Journals / Ege Akademik Bakış Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 4

THE EMERGENCE OF TECHNOPARKS AS A NEW ORGANIZATIONAL FORM: A STUDY FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COEVOLUTION

Pages
425–444
Publication Date
2022-10-03
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Our study contributes to the literature explaining that in an institutional environment how environmental changes and conditions trigger interactions between actors and how the outcomes of the actors' interaction reveal technoparks as a new organizational form.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to reveal the emergence of technoparks as a new organizational form, the conditions, and actors effective in this process from the perspective of coevolution.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Moreover, the transition to a free-market economy on January 24 in 1980 is the event that initiated the coevolution process.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Our study contributes to the literature explaining that in an institutional environment how environmental changes and conditions trigger interactions between actors and how the outcomes of the actors' interaction reveal technoparks as a new organizational form.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:New Organizational Forms · Coevolution Perspective · Technoparks

Abstract

This study aims to reveal the emergence of technoparks as a new organizational form, the conditions, and actors effective in this process from the perspective of coevolution. Following the exploratory nature of the research, we preferred a qualitative method and collected the data through document analysis and semi-structured interviews. The findings showed that the technopark form emerged in a coevolutionary process. Moreover, the transition to a free-market economy on January 24 in 1980 is the event that initiated the coevolution process. Then, conditions such as ensuring university-industry collaboration triggered the interaction between the actors in the emergence process of technoparks. Also, we revealed that Technology Development Center was the catalyst that accelerated the process, and METU Technopark, which was established before the law, was a proto form. Furthermore, the government shaped the functioning of the form with the law it enacted. Our study contributes to the literature explaining that in an institutional environment how environmental changes and conditions trigger interactions between actors and how the outcomes of the actors' interaction reveal technoparks as a new organizational form.

🔖

Cite This Article

BÖYÜKASLAN, H. D., ÖZKARA, B. (2022). THE EMERGENCE OF TECHNOPARKS AS A NEW ORGANIZATIONAL FORM: A STUDY FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF COEVOLUTION. Ege Akademik Bakış Dergisi, Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 4, 425–444. https://ajindex.com/articles/751805

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Aytemur, J., Erdemir, E. & Koç, U. (2015, May 14-16). Kurumsallaşamayan kurumsal girişimler: Yeni bir örgütsel form olarak köy enstitüleri. Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi, Mugla, Türkiye. Baum, J.A.C. & Singh, J.V. (1994). Organization- environment coevolution. In J.Baum & J.Singh (Ed.), Evolutionary Dynamics of Organizations (pp. 379-402).
  2. Oxford University Press.
  3. Breslin, D. (2016). What evolves in organizational co-evolution?. Journal of Management & Governance, 20, 45-67.
  4. Buğra, A., & Savaşkan, O. (2015). Türkiye’de yeni kapitalizm. İletişim Yayınları.
  5. Cansız, M. (2017). 2023'e doğru Türkiye teknoparkları. TC Kalkınma Bakanlığı. Carney,M. & Gedajlovic, E. (2002). The co-evolution of instutional environments and organizational strategies: The rise of family business groups in the ASEAN region. Organization Studies, 23(1), 1-29.
  6. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage Publication. Child, J., Lu, Y., ve Tsai, T. (2007). Institutional entrepreneurship in building an environmental protection system for the people’s republic of China. Organization Studies, 28(7), 1013-1034.
  7. Chiles, T. H., Meyer, A. D., & Hench, T. J. (2004). Organizational emergence: The origin and transformation of branson, missouri's musical theaters. Organization Science, 15(5), 499-519.
  8. Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. (2004). Identity ambiguity and change in the wake of a corporate spin-off. Administrative science quarterly, 49(2), 173-208.
  9. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. (Second Edition). Sage Publication. Çalışır, M., & Gülmez, A. (2010). Teknoloji politikaları çerçevesinde ekonomik gelişim: Türkiye–Güney Kore karşılaştırması. Akademik İncelemeler Dergisi, 5(1), 23-55.
  10. Dijksterhuis, M.S., Van den Bosch, F.A.J., & Volberda, H.W. (1999). Where do organizational forms come from? Management logics as a source of coevolution. Organization Science, 1(5), 569- 582. Dirlik, O. (2016). Türk iş sisteminin evrimi: Makro kurumsal bir inceleme. Yönetim ve Organizasyon Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1(2), 5-30. Djelic,M.L. & Ainamo, A. (1999). The coevolution of new organizational forms in the fashion industry: A historical and comperative study of France, Italy and the United states. Organization Science, 10(5), 622- 637. Dorado, S. (2005). Institutional entrepreneurship, partaking, and convening. Organization Studies, 26(3), 385-414.
  11. Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton