بررسی اعتبار مدل هوشمندی بنگاه مادر تخصصی صنایع پتروشیمی

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه مدیریت، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.

2 گروه مدیریت، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران (عضو هیئت علمی دانشگاه امام صادق (ع)).

چکیده

هوشمندی بنگاه مادرتخصصی صنایع پتروشیمی به عنوان بزرگترین بخش خصوصی کشور در راستای ارزش آفرینی برای شرکت‌های تابعه و استفاده از یک مدل هوشمند از اهمیت بالایی برخودار است. هدف این پژوهش اعتبار سنجی مدل هوشمندی بنگاه مادر تخصصی صنایع پتروشیمی و ارایه راهکارهای مرتبط با آن می‎‌باشد. پژوهش از نوع آمیخته می‌باشد که از مدیران در صنعت پتروشیمی به روش نمونه‌گیری گلوله برفی مصاحبه شده است و تا رسیدن به اشباع نظری که 23 مصاحبه را شامل می‌شود ادامه یافت. گزاره‌ها به کمک روش داده بنیاد و نرم افزار MAXQDA مورد تحلیل قرار گرفت. جامعه آماری در بخش کمی 462 نفر از مدیران شرکت صنایع پتروشیمی خلیج فارس را شامل می‌شود. در بخش کمی پرسشنامه محقق ساخته پژوهش بین 90 نفر از مدیران شرکت‌های زیرمجموعه در سطوح مختلف توزیع گردید که درنهایت 82 پرسشنامه برای تحلیل مناسب تشخیص داده شد. به منظور بررسی داده‌های بخش کمی از روش تحلیل عاملی به کمک نرم افزار SPSS و WarpPLS استفاده گردید. مدل هوشمندی بنگاه مادر تخصصی صنایع پتروشیمی شامل 550 کد باز می‌شود که در قالب 95 گزاره مشترک تقسیم‌بندی شده است. گزاره‌های این سطح در قالب 13 مقوله اصلی و 4 مفهوم تقسیم‌بندی شده است که شامل مفاهیم؛ تصمیمات راهبردی (با ضریب بتا 0.979)، وظایف، خدمات و منابع (0.987)، خالق/آفرینندگان سرمایه و ساختارها (0.974)، سیستم‌ها و فرایندها (0.980) می‌شود. ضرایب بتا حاصل از تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌ها در بخش کمی حاکی از اهمیت بالای هر یک از مفاهیم و مقادیر برازش و تحلیل عاملی نشان از تأیید مدل می‌باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Validation the intelligence Model of Petrochemical Industry Parent Co.

نویسندگان [English]

  • ali abdali 1
  • gholamreza godarzi 2
  • Tsohrabi sohrabi 1
1 Department of Management, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University,Tehran, Iran.
2 Department of Management, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University,Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

The importance of petrochemicals as the largest private sector in the country in terms of value creation for subsidiaries and the use of a smart model is of paramount importance. The purpose of this study was to present and validate the intelligence model of the petrochemical firm's parent firm and provide related solutions. The research is of mixed type which is interviewed by managers in petrochemical industry through snowball sampling and the interviews continued until a theoretical saturation of 23 interviews was reached. Research propositions were analyzed using the data base method and MAXQDA software. The statistical population includes 462 managers of the Persian Gulf Petrochemical Company. In the quantitative part, a researcher-made questionnaire was distributed among 90 managers of the subsidiaries at different levels. Finally, 82 questionnaires were identified for proper analysis. Factor analysis was performed using SPSS and WarpPLS software to analyze quantitative data. The intelligence model of the petrochemical firm specializes in 550 open source code divided into 95 common propositions. The propositions at this level are divided into 13 main categories and 4 concepts that include concepts: strategic decisions (with a beta coefficient of 0.979), tasks, services and resources (0.987), creator / creators of capital and structures (0.974), systems and processes (0.980). The beta coefficients obtained from the data analysis in the quantitative section indicate the high importance of each of the concepts and quantities of fit and factor analysis to confirm the model.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Intelligence
  • Petrochemical Industry
  • parent Co
  • factor analysis

1-      Adamkó, A., Kãdek, T., Kósa, M. (2014). Intelligent and adaptive services for a smart campus, Conference on Cognitive Infocommunications (CogInfoCom), 505-509.

2-      Ahmad, S.D., Pujiyono & Manthovani, R. (2018). Legal Liability of Parent Company on Subsidiary’s Bankruptcy in Indonesia, International Journal of Trend in Research and Development, 5(1), 312-315.

3-      Asadzadeh, A. & RahmanSeresht, R. (2016). A Model for Explaining Intelligence in Holding Companies, Journal of Business Management. 7(4), 805-822. (in Persian)

4-      Azar, A., Rahnavard, F. & Musalmani, Gh. H. (2015). Designing a Strategy for the Formulation of Industry Strategy; Examining the Petrochemical Industry, Management Process and Development, Vol. 28, 4(84), 61-71. (in Persian)

5-      Bali, R. K., Wickramasinghe, N. & Lehaney, B. (2009). Knowledge Management Primer, Publisher Routledge, ISBN: 1135850798, 9781135850791, 142 pages.

6-      Charmaz, K. (2008). What is Grounded Theory? In: NCRM Research Methods Festival 2008.

7-      Conteh, C. (2014). Canadian public administration in the 21st century. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Retrieved from ProQuest database.

8-      Dadkhah, S., Bayat, R., Fazli, S., Tork, E. K., & Ebrahimi, A. (2018). Corporate foresight: developing a process model. European Journal of Futures Research, 6(1), 1-10. 

9-      DanaiFard, H. (2012). Designing a National Observatory for Political and Management Studies in the Islamic Republic of Iran: Theoretical Wisdom, Operational Conceptualization and Challenges, Quarterly Journal of Science and Technology, 4 (4), 13-24. (in Persian)

10-  Dominik G. (2013). The Holding Company as an Instrument of Companies’ Tax-Financial Policy Formation, International Journal Contemporary Economics, 7(1) 75-82.

11-  Farhangi, A., Karoubi, M. & Alvaziri, S. (2015). Classical Grounded Theory; Descriptive Proposed Generation Theory of the Permissible Identity Gravity Center for Iranian Health Tourism, Journal of Business Management, 7(1), 75-86. (in Persian)

12-  Forster, B. (2014). Technology foresight for sustainable production in the German automotive supplier industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 92, 237-248. http://www. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2014.09.010.

13-  Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory, Aldine Publishing Company. Chicago.

14-  Glaser, B. (1965). Examples of grounded theory: A reader, Sociology Press. Mill Valley, CA.

15-  Goodarzi, G. R., Azar, A., Azizi, F. & Babaei Meybodi, H. (2016). Providing the proposed regional prospecting framework as an interdisciplinary field of study: the study document, the development document of Yazd province, Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities, 8(2), 133-155. (in Persian)

16-  Goold, M., Campbell, A., & Alexander, M. (1994). Corporate level strategy: Creating Value in the Multi Business Company. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

17-  Hasangholipour, H., Gholipour, A., ghazimahaleh, M. M. & Arbatani, T. R. (2010). Requirements, necessities and mechanisms of knowledge commercializing in Management Schools/ Faculties. Journal of business Management, 2(6): 41-61. (In Persian)

18-  Hasrati, Mostafa. (2006). an Introduction to the Qualitative Method of Foundation Data Theory, Journal of Language and Linguistics, 2(3), 75-86. (in Persian)

19-  Hatto P. (2010). Standards and Standardisation. A practical guide for researchers. European Commission. Directorate-General for Research & Innovation.

20-  Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2003). The dynamic resource-based view: Capability lifecycles. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 997–1010.

21-  Højland, J. and Rohrbeck, R. (2018) 'The Role of Corporate Foresight in Exploring New Markets: Evidence from 3 Case Studies in the BOP Markets', Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, January, pp. 1-13.

22-  Hwang, D. (2014). Smart approach to innovative education for 21st century, in International Conference IITE-2014 “New Challenges for Pedagogy and Quality Education: MOOCs, Clouds and Mobiles. Moscow.

23-  Kalaki, Hassan. (2009). Fundamental theory as a method of theorizing, called cultural research, 3(6), 119-140.

24-  Karimi, M. (2015). A new generation of oil contracts and the need to create a "technology observatory" center in the oil industry, Research Institute of Petroleum Industry, 137 21-24. (in Persian)

25-  Mehr Al-Hassani, M.H., Haghdoust, A.A., Dehnouyeh, R., Abolhajlaj M., Emami, M. (2016). Providing a proposed framework for monitoring the health system, Iranian Journal of Epidemiology, 12, 92-96. (in Persian)

26-  Noruzi, H. & Movahedifar, E. (2015). Research Methodology Thesis Writing for Management Students: With Warp PLS Software, Mehraban Nashr, Tehran, Iran. (in Persian)

27-  Ramadan, W. A. (2017). Corporate Future Foresight in Government: A necessity or a luxury?, Thesis. Rochester Institute of Technology. Accessed from, Rochester Institute of Technology, RIT Scholar Works.

28-  Rohrbeck R, Gemu¨nden HG (2011). Corporate Foresight: its three roles in enhancing the innovation capacity of a firm. Technol Forecast Social Change 78(2):231–243

29-  Rohrbeck, R., Battistella, C., & Huizingh, E. (2015). Corporate foresight: An emerging field with a rich tradition. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 101, 1–9. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2015.11.002

30-  Rupsiene, L. & Pranskuniene, R. (2010). The variety of grounded theory: Different versions of the same method or different methods? Social Sciences, 4(70): 7-19.

31-  Savioz, P. (2004), "Technology Intelligence Concept Design and Implementation in Technology-based SMEs", Palgrava Macmillan.

32-  Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, 2nd Edition, Sage. Thousand Oaks, CA.

33-  Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

34-  Vecchiato R, Roveda C. (2010). Foresight in corporate organisations. Technol Anal Strat Manag, 22 (1), 99–112.

35-  Voros, J. (2003). A generic foresight process framework. Foresight, 5(3), 10–21.

36-  Wyrwicka, M. K. & Erdeli. O. (2018). Strategic Foresight as the Methodology of Preparing Innovation Activities, Marketing and Management of Innovations, DOI 10.21272/mmi, 2-26.