Refine your search
Collections
Co-Authors
Year
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z All
Slamet, Achmad
- Industrial Innovation in Research Management as Knowledge Outcome:A Case Study
Abstract Views :258 |
PDF Views:0
Authors
Affiliations
1 Sekolah Tinggi Elektronika dan Komputer, ID
2 Semarang State University, ID
3 Mathematics Education Departement, Pancasakti University Tegal, ID
4 Education Management Departement, Semarang State University, ID
1 Sekolah Tinggi Elektronika dan Komputer, ID
2 Semarang State University, ID
3 Mathematics Education Departement, Pancasakti University Tegal, ID
4 Education Management Departement, Semarang State University, ID
Source
International Journal of Knowledge Management and Practices, Vol 6, No 2 (2018), Pagination: 26-37Abstract
Objective: This paper aims to provide the concept of industrial innovation in research management.
Methodology: This paper reviewed the diferent kinds of literature on industrial innovation and research management. The study formulated the knowledge outcome perspective of the industrial innovation in research management.
Findings: This paper investigated the industrial innovation since the latter has not been defined clearly from a knowledge perspective. For the definition, the model of industrial innovation in research management is designed. Research limitations: This paper formulated the contribution of industrial innovation to develop knowledge and implementation of the research management.
Social implications: Academics in a vocational college can generate potential innovation in the industry.
Practical implications: The industrial innovation in the research management model was applied to adjust the learning materials in accordance with the continuous innovative changes in the industry. The framework model was based on a case study involving a polytechnic and the industry in East Java, Indonesia.
Originality: This paper contributes for developing a knowledge-based model on industrial innovation in research management.
Keywords
Industrial Innovation, Research Management, Knowledge.
References
- Arikunto, S. (2010). Prosedur penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. (edisi revisi). Jakarta : Rineka Cipta.
- Clayton, M. C., & Raynor, M. E. (2003). The innovator’s solution, 74, 65-73.
- Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation.
- Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128-152.
- Dobni, C. B. (2008). Measuring innovation culture in organizations: The development of a generalized innovation culture construct using exploratory factor analysis. European Journal of Innovation Management, 11(4), pp.539-559. Retreived from https://doi.org/10.1108/ 14601060810911156
- Bolisani, E., & Bratianu, C. (2017). Knowledge strategy planning: An integrated approach to manage uncertainty, turbulence, and dynamics. Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(2), 233-253. doi: 10.1108/JKM-02-2016-0071.
- Etzkowitz & Leydesdorff. (1995). The triple helix in the context of global change: Dynamics and challenges. Department of Management, Birkbeck, University of London, London WC1E 7HX, UK.
- Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and “mode 2” to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29, 109-123.
- Gaspersz, V. (1998). Manajemen Produksi Total Strategi Peningkatan Produktivitas Bisnis Global. Gramedia Pustaka Utama, Jakarta.
- Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2005). Organizational DNA for Strategic Innovation. California Management Review, 47. 10.2307/41166306.
- Haggard, S. (2000). The political economy of the Asian financial crisis. Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.
- Hamel, G. (2002). Leading the revolution. 1. vyd. New York: PLUME. ISBN 0-452-28324-8.
- Julia Naranjo, et al. (2011). Innovation or imitation? The role of organizational culture. Manage-ment Decision, 49(1), 55-72. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741111094437
- Lasambouwa, C., Sutjiredjekib, E., & N. Nuryatic. (2015). Development of competency standard model for researchers to improve research capacity of indonesia’s polytechnic lecturer. International Journal of Education and Research., 3(12), 53-62.
- Leiponen, A. (2005). Skills and innovation. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 23(5), 303-323.
- Leydesdorff, L. (2012). The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government.
- Lowe, C. U. (1982). The Triple Helix - NIH, industry, and the academic world. The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, 55, 239-246.
- Marjanovic, et al. (2009). A historical reflection on research evaluation studies, their recurrent themes and challenges. RAND Corporation, Westbrook Centre, Milton Road, Cambridge CB4 1YG, United Kingdom.
- Muller, K., Rammer, C., & Trüby, J. (2009). The Role of Creative Industries in Industrial Innovation. Discussion Paper No. 08-109. ftp://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp08109.pdf.
- Mgijima, M. N. (2014). Needs-based professional development of lecturers in further education and training colleges: A strategic imperative. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(2).
- Lam, N. M. K. (2016). Business-government relationship in economic development. Asian Education and Development Studies, 5(4), 362-370. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/AEDS-08-2016-0067.
- Nagesh, T. (2016). Linking knowledge management and innovation culture for business performance improvement. International Journal of Knowledge Management and Practices, 4(2). ISSN:2320-7523.
- Popescu, Brenda & Beju. (2011). Development of a e-research platform academic. Journal of Manufacturing Engineering, 9(2).
- RistekDikti. (2016). Panduan Seleksi Insentif Teknologi yang dimanfaatkan di Industri Tahun 2017. Direktorat Jenderal Penguatan Inovasi. Jakarta: Kementerian Riset, Teknologi dan Pendidikan Tinggi.
- Barker, R. (2015). Management of knowledge creation and sharing to create virtual knowledge-sharing communities: A tracking study. Journal of Knowledge Management, 19(2), 334-350, https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-06-2014-0229.
- Roscoe, J. T. (1975). Fundamental research statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. hal.189-197.
- Sabato, J. (1975). El pensamiento latinoamericano en la problemática ciencia–technología–desarrollo-dependencia. Paidos, Buenos Aires.
- Darling, S. D., & Cunningham, J. B. (2016). Underlying values and competencies of public and private sector managers. Asian Education and Development Studies, 5(4). Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/AEDS-09-2015-0050.
- Staub, F. C., & Stern, E. (2002). The nature of teachers’ pedagogical content beliefs matters for students’ achievement gains: Quasi-experimental evidence from elementary mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 344-355.
- Stiglitz, J. E. (2002). Globalization and its discontents. New York: W.W. Norton.
- Suharto. (2011). Pengembangan Profesional-isme Dosen. POLINES. Ragam Jurnal Pengembangan Humaniora 11(1).
- Sugiyono. (2014). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta.
- Sugiyono. (2004). Metodologi penelitian mana-jemen pendidikan. Bandung: CV. Alfabeta.
- Terry, G. (2010). Dasar-dasar manajement. Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara. Alma, Cetakan kesebelas.
- Toni, A. F. D., & Nonino, F. (2010). A model for assesing the coherence of companies knowledge strategy. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 9, 327-341.
- Vutsova, A., & Ignatova, O. (2013). The Role of Public-Private Partnership for Effective Technology Transfer. Academic Publishing Platform. PRADEC Conference Proceedings, 2(2), 11-18.
- Xu, X., & Ding, Y. (2014). Supplier selection in manufacturing innovation chain-oriented public procurement based on improved PSO method. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, JIEM, 7(1), 276-293.