*승* 스토어

*승*

개인

팔로워0 팔로우

소개

등록된 소개글이 없습니다.

전문분야 등록된 전문분야가 없습니다.

판매자 정보

학교정보

입력된 정보가 없습니다.

직장정보

입력된 정보가 없습니다.

자격증

입력된 정보가 없습니다.

판매지수

판매중 자료수

7개
전체 판매량

41개
최근 3개월 판매량

0개
자료후기 점수

평균A+
자료문의 응답률

-

전체자료 7개

Absorptive Capacity - Cohen and Levinthal 평가A+최고예요

Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation Wesley M. Cohen and Daniel A. Levinthal Reviewed work(s ): Source : Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 35, No. 1, Special Issue: Technology, Organizations , and Innovation ( Mar., 1990), pp. 128-152Introduction/ About Arthurs Frederick C. Joerg Professor of Business Administration Professor of Strategy, Economics, and Law Teaching / Research Interests: Strategy, Technology and Knowledge Management, Economics of Technological Change Ph.D., Yale University - 1981 Economics M.Phil., Yale University - 1978 Economics M.A., Yale University - 1978 Economics B.A., Yale University - 1973 magna cum laude with divisional honors (interdisciplinary major in development, combining economics, African history and anthropology ); Wesley M. Cohen Academic Positions Held Wharton: 1989-present (named Reginald H. Jones Professor of Corporate Management, 2005; Chairperson, Management Department, 2001-present; named Julian Aresty Professorzation but also the ability to exploit it Gatekeeping or boundary-spanning roles Both monitors the environment and translates the information Interaction within subunits (inward-looking absorptive capacity) Interaction between subunits (cross-functional absorptive capacity) Awareness of complementary expertisePath Dependence and Absorptive Capacity/ Accumulating absorptive capacity in one period will permit more efficient accumulation in the next Low initial investment will make it more expensive to acquire it in later periods Firms can get “locked-out” - Firm does not develop absorptive capacity in initial period - No initial absorptive capacity - Leads to inertia (Nelson and Winter, 1982)Absorptive Capacity and R D Investment/ R D contributes to the firms absorptive capacity The reponsiveness of R D activity to learning incentives is an indication of absorptive capacity R D intensity (=R D/sales) - demand - appropriability - technological opportunity conditionsAbsorptive Capacity ande knowledge, assimilate, and exploit it (e.g. university labs involved in basic research – contract research labs) The degree to which a field is cumulative, or the field’s pace of advance, should also affect how critical R D is to the development of A.C. Following Nelson and Winter (1982), the less explicit and codified the relevant knowledge, the more difficult it is to assimilateAbsorptive Capacity and R D Investment/ Absorptive capacity influences the effects of appropriability and technological opportunity conditions on R D spending A firm is unable to assimilate externall available knowledge passivelyDirect effect of ease of learning/ As the ease of learning diminishes, learning becomes more dependent on a firm’s own R D - The marginal impact of R D on A.C. is greater in more difficult learning environments - A more difficult learning environment lowers firm’s absorptive capacities - Competitors are now less able to tap into the firm’s R D findings that spill outTechnological OppWhen absorption incentive is large, as when learning is difficult, spillovers may actually encourage R D - Absorption incentive is greater when firms are less interdependent - More competitive market structure , higher price elasticity of demand for the productData and Measures/ Cross-sectional survey data in the American manufacturing sector Dependent variable: R D intensity – Firm’s business-unit R D expenditure - 318 firms, 1719 business units; 1975-1977 Technological opportunity – variables measuring the “relevance” or “importance” for technological progress - 7-point Likert scale : relevance of 11 basic and applied fields of science and the importance of external sources of knowledge - Extra-industry sources of knowledge : equipment suppliers, material suppliers, downstream users, government labs, universitiesData and Measures/ 24 percent of the firms performed no R D in at least one year. - Tobit analysis The presence of heteroscedasticity - GLSTobit Model/ 종속변수의 값이 부분적으로 절단되어 어떤나타남 Tobit Model 출처 : SPSS KoreaData and Measures/ The degree to which outside knowledge is targeted to a firm’s needs : important determinant of the ease of learning Basic sciences : less targeted Applied sciences : more targeted (+university labs, government labs, materials suppliers, equipment suppliers) Appropriability : Levin et al.’s survey (patents, secrecy, lead time, moving quickly down the learning curve, complementary sales, service efforts)Result/ 5 extraindustry sources 4 basic science 7 applied scienceResult/ Technological opportunity - When learning is more difficult, an increase in the quantity of knowledge has a positive effect on R D intensity - An increase in technological opportunity associated with basic science elicits more R D (relative to applied science)Result/ Appropriability - When learning is difficult, high absorptive capacity becomes more important - As market becomes more competitive, high appropriability becomes important - The effect of R D intensity of

경영/경제| 2013.04.03| 24페이지| 1,500원| 조회(255)

Absorptive Capacity, Cohen and Levinthal, Wesley M. Cohen

미리보기

닫기
Theory Construction as Disciplined Imagination - Weick

Theory Construction as Disciplined ImaginationMain Index Introduction 3 steps for theorizing process Literature Review Implications Theorizing ProcessKarl E. Weick American organizational theorist who is noted for introducing the notions of “loose coupling”, “mindfulness”, “ sensemaking ” into organizational studies Rensis Likert Distinguished University Professor at the Ross Scholl of Business, University of Michigan Bachelor’s degree at Wittenberg College in Ohio Ph.D in organizational psychology from Ohio State Universtiy in 1962 Books - The Social Psychology of Organizing, McGraw Hill. 1969 - Sensemaking in Organizations, Sage. 1995 - Making Sense of the Organization, Blackwell. 2001 - Managing the Unexpected: Assuring High Performance in an Age of Complexity. 2001 AuthorsIntroduction “ Theory Building “ - 이론이 어떻게 만들어 지는가 : 문제 제기 - conjecture 만들기 - 기준 설정 (Problem Statement - Thought Trials - Selection Criteria) - 문제는 명 확하고 , 자세하게 - 가설은 많이 , 독립적으로 - 기준도 많이 , diverse 하게 - And finally, a good theory is a plausible theory.Introduction “ Theory Building “ Elaboration of the theorizing process 1. Problem statements 2. Thought trials 3. Selection criteriaLiterature Review Literature - Kaplan(1964) : knowledge growth by intention vs. knowledge growth by extension intention – internal content of a term or concept that constitutes its formal definition extension – its range of applicability by naming the particular objects that it denotes - Barlett : interpolation / extrapolation - Freece : open system vs. closed system - Bourgeois : 7 steps - Campbell : theorizing = trial and errorLiterature Review Example – Marine Navigation 초음파를 쏘아 레이더 영상을 통해 tugs, barges, rocks, phantom objects 등을 예측하여 collision 을 피할 수 있다 . 즉 , 레이더 영상을 통해 selection criteria 만든다 . Echoes from these emissions = substitutes for real objects 여기서의 초음파는 , interviews, accident reports, firsthand observation, intuition 등이 될 수 있음 중요한것은 , 이러한 과정들이 ‘representation’ 에 의해 이루어진다는 것 Echo 를 통해 real collision 을 예측하듯이 , effective judgment 로 confirmation 여부를 결정Problem Statements 1 st step : Problem Statements Explicit 하고 accurate 해야 함 Theoretical problem 은 Adaptation problem 에 비교됨 : 문제를 해결하려는 conjecture 는 niche 를 찾으려는 action 과 같다 하나 다른점 : Theoretical : artificial selection Adaptation : natural selectionThought Trials 2 nd step : Thought Trials 숫자가 많아야 하고 , heterogeneity 해야 한다 “little men often start an argument in the presence of big men” (Lave March) - “ Among people, inequalities in one domain lead to aggression in another” Thought trial 은 homogeneity 하려는 성향이 있음 Preference 와 experience 가 개인에게 영향을 미침Selection Criteria 3 rd step : Selection Criteria Consistent, Simultaneous, Diverse Consistent 하지 못하면 conjectures become fragmentary 또한 many diverse selection criteria 가 theory-construction process 를 개선시킴Implications Problem Statement make assumptions more explicit, make representation more accurate, make representation more detailed Thought Trials increase number of trials generated, increase heterogeneity of trials generated Criteria Select apply criteria more consistently apply more criteria simultaneously apply more diverse criteriaImplications Metaphor : representation 의 일종으로서 , 복잡한 현상을 짧고 간결하게 표현 할 수 있는 하나의 도구 이다 To build better theory, theorists have to “ think better ”{nameOfApplication=Show}

경영/경제| 2013.04.03| 13페이지| 1,500원| 조회(186)

Weick, Karl E. Weick

미리보기

닫기
Cassiman - In Search of Complementarity in Innovation Strategy: Internal R&D and External Knowledge Acquisition

..PAGE:1In Search of Complementarity in InnovationStrategy: Internal R&D and ExternalKnowledge AcquisitionBruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers..PAGE:2Bruno CassimanEducation1991 - 1996:Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern UniversityPh.D. in Managerial Economics and Decision Sciences.1986 - 1990:K.U.Leuven, Belgium.Engineering and Management. Majors in Quantitative Methods and Finance.Employment2007 ~ Present:Professor of Strategic Management, IESE Business School2002 - 2007:Associate Professor in General Management, IESE Business School2000 - 2002:Assistant Professor in General Management, IESE Business School1996 - 2000:Assistant Professor of Economics and Business Strategy at the Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona...PAGE:3Reinhilde VeugelersPast Positions1990: Northwestern University, The Kellogg Graduate SchoolManagement, M.E.D.S. Department, Evanston, Illinois, U.S.A.1995-1997: UCL, Louvain-la-Neuve1998/1999 Universite de Paris I, SorbonneUniveridad Autonoma de Barcelona, Ecs PasteurSince 2007 Visiting Faculty GSE at UPF-UAB BarcelonaCurrent positionFull Professor (Gewoon Hoogleraar) at the K.U.Leuven, Faculty ofBusiness and Economics, Management, Strategy and InnovationDepartment ;Teaching: International Business Economics & Strategy(Master);Economics of Information (PhD); Economics & Management ofInnovation (PhD)..PAGE:4Make (Internal R&D) 와 Buy (External knowledge acquisition)사이의 complementarity 연구Productivity approach와 adoption approach를 조합Make & Buy decision에 영향을 미치는 contextual variables 조사Supermodularity 이론을 통해 MAKE-BUY 사이의 complementarity 조사..PAGE:53.4 Empirical Strategy1. Productivity approach 를 통해 complementarity의 존재유무 파악2. Multinomial logit 전략 선택에 영향을 미치는 요인들을 조사3. Refine the search for complementarity- bivariate probit model- using contextual variables, cut the data into subsamples- 위의 모델들 전부 조합4. Data : Belgian manufacturing industry. Consists of 269 observations...PAGE:6Contextual VariableA1A2ProductivityA1&A2A1A20BivariateProbitOLSMultinomiaPAGE:10..PAGE:11..PAGE:12..PAGE:13James Heckman, 1944.4.19~EducationB.A. 1965 (Math) Colorado College (summa cum laude)M.A. 1968 (Econ) Princeton UniversityPh.D. 1971 (Econ) Princeton UniversityAwards and HonorsBank of Sweden Prize in Economic Sciences in Honor of the Memory of Alfred Nobel, 2000.John Bates Clark Medal (American Economics Association), 1983.Distinguished Contributions to Public Policy for Children Award, Society for Research in Child Development, 2009...PAGE:14..PAGE:15..PAGE:16Tobit Model임의로 C라는 값을 정하고 그 이상(혹은 이하) 값을 버리려 할때.그 이상(혹은 이하)값을 truncated on the left(right) 한다고 하고,그 왼쪽(혹은 오른쪽) 값들이 cencored 되었다고 한다. (0으로 침)..PAGE:17..PAGE:18Multinomial Logit Model..PAGE:19..PAGE:20..PAGE:21..PAGE:2261%56%Poor predictive power..PAGE:23..PAGE:24결론Adoption 의 poor outcome 이 전체적인 two-step procedure의 poor outcome 야기Two-step stage 자체에도 multicollinearity한 문제가 있다 (Maddala,1983)Adoption을 설명해 줄 다른 variables들이 필요하다하지만 Make 와 Buy 사이의 complementarity는 입증했다Productivity Approach 에 적용된 모델은 일반 인 로지스틱 분포 형태를 가정한다소득 수준에 따른 정당 지지 선호도를 분석해 볼 때,소득이 높을 수록 여당을 지지한다는 가정을 해보자단순히 소득의 분포는 정규분포 형태일 것이다그러나 가정에 따르면 어느 정도 소득 이상이면여당을 지지할 것이므로 지지의 분포는 누적정규분포의 형태일 것이다로지트ㆍ프로비트 모델은 정치문제를 분석하는데 유용한 경우가 많다. 예를들면 어떤 특정의 정책을 지지하는가 않는가, 어떤 특정의 조직(예 : 후원회)에 가입하고 있는가 않는가,선거에 있어서 투표하였는가 않았는가 등을여론조사에 기초하여 분석하는데 적용할 수 있다. 여론조사 이외의데이터에 기초한 분석 예에는 법안이 가결되었는가 안되었는가,군사력이 수반된국제분쟁이 발생하였는가 않았는가, 파업이 실시되었는가 안되었는가 등이 있다.Combining - > 두 가지의 모델을 조합함으로서 two-step procedure가 됨.[여기서 bivariate 에 대한 결과는 Table6 에 나오므로 자세한 설명은 뒤에가서]7Contextual Variables : factors that are affecting complementarity.Multinomial logit model : 하나의 변수. 그러나 그것이 여러 카테고리로 나누어 질 수 있는 경우에 이 모델 사용.카테고리중 하나를 bench mark 삼아서 다른 요소들과 비교. 여기서는 NoMake&Buy 를 BenchMark (0) 값으로 삼았다.[이 결과는 Table5에 나오므로 자세한 설명은 뒤에서]8각각의 관계 간략하게 설명9대략적인 설명Complementarity Test 를 해보면 20.5-13.5 > 9.7-14.9특이할 점은, 둘다 안하는 경우가, 하나만 하는 경우보다 sales가 더 높다는 것을 알 수 있었다10하나씩 설명Export intensity -> encounter competitive environmentEffectiveness IP protection industry -> BuyEffectiveness strateg식의 문제가 발생할 수 있다. 이것과 관련해 시카고대학의 Heckman 이 한가지 모델을 만들었다.교육과 임금의 관계 조사시. 미니멈 임금 고려 못함. 미니멈 임금 이하에서는 아예 일을 안한다.하지만 일반 모델에서는 이것을 고려 못하고 그 이상 받는 임금들로만 조사하게 된다. 높은 교육을 받는사람들은 높은 임금을 받기 때문에 우리는 보통 원래 total population보다 더 높은 임금과 교육 수준으로만 모델이 샘플링되게 된다. 낮은 교육수준과 낮은 임금을 받는사람들은 labor force에서 카운트되지 않음. 이런 경우에 교육과 임금 수준의 관계를 조사할 경우 bias를 일으킬 수 있다.14다시 표로 돌아와서, 여기서는 모집한 샘플들이 이미 innovation을 한 firm들만 조사하게 되었다.원래 샘플들은 firm들이 innovative 하냐 안하냐를 보기 위해 모았는데여기서 regression 한 것들은 size와 export intensity와 같은 variables에 대해 innovation하냐 안하냐를 가지고 모델링.그래서 bias를 줄이기 위해 Heckman correction 사용했고, 169개가 남았다. 그걸로 분석한것이 (2).(3)을 보면 Tobit Model 을 사용했다고 한다.15Consider a continuous random variable Y, and a constant C. If you were to sample from the distribution of Y but discard values less than (greater than) C, the distribution of the remaining observations would betruncatedon the left (right). If you were to sample from the distribution of Y and report values less than (greater than) C as C, the distribution of the sample w안미친다

경영/경제| 2013.04.03| 24페이지| 2,500원| 조회(74)

Cassiman, Bruno Cassiman, Reinhilde Veugel..

미리보기

닫기
Capturinf Value from Knowledge Assets - Teece

Capturing Value from Knowledge Assets: The New Economy, Markets for Know-how, and Intangible Assets David J. Teece California Management Review Vol 40. No.3 Spring 1998Introduction Knowledge and Competitive Advantage - Liberalization of markets - Expansion of what’s tradable - Intellectual property regimes - Increasing returns - Decoupling of information flows from the flow of goods/services - Ramification of new information communications technologies - Product architecture technology “fusion” Capturing Value from Knowledge Competence - Nature of knowledge - Appropriability - S ectoral differences in the market for know-how - Complementary assets - Dynamic CapabilitiesKnowledge and Competitive Advantage Liberalization of markets Since the Kennedy round of trade negotiations in the 1960s Restrictions have also been relaxed Transportation costs have fallen Information diffuses instantaneouslyKnowledge and Competitive Advantage Expansion of what’s tradable Many types of “intermediate” products have been created Aided by developments in computer information technology For instance : petroleum industryKnowledge and Competitive Advantage Strengthening of Intellectual Property Regimes Intellectual property augments the importance of know-how assets Laws typically embrace patents, trademarks, trade secrets, and copyright Amplified by the growth of information technologyKnowledge and Competitive Advantage The Growing Importance of Increasing Returns 18~19 th century – decreasing returns Raw material processing manufacturing - processing of information Which is ahead tends to stay ahead 1. Standards and network externalities 2. Customer lock-in 3. Large up-front costs 4. Producer learningKnowledge and Competitive Advantage Decoupling of Information from Goods Services Through electronically connected networks, information flows readily Example : an insurance salesman - traditional channels are no longer needed Transfer of information has required specialized channels - new developments are needed Erosion in the ability to control information - bargaining power will be reduced, switching costs will declineKnowledge and Competitive Advantage Ramifications of Information Communications Tech Communications systems computer networks - enable advances in corporate, intercorporate , and strengthen links between strategic and operations management Network computing : strips out barriers to communication Service firms : such as lawyers, accountants, management consultants..Knowledge and Competitive Advantage Product Architecture and Technology “Fusion” Complexity - New products are rarely stand-alone items Example : SLI of ASICs SLI is almost never owned by a single firm - widely distributed throughout the industry Fusion : convergence or integration of previously disparate technologiesCapturing Value from Knowledge and Competence The Nature of Knowledge Codified / Tacit Observable / Non-Observable Positive / Negative Autonomous / Systematic Knowledge Intellectual Property RegimeCapturing Value from Knowledge and Competence Replicability , Imitability, and Appropriability Nelson and Winter, Teece : “Many organizational routines are quite tacit in nature” Appropriability is strong when a technology is both inherently difficult to replicate and the intellectual property system provides legal barriers to imitation.Capturing Value from Knowledge and Competence Replicability , Imitability, and Appropriability Assets can be the source of competitive advantage only if they are supported by strong appropriability Should be non-tradable (locational assets, knowledge asset, competences)Capturing Value from Knowledge and Competence Complementary Assets Complementary assets matter because knowledge assets are typically an intermediate good and need to be packaged into products or services to yield valueCapturing Value from Knowledge and Competence Dynamic Capabilities Ability to sense and then to seize new opportunities and to reconfigure and protect knowledge assets, competencies, complementary assets Competitive advantage required dynamic capabilities 1. External Sensing : sense the opportunity and the need for change 2. Organizational Action : once an opportunity is sensed, it must be seizedCapturing Value from Knowledge and CompetenceConclusion Intangible assets have emerged as the key drivers of competitive advantage New forms of business organization are clearly critical Deeper understanding of imitability and replicability is needed Managers who figure this out are likely to be well positioned to build and maintain competitive advantage in the next millenniumThank You !{nameOfApplication=Show}

경영/경제| 2013.04.03| 17페이지| 2,000원| 조회(78)

David Teece, Teece

미리보기

닫기
Do Strategic Groups Exist? An Economic Framework For Analysis

Do Strategic Groups Exist? An Economic Framework For Analysis David Dranove , Margaret Peteraf and Mark Shanley Strategic Management Journal , 19 : 1029-1044Introduction Key Words Strategic Group ( 전략 집단 ) Mobility Barrier ( 이동 장벽 )Literature Hunt (1972) 에 의해 처음 ‘Strategic groups’ 라는 개념이 도입 그후 Porter (1976, 1979), Caves and Porter (1977) 에 의해 발전 Porter (1979) : ‘’Strategic group’ 이란 한 산업내에서 다른 기업들과 비슷한 기업이면서 그룹 외부의 기업과는 다른 형태를 말한다 . 그리고 이들 사이에는 ‘Mobility barrier’ 가 존재한다 ’ McGee and Thomas (1986) : mobility barrier 는 오랜시간 투자된 , 되돌릴 수 없는 자산이며 외부진입자들의 모방 뿐 아니라 진입도 막는다Group-level effects Group-Level Effects Group-level process 의 결과물 Group member 들의 행동을 바꾸는데 영향을 줌 단순히 firm-level effect 를 합친 것보다는 큼 여기서는 group-level effect 를 firm-level 혹은 industry-level effect 로부터 구분하려고 함 기존의 연구들은 그룹간의 경쟁에 초점을 맞추었고 여기서는 그와 다르게 그룹내 멤버들간의 경쟁을 살펴봄 종류로는 market power, efficiency, differentiation effects 가 있음Group-level effects 1. Market power effects Mutual interdependence 한 관계로 , 각 그룹 멤버가 다른 멤버에 영향을 미침 가격을 함께 올리는 ‘collusion’ 이 한 예가 될 수 있음 기본 모델인 ‘ Cournot Model’ – 상대 기업의 행위를 예측하고 그에 기반해서 행동할 때 큰 수익 기대 가능Group-level effects 2. Efficiency effects ‘strategic alliance’ 가 좋은 예가 될 수 있음 그룹 내 interaction 이 많아질 수록 서로에게 예민해짐 공동 기술을 위한 합작투자 - 그룹 밖의 기업들에 비해 기술적 우위 차지Group-level effects 3. Differentiation effects ‘strategic interactions’ : 그룹 내 기업들간의 협력체계 예 ) purposive collusion, mutual R D, cooperative ventures 등 이와 같이 서로 ‘strategic interactions’ 를 하는 기업들은 다른 경쟁기업으로부터 ‘differentiated’ 됨Propositions Proposition 1 : Strategic groups may affect firm profitability through their effect on product prices or factor prices Differentiation effect : 높은 가격과 높은 이윤 등을 통해 수익 기대 Efficiency effect : 비용이 줄어들고 수익에 직접적인 영향을 미치며 그룹 외 기업에 대해 우위를 지니게 됨Propositions Proposition 2 : Strategic groups can affect factor prices or product prices only if the respective markets are imperfectly competitive Group-level efficiency effect 와 differentiation effect 를 통해 수익을 얻기 위해서 , 시장 경쟁은 불완전 해야 함Propositions Proposition 3 : Strategic groups can have a persistent effect on firm profitability relative to the industry average only if mobility barriers limit entry into the group Mobility barrier 는 첫째 , 외부 진입자가 모방을 통해 진입하려는 것을 막아줌 둘째 , 그룹의 어디까지가 strategic group 인지 명시해 주는 역할 . 더 집중적으로 교류할 수 있게 해줌 Oster (1982) 에 따르면 , mobility barrier 란 firm-specific sunk investment 임Propositions Proposition 4 : Strategic groups can affect the profits of member firms (i.e., groups exist) only if there are strategic interactions among the firms within the group Martin (1988) : 그룹 내 집중적 상호작용 있을때 협력이 효과적 Krugman (1991) : 지형적으로 가까울 수록 효과적 Porter (1979) : 그룹 멤버들끼지 비슷한 비용으로 비슷한 제품 생산할때 협력은 강화되고 수익 늘어남 Peteraf and Shanley (1997) : 네트워크가 강하고 많을 수록 협력강화 Tirole (1989) : 다른 시장 간에도 협력을 할 경우 그룹 멤버들은 협력하려는 동기 더 많아짐Propositions Proposition 5 : Strategic groups can have a persistent effect on profits if and only if there are mobility barriers limiting entry into the group as well as strategic interactions within the group Strategic interaction, mobility barriers 이 둘은 각각의 역할이 따로 있고 , 하나만으로는 지속적인 profit 을 기대하기 쉽지 않음 따라서 둘 다 있어야 함Critiques 이 논문에서는 한 기업이 한 group 에 있는가 없는가로 Strategic Group 을 정했지만 기업이 꼭 하나의 group 에만 속하라는 법 없음 ( 여러 개의 그룹에 속하는 경우 ) Vertical group 과 같이 산업간 경계를 넘는 경우 , 이 모델은 적절하지 못함Conclusion 한 산업 내에도 전략에 따라 strategic group 으로서 나누어 질 수 있음 기존의 firm-level 혹은 industry-level 의 영향을 다 걷어내고 오직 group-level effect 를 알아보고자 함 Strategic group 사이에서 이동하는데 mobility barrier 가 있음Thank You !{nameOfApplication=Show}

경영/경제| 2013.04.03| 15페이지| 2,500원| 조회(66)

Dranove, Do Strategic Groups Exist

미리보기

닫기