혁신성 기여 관점에서 리빙랩 사례별 동인을 도출하고 에너지 혁신이슈별 리빙랩 활용 전략을 수립하였다. 본 연구는 에너지 섹터에서의 혁 신이슈에 대한 접근으로 리빙랩 모델의 활용 전략과 그 가치에 대한 탐색적, 기술적 분석 연구로서 종래에 시도되지 않았던 리빙랩 활용 전략 프레임워크를 제공할 수 있고, 에너지 리빙랩 활성화와 네트워크 형성에도 기여될 수 있다는 점에서 학술적· 실용적· 정책적 함의가 있다고 볼 수 있다.

무한 경쟁이 날로 격화되고 있는 글로벌시대에서 기업과 조직은 경쟁력 제고를 통한 생존과 발전을 위해 지속적인 혁신을 추구하지 않을 수 없게 되었다. 오늘날 기업경영에서 널리 사용되어지고 있는 조직 혁신의 형태는 주로 ‘구조조정’, ‘인력감축’, ‘정리해고’, ‘사업매각’, ‘비용절감’ 등과 같은 것들이다. 이러한 혁신기법들은 모두 기업이 효율성과 경쟁력을 높이기 위해 채택한다는 점에서 공통점을 찾을 수는 있으나 실행조건이나 구체적인 방법에서는 다소 차이가 있다. 본 연구는 선행연구와 산업계의 동향을 검토하여 조직혁신의 수단으로 많이 사용되어지고 있는 Downsizing관리의 통합모형을 제시하고, 가설검증을 통하여 타당성을 분석하였다. 실증분석을 통해 나타난 연구의 결과를 요약해보면, 첫째, Downsizing에 대한 조직구성원들의 인식에 대한 관리단계별(선행관리단계, 과정관리단계, 사후관리단계) 긍정적인 영향관계를 확인하였다. 둘째, 선행관리단계에서는 Downsizing 공론화의 중요성이 제기되었다. 셋째, 과정 관리 단계에서는 Downsizing에 있어 공정성과 객관성의 유지가 필요함을 확인하였다. 넷째, 사후관리단 계에서는 생존자 지원프로그램의 활성화가 필요함을 확인하였다. 이러한 본 연구의 결과는 기업의 지속가능한 성장과 발전을 위한 경쟁력 제고나 혁신전략의 수립이나 조직 활성화에 많은 함축적 의미를 제공할 수 있을 것이라 판단된다. 특히 Downsizing을 통한 조직혁신 전략을 추진함에 있어 요구되는 많은 유의미한 정보와 자료들을 제공할 수 있을 것이라 사료된다.

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), 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 a comparison of Korean and Japanese exporters. Most empirical research about product strategy and innovation capability has been conducted in Western-based context. This means that managers operating in non-Western business environments have only Western-based empirical evidence to help them develop strategies for managing levels of market orientation in their international businesses. However, non-Western business cultures may be different from those found in Western firms, and therefore generalizing studies of exporting behavior from Western to non-Western business contexts may be misleading. Indeed, it is noted that there is a need for more studies into the transferability of Western research to the Asian business setting (Ambler, Styles, & Xiucun, 1999). Thus, in order to fill this imbalance, the purpose of this study is to attempt to investigate product strategy and innovation capability of Korean and Japanese firms in international markets. Conceptual background 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). 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 haveshown 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. Hypotheses 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). In addition, with a cost leadership strategy, firms focus on reducing costs through operational efficiency. 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. On the other hand, 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). 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. Firms that position their products in a manner that co-aligns with their “home country competitive advantages” will, on average, tend to perform better than those that do not. The impact of home-country advantages is lessening over time as firms develop firm-specific global core competencies to replace home-country advantages. The corporate climate in Japanese firms is characterized by worker participation and long term employment. These factors not only tend to increase costs, but also may have a positive effect on product quality through better employee motivation and more knowledgeable workers. Japanese firms have the highest labor and taxation costs and a demand base that is more quality than price sensitive. This creates a home-country environment that favors higher quality. Therefore, Japanese firms most easily achieved a strategic fit with their home country business environment by pursuing a differentiation strategy. On the other hand, Korean firms tend to focus innovation on small, incremental improvements in process and product development, exploiting experience effects. Over time, this focus results in higher quality for Korean products and lower costs, thus creating the potential for Korean firms to use a cost leadership strategy. Moreover, Korea’s capital markets (which offer inexpensive capital below short-term market rates), a demand base that is price sensitive, and the Korean corporate culture’s emphasis on low prices all contribute to an environment favoring lower cost and lower price strategy. Hypothesis 1: Cost leadership strategy pursued by Korean firms is positively associated with export performance, compared to Japanese firms. Hypothesis 2: Differentiation strategy pursued by Japanese firms is positively associated with export performance, compared to Korean firms. 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). 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 3: Exploitative innovation capability moderates the relationship between cost leadership strategy and export performance positively. Hypothesis 4: Exploratory innovation capability moderates the relationship between differentiation strategy and export performance positively. Results This study conducted survey data from Korean and Japanese exporters, regarding to product strategy, innovation capability, and export performance. 223 usable questionnaires were obtained in Korea, and 124 usable questionnaires were obtained in Japan. With regard to number of years of international experience, international experience averaged 15 (S.D. = 23.54) for Korean samples and 37.95 (S.D. = 21.90) for Japanese samples. In addition, export intensity by total sales over exporting sales averaged 15 (S.D. = 23.54) for Korean samples and 36.91 (S.D. = 26.15) for Japanese samples. Using survey data from Korean and Japanese exporters, the findings indicate that cost leadership strategy enhance export performance for Korean firms. On the other hand, for Japanese firms, differentiation strategy is more related on export performance positively. Moreover, exploitative innovation capability strengthens the relationship between cost leadership strategy and export performance, while exploratory innovation capability enhances the link between differentiation strategy and export performance for both Korean and Japanese firms. 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. Furthermore, this study found that different effects of product strategies on export performance in line with home country competitive advantages. Understanding the nature of marketing strategies employed by Korean and Japanese firms as well as its different effects may provide a useful reference point for exporters from other emerging countries in Asia. 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.

Introduction This study examines acceptance effect of successful advertising public-relations campaign strategy in 4th industry innovation on students in dept. of advertising public relations. And this paper tries to analyze how university students feel and perceive acceptance effect of concept of successful advertising public-relations campaign strategy in 4th industry innovation and how the types are classified. Examining opinions of concept of successful advertising public-relations campaign strategy in 4th industry innovation on university students is an important direction for research at the level of multiple discussion in which we can look at it from the center of social and cultural issues, and meaningful for the development of the related researches in the future. This paper purposes to examine the characteristics and the subsequent implication of acceptance type of acceptance effect about concept of successful advertising public-relations campaign strategy in 4th industry innovation on university students' self-consciousness and to suggest subsequent use value. Theoretical Development This study is to examine the types of university students who perceive acceptance effect of successful advertising public-relations campaign strategy in 4th industry innovation. In addition, until now, the interests and researches of the related societies are most actively in progress however there is hardly analysis on the acceptance types of acceptance effect of successful advertising public-relations campaign strategy in 4th industry innovation on university students' self-consciousness found. So this study tries to discover a type of acceptance in which university students themselves define and structuralize acceptance effect of successful advertising public-relations campaign strategy in 4th industry innovation through Q-methodology approach. Research Design In this study, Q-methodology will be applied to the sorting of statement cards to determine students’ reception type derived from the effect of a behaviors. As a source for statement cards, a Q-concourse was developed based on newspaper articles, specifically Korean articles on acceptance effect of successful advertising public-relations campaign strategy in 4th industry innovation related political items, advertisements, and interviews; from this data a Q-statement was written and a P-sample selected. Following this, sorting was done to determine the Q-sort, which was then analyzed using a PC QUANL program(for Dos). The Q-sample for this research is composed from the statements of acceptance effect of successful advertising public-relations campaign strategy in 4th industry innovation, in order to document their subjective opinions and values. At first, 34 Q-population (concourse) was selected based on the media related literature review described above, and interviews targeting the general public. As the next step representative statements were chosen randomly and reduced in number to a final 16 statement samples for the purposes of this study. These statements include all opinion values and were written to have positive, neutral, and negative balance. Since Q-methodology deals with intraindividual differences rather than inter-individual differences, it is not influenced by the number of the P-sample. In addition, since the methodology of a Q-study does not infer the characteristics of the population sample from the sample, selecting of the P-sample is likewise not governed probabilistic sampling methods. Finally, in this research, 34 people were selected as the P-sample. Result and Conclusion In order to see the subjectivity types of the university students' participation in acceptance effect of successful advertising public-relations campaign strategy in 4th industry innovation, Q-factor analysis was conducted and three factors were found. As the result of the using QUANL program, 12 students were in type 1, 12 students were in type 2, and 10 students were in type 3. Here, the number of students are meaningless and these three types explains about 40(0.4011)% of total variance. Since the people whose factor weight is higher than 1.0 is 6, 4, and 2 for each group, we can say that type 1 is the biggest factor. In addition, the representative Eigen values are 5.4079, 4.6256, 3.6039 each. The study used Q methodologies in order to observe the subjective propensity of the university students about successful advertising public-relations campaign strategy in 4th industry innovation. At 3 types of analyzed results, it’s not unfamiliar concepts compared to the past, the most of respondents shown the various opinions as a matter of the expanding and understanding successful advertising public-relations campaign strategy in 4th industry innovation of university students.

The Theory of Value Drivers, or Value Driver Theory (Wendee, 2011), is useful in understanding the value creation process in any enterprise. Innovation and strategy are important components in the value creation process. This research, which is based on Value Driver Theory, explored the role that innovation and strategy have in the value creation process and how they are employed in creating enterprise value. Value Driver Theory was discovered using two different, but compatible, research methodologies. The qualitative study used to discover Value Driver Theory explored the effect of business value drivers on the valuation of businesses in the United States and proposed a theory of value drivers. The Value Driver Theory study used two research methods – grounded theory and the Delphi method - to explore the effect of business value drivers on the valuation of businesses in the U.S. and to propose a theory of value drivers. In addition to a list of 72 individual value drivers, which includes innovation and strategy, the theory of value drivers presents a comprehensive value driver possibilities frontier and value driver chain, both of which are part of and are used to explain the theory of value drivers. The theory of value drivers is comprised of 28 propositions that work in concert with the possibilities frontier, the value driver chain, and other elements that are described in the paper. The Value Driver Theory paper differs from other studies as follows: First, the paper significantly extends the notions, ideas, and concepts from previous studies on value drivers. Second, the paper creates a comprehensive classification scheme for value drivers and has identified many more characteristics and properties of value drivers than previous studies. Third, the study identified 72 specific value drivers through the literature review and the Delphi study. Fourth, the paper consolidates the material from the literature review and the result of the research conducted through the Delphi and grounded theory studies and codifies it into the theory of value drivers. Subsequent to the publication of the paper on Value Driver Theory, new conceptual frameworks and tools have been developed to enhance the usefulness of Value Driver Theory in evaluating the enterprise value creation process. These conceptual frameworks and research tools were explored in the current study in general terms; and particularly as to how they relate to and enhance the use of innovation and strategy in the value creation process.

The new businesses started by the companies usually results in being unsuccessful. The main reasons for that are either aiming targeting wrong customers, unsatisfaction of customers’ requesting quality standards, or taking wrong actions against the competitors in the market. Therefore, companies should aim the targets for the newly developing products based on the fulfilling values for the customers when they start the new businesses, and should take good cares for risk managements at the each step of the new business to prevent the failure in advance. In addition to that, the companies starting new businesses not only need to take the customers attributes (CA) into account, but they also should apply the new technologies as one system to initiate a new business to satisfy the basic wants of the customers. This article suggests the New Product Development Pursuing Model using the Indicative Planning methodology and the Quality Management tools. The New Product Development Pursuing Model would be completed by the following steps as below; 1. Drawing the CTQ (Critical To Quality) for setting up the new product development objectives by : i) using the VOC (Voice Of Customers) obtained by the QFD (Quality Function Deploypment) if the market is mature, ii) applying AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) to information in the QIS (Quality Information System) if the market is unmature to get enough need information of the customers. 2. Risk Management in NPD : The NPD pursuing model consisted of the IP (indicative planning) is suggested not by the process of top-down-way mandatory planning process, but by the tools used in the administrative science and economic fields, namely by governance. The companies could apply innovative methodology for new products development processes to fulfil the customers satisfaction in the fields, through the CA (Contingency Approach) of the NPD (New Product Development) process.

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.

에너지자원의 안정적인 확보는 국가발전을 위한 가장 중요한 요소 중 하나이다. 본 연구는 혁신시스템 관점에서 우리나라의 에너지관련 정책결정시스템을 분석하고 그 문제점을 도출하였다. 혁신시스템의 구성요소 중 혁신주체 측면에서는 에너지의 안정적인 수송을 위한 전략적인 강화방안이 미흡하다는 한계를 가지고 있었으며, 연계측면에서는 국방영역을 제외한 혁신주체들 간의 연계는 비교적 양호하였으나 안보적 관점에서 중요한 역할을 담당하는 국방영역과 타 혁신주체들 간의 연계는 미흡한 것으로 분석되었다. 하부구조 측면에서는 에너지안보 관점에서 국방영역의 하부구조인 전력건설 논의가 미흡한 것으로 나타났으며, 마지막으로 제도적 측면에서는 에너지안보에 관한 국방영역의 역할에 대한 제도적 정립이 미흡하여 향후 국가 에너지안보와 관련된 거버넌스에서 국방영역의 참여가 제도적으로 명시될 필요가 있는 것으로 분석되었다.

본 연구의 목적은 다국적기업의 글로벌 친환경혁신전략에 영향을 미치는 요인과 해당 결정요인들을 바탕으로 실행된 글로벌 친환경혁신전략이 다국적기업의 경영성과에 직접적인 영향을 미치는지 고찰해보기 위함이다. 제도적 이론을 활용하여 연구의 이론적 모형을 제시했으며 이를 바탕으로 글로벌 규제적 압력과 글로벌 경쟁자 압력이 다국적기업의 글로벌 친환경혁신전략에 긍정적인 영향을 미칠 것이라는 가설을 제시하였다. 이와 함께 다국적기업의 친환경혁신전략과 경영성과 간 직접적인 관계가 있음을 나타내는 가설도 함께 제시함으로써 기업의 의사결정에 직접적인 영향을 미치는 모든 주체들의 특성을 고려하여 다국적기업의 글로벌 친환경혁신전략 프로세스를 설명하는 통합적인 모형을 나타내보고자 하였다. 본 연구의 연구모형은 PLS를 이용한 경로분석을 바탕으로 검증 되었으며 자료는 한국증권거래소에 상장된 다국적기업의 본사 중 식품가공 및 처리를 제외한 제조업만을 한정하여 실시한 설문조사를 통해 수집되었다. 또한 경로분석에 앞서 수집된 자료의 편의를 없애기 위해 무응답편의 및 동일방법편의 진단을 위한 분석을 실시하였다. 이를 바탕으로 자료를 분석한 결과 모든 제도적 압력 요인들이 다국적기업의 친환경혁신전략에 긍정적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 그와 더불어, 본 연구결과는 다국적기업 의 친환경혁신전략이 기업의 경영성과 개선에도 직접적인 영향을 미친다는 것을 보여준다.

This paper analyses the importance of innovation for 680 EU multinationals subsidiaries involved in international marketing in China, the period of 1998-2009, using unbalanced panel data analysis. To date, the literature on EU subsidiaries has failed to consider product innovation in the strategy interplay in approaching new markets overseas. Building on the resource-based view of the firm, linked with host economic and political institutions, the authors empirically examine the inferential marketing strategy in an EU-China context, by applying econometric techniques to investigate innovation capabilities and to test the presence of agglomeration effect of past innovation activities. We find that EU innovation in China is influenced by both host country institutions and firm capabilities, rendering support to the theory. Our analysis indicates EU subsidiaries’ innovation is positively related to firm advertisement, labour training and host market size. R&D expenditure has a negative bearing on innovation. However, openness has a negative and significant effect on product innovation in China. The study findings have important implications for research on international marketing, new venture decision making, and overseas innovation expansion strategies.

국제 마케팅 분야에서 제품 전략과 수출 성과의 관계에 관한 연구가 활발히 이루어져 왔다. 이러한 제품 전략과 수출 성과의 관계는 기존 역량의 활용뿐만 아니라 지속적인 혁신활동이 뒷받침되어야 한다. 이에 본 연구는 자원기반이론 관점에서 제품 전략이 수출 성과에 미치는 영향에 관해 살펴보고자 하였으며, 나아가 조직학습관점에서 혁신 역량이 제품 전략과 수출 성과의 관계에 미치는 조절효과에 대해 알아보고자 하였다. 한국 수출업체를 대상으로 한 설문조사를 바탕으로 실증분석을 실시한 결과, 제품 품질 전략과 제품 혁신 전략이 수출 성과에 긍정적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 또한 활용적 혁신 역량이 제품 품질 전략과 수출 성과의 긍정적인 관계를 강화하는 것으로 나타났다. 본 연구는 제품 전략과 혁신 역량 간 적합성을 통해 제품 전략이 수출 성과에 미치는 긍정적인 효과를 높일 수 있음을 시사하며, 향후 이와 관련한 선행요인 및 결과요인에 관한 추가적인 연구가 활발하게 이루어질 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.

This thesis introduced a model of diagnosing a company's quality management, and a process of achieving quality innovation based on the model. As for study methods, books and theses related to quality and process innovation were collected for investigation, a survey on internal employees to investigate major issues of quality and standard consciousness was conducted, and 5DP was discussed for balanced process analysis.

최근 많은 기업 또는 영리단체들은 급변하는 주변환경에 대응하기 위하여 다양한 혁신 방법들을 도입하여 운용하고 있는데, 하나만의 혁신기법들만을 적용한다는 것은 기업 또는 단체들에게 보다 긍정적인 결과를 얻어내기에 부족함이 있다. 본 연구에서는 혁신방법 중에서TRIZ와 6시그마의 혼합방안을 제시하기 위해서 다음의 세 가지 내용을 중점적으로 연구하였다. 첫째, TRIZ와 6시그마의 이론과 운영시스템을 설명하였다. 둘째, TRIZ와 6시그마에 대한 공통점, 차이점, 품질경영측면에서의 비교를 통하여 TRIZ와 6시그마와의 관계를 정립하고 올바른 이해를 제시하였다. 셋째, 6시그마의 진행 단계에서 TRIZ기법이 도움을 줄 수 있는 부분을 분석하고 6시그마와 TRIZ를 혼합한 새로운 모형과 예를 제시하였다.

Six Sigma emphasizes KPI and establishes the present level as well as the goal level through statistical calculation and tries to achieve management innovation through process improvement. But in the area of new product development or service, sufficient

Since 1980's, many enterprises have constructed Strategy Information System and tried BPR, ISP. Also, they implemented ERP and practiced the Process Innovation and Six Sigma for Management Innovation in todays. Although most companies had previous good plans, but those are not satisfied. Because of failed to change management and continued next activity. Many Project for Process innovation are ended as disposal project in my case, if they want next project, they need a new plan which needs additional fund and resource. This paper studied Process Innovation and Six Sigma in many things and proposed new model for continued project on the master plan. Also it proposed next study subject about ERP Optimization and Harmonization after implemented ERP which is considered as next step of PI.

Since 1980's, many enterprises have constructed Strategy Information System and tried BPR, ISP. Also, they implemented ERP and practiced the Process Innovation and Six Sigma for Management Innovation in todays, Although most companies had provious good plans, but those are not satisfied. Because of failed to change management and continued next activity. Many Project for Process innovation are ended as disposal project in many case, if they want next project, they need a new plan which needs additional fund and re source. This paper studied Process Innovation and Six Sigma in many things and proposed new model for continued project on the master plan. Also it proposed next study subject about ERP Optimization and Harmonization after implemented ERP which is considered as next step of PI.

The study aims to develop concepts originating through empirical research models to build superior competitiveness and optimal performance achievement. Therefore, to bridge these goals, the study addresses several indicators/items as a novelty, namely, entrepreneurship insight factors, market orientation, knowledge-sharing, innovation, managerial capability, product strategy, process and service improvement, resources capability to improve performance and increase competitiveness by empirical model direct, mediating and indirect effect. The total sample in this study is 497 eligible SMEs that partner with go-food in Makassar City. All research samples are the owner or the person in charge of the business; the data collection period is from May to December 2019. Data are collecting using a survey with 64 construct questions, summarized in seven manifest variables. The research method uses quantitative tools, with SMART-PLS as a statistical tool. This study develops sixteen hypotheses; all of the hypotheses are supported both directly, indirectly, and mediated. The study also found that the link based on CCT, RBV, and TAM Theory is the right choice of theories, as the foundation of this study was very reliable and valid. Indeed, all of the grounded methods have implications both in theory and its main application for the business in the online marketplace.

Recently, the role of container ports is radically changing, These changes are largely driven by the innovation process of Logistics such as Supply Chain Logistics and Global Logistics due to the international expansional of industry. Under this environment, It is required that the container port should act as a integral part of a Supply Logistics Chain especially to provide the customer-oriented logistics service. This paper deals with the development strategy of container ports coping with these changes in the view point of container ports as a Logistics infrastructure to provide customer-response services and necessary to the economic promotion of hinterlands. Strategy is suggested in the phases of the customers desire, the pattern of container cargo, the economic promotion of hinterlands, and interrelation of container ports in north-east Asia and also domestics through the analysis of competiveness of container ports.

Recently leading edge companies use the Supply Chain Management as a competitive weapon to secure and maintain customer loyalty. As a consequency they are concentrating resources on the company’s core business and employing strategic alliances with third-party providers to ensure the company provides its customers’desired logistics service levels at acceptable costs. Under this circumstances this paper surveys the third party logistics as a leading edge logistics industry coping with the progress of the supply chain management. The status and the type of the TPL including the Forwarder are analyzed in the view point of global logistics. Also the development strategy of third party logistics in the future is suggested.