Loading...

Archive

    10 December 2020, Volume 41 Issue 12 Previous Issue    Next Issue

    For Selected: Toggle Thumbnails
    Does Innovation Persistence Always Benefit Corporate Performance? An Analysis Based On The Moderation Effect Of Environmental Dynamics
    XU Zhi, CHEN Zhengyifan, ZHU Mingjing
    2020, 41(12): 3-19. 
    Abstract ( 163 )  
    Abstract: The world is at the edge of a historical tech-revolution and China is standing at the center of storm that has the ability and possibility to completely reform current technology market. That's to say, Chinese enterprises are right in such huge a tide of global change: the technology environment, market environment turmoil or great changes (sometime, even structural reform) will become the common state of enterprise development. This change of commercial environment will bring a hard issue that the relationship between continuous innovation and enterprise performance may become more complex hence is hard to be taken advantage of by companies. Given such an environmental volatility scenario, how can enterprises fulfill corporate performance improvement through continuous innovation? This path is full of challenges and, meanwhile, opportunities. From the perspective of environmental dynamics, this paper tries to explain the complex relationship between continuous innovation and enterprise performance in the current situation, discuss the moderate effect of environmental dynamics on the relationship, and reveal the path of innovation sustainability to improve enterprise performance under different environmental turbulence. Based on the U model of continuous innovation and enterprise performance. Specifically, 5450 data sample points from 545 listed companies, within Shanghai and Shenzhen stock
    markets, from 2007 to 2016 are selected to conduct empirical evidence,. the complex relationship between technological
    innovation sustainability and enterprise performance in the external environment is discussed when combined
    with the current situation of environmental dynamics. The empirical analysis supports the following conclusions :(1) the impact of continuous technological innovation behavior on enterprise performance is nonlinear,
    there is an inverted U type of relationship. Empirical analysis results show that technological innovation sustainability
    has an inverted U relationship with enterprise performance. When technological innovation sustainability is
    low, technological innovation sustainability has a positive effect on enterprise performance. (2) The results of empirical
    analysis show that technological environmental dynamics has no significant effect on the relationship between
    technological innovation sustainability and enterprise performance, while market dynamics plays an important
    role in the U relationship between technological innovation sustainability and enterprise performance. That
    is, with more significant fluctuation of market environment, the rising period of technological innovation persistence
    on enterprise performance will rise faster, and the decline of marginal reward caused by excessive and
    continuous innovation behavior which does not match the size of the enterprise itself will be more obvious.
    There are still many shortcomings of this article, at least including : the technological innovation activities of enterprises
    are not further divided, the relationship between technological innovation persistence of different models
    (such as breakthrough innovation and progressive innovation) and different types of technological innovation persistence
    (such as management innovation, organizational innovation, etc.) and enterprise performance needs further
    study; third, the research on the environment from the industry level, did not examine the impact of "indirect
    environment" on the relationship between technological innovation sustainability and enterprise performance.
    Based on this, the future research topics can be classified to examine the impact of different types of technological
    innovation on enterprise performance; in addition, the research subjects can be expanded to carry out more
    in-depth related research on enterprises of different industries and different sizes.

    Related Articles | Metrics
    The Alienation of Disruptive Technology and Governance: Based on the Stylized Fact of "Deepfake" Technology
    MIAO Zhengming, YIN Ximing, XU Zhanwei, CHEN Jin
    2020, 41(12): 83-98. 
    Abstract ( 138 )  
    Disruptive technology alienation refers to that technology was used to obtain illegal gains during the process of the development and application of emerging technology, which deviates from its original purpose and contradicts its mission of serving the human society. Disruptive technology alienation is based on the concept of technology supreme, which lead to technological development and application that violates laws or social ethics. It has become a threat to the digital era and an critical challenge for both national and global sustainable development goals (SDGs). However, relatively little study has systematically investigated the disruptive technology alienation. This study explores the alienation in the process of innovation and application of disruptive technology. In this paper we are trying to contribute to the current research on disruptive innovation and provides practical inspiration to cope with the challenge of technology alienation and improve the governance capacity of disruptive technologies. Drawing from responsible innovation theory and combing with interdisciplinary research perspectives, this dynamic and a process of rapid evolution and cyclical strengthening. Therefore, the risks and potential consequences brought about by disruptive technological alienation have many characteristics such as high degree of impact, all-roundness, durability and irreversibility. The main risk consequences of disruptive technological alienation are concentrated in the four aspects of technology civilianization, public opinion governance, social trust, and national security risks. 
    In conclusion, it is necessary to implement responsible innovation mindset and people-oriented scientific and technological ethics during the process of innovation and commercialization of disruptive technologies. On the one hand, both the government, firms and individuals could work together from "technology-individual motivation-organizational management-national security-cultural values" and other multi-level and multi-dimensional approaches, to deal with the disruptive technology alienation, and accelerate progress disruptive technology governance capabilities and modernization of governance systems ensure that science and technology are responsible, so that disruptive technological innovations could continue to empower national development and people’s health and happiness.
    On the other hand, China should also actively seek international cooperation, build a disruptive technology collaborative innovation and governance platform for co-governance and sharing, as well as work together with international players to respond to international public security risks, and apply the mindset of "technology for good" to contribute the overall sustainable development of human society.
    Related Articles | Metrics