针对混合产品提供后制造企业出于盈利与保护为目的的知识封锁行为,在考虑知识共享对客户效用和知识溢出影响的基础上,构建了三种知识管理策略的供需价值创造模型。研究结果表明:混合产品专有知识共享存在以知识溢出成本系数为度量的双重边界,且保护性知识共享边界更为苛刻,当知识溢出成本系数处于边界内时,制造企业可依次实施盈利性与保护性知识共享,反之,宜实施知识封锁策略;保护性知识共享下的价值创造、最优价格和提供量对知识溢出系数的敏感性高于盈利性知识共享。此外,客户若能通过知识共享实现价值的更大创造,将有助于制造企业扩大知识共享范围。
Abstract
Service derivation has become an important strategy for manufacturing enterprises to obtain competitive advantages. Compared with the independent provision of products or services, the hybrid offerings can achieve greater value co-creation for supply and demand. As modular derivative service components are continuously embedded in hybrid offerings, the structure of hybrid offerings has become more complex and the knowledge content has sharply increased, which arouses the attention of manufacturing enterprises to knowledge management after the provision of hybrid offerings.In order to obtain more service opportunities and prevent knowledge leakage, manufacturing enterprises usually block the two types of hybrid offerings knowledge: (1) Profitable knowledge is conventional knowledge, related to services such as accidental failure handling, immediate operation & maintenance and functional repair. Profitable knowledge is external knowledge of hybrid offerings with explicit and practical characteristics, and customers can directly obtain it through learning or interacting with manufacturing enterprises. (2) Protective knowledge is unconventional knowledge, related to product structure and technological transformation. Protective knowledge involves enterprises′ intellectual property, which has tacit and value-added characteristics, so that customers usually cannot directly obtain unless manufacturing enterprises share it. However, knowledge blocking restricts the innovation and value creation of hybrid offerings by customers, which deviates from the goal of value co-creation for supply and demand through service derivation. Therefore, reasonable knowledge sharing can increase customers′ willingness to pay for hybrid offerings and customer utility, which caters to the vision of open innovation and alliance knowledge sharing advocated by the service economy. But in the meanwhile, knowledge sharing will bring the risk of knowledge spillover and accelerated diffusion, which may weaken the competitiveness of enterprises, and make enterprises easy to fall into the sharing paradox. Existing literatures have analyzed the knowledge blocking of manufacturing enterprises and designed knowledge sharing contracts, but the strategic choice of knowledge blocking or sharing after the provision of hybrid offerings is currently inconclusive. It is still necessary to further analyze the impact of knowledge blocking and sharing on the value creation for supply and demand.Manufacturing enterprises implement a two-stage knowledge blocking strategy from shallower to deeper after the provision of hybrid offerings: (1) In the initial stage after provision, manufacturing enterprises let customers grasp the using knowledge of hybrid offerings through co-production and training. Customers desire to obtain deeper knowledge of hybrid offerings, such as accidental fault handling, immediate operation & maintenance and functional repair, to better adapt to market demand fluctuations and reduce delay cost caused by untimely equipment maintenance. At this time, in order to obtain more service opportunities and profit space, manufacturing enterprises usually adopt the first stage of profitable knowledge blocking strategy. (2) As hybrid offerings tend to be homogeneous, it is easier for customers to grasp profitable knowledge. At this stage, customers desire to obtain knowledge about renovation, improvement and overhaul of hybrid offerings, to further expand the value creation scope and break the original use field of hybrid offerings. Therefore, in order to prevent the knowledge diffusion of advantageous businesses, manufacturing enterprises usually adopt the second stage of protective knowledge blocking strategy.Based on the above situation and considering the impact of knowledge sharing on customer utility and knowledge spillover, this paper constructs a model of value creation for supply and demand under three knowledge management strategies (knowledge blocking, profitable knowledge sharing and protective knowledge sharing), aiming to find the boundary of knowledge blocking or sharing. The results show that: (1) The knowledge sharing of hybrid offerings in manufacturing enterprises has a double boundary measured by knowledge spillover cost coefficient. Also, the boundary of protective knowledge sharing is narrower than profitable knowledge sharing. Only by implementing the knowledge sharing strategy within the boundary can manufacturing enterprises realize the value co-creation for supply and demand. (2) The knowledge sharing value creation and the knowledge spillover cost in manufacturing enterprises are in a trade-off relationship. The value creation, optimal price and quantity of hybrid offerings under the protective knowledge sharing are more sensitive to the knowledge spillover coefficient than profitable knowledge sharing. (3) If customers can use shared knowledge to achieve greater value creation, manufacturing enterprises are more willing to share two types of knowledge. Therefore, customers should express their desire for the knowledge and demonstrate their knowledge absorptive capacity to manufacturing enterprises. When the value creation of knowledge sharing becomes predictable and measurable, manufacturing enterprises are more willing to share knowledge with customers under the guidance of a reasonable contract.The conclusions enrich the knowledge management theory in the process of manufacturing servitization and clarify the preconditions for the knowledge sharing contract design. The implications for service-oriented manufacturing enterprises′ knowledge management after the provision of hybrid offerings are: (1) If hybrid offerings dominate the market, manufacturing enterprises can implement the knowledge blocking strategy to ensure a stable revenue stream. (2) If hybrid offerings are highly competitive in the market, manufacturing enterprises can implement the profitable knowledge sharing strategy to stimulate potential customers′ demand. (3) If hybrid offerings tend to be homogeneous, manufacturing enterprises can implement the protective knowledge sharing strategy to stimulate innovative use of hybrid offerings to achieve greater value creation for both supply and demand.
关键词
混合产品 /
知识封锁 /
知识共享 /
边界识别
Key words
hybrid offering /
knowledge blocking /
knowledge sharing /
boundary recognition
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1]罗建强, 赵艳萍, 彭永涛. 基于TRIZ的制造企业服务衍生研究[J]. 管理评论, 2016, 28(5):35-46.
[2] Shankar V, Berry L L, Dotzel T. A Practical Guide to Combining Products and Services[J]. Harvard Business Review, 2009, 87(11):94-99.
[3] Ulaga W, Reinartz W J. Hybrid Offerings: How Manufacturing Firms Combine Goods and Services Successfully[J]. Journal of Marketing, 2011, 75(6):5-23.
[4] Roster C A, Rogers M M. Profits and Perils in The Antiques and Collectibles Market: The Influence of Product Knowledge Structures on Dealer Exchange Outcomes[J]. International Review of Retail Distribution & Consumer Research, 2016, 26(1):1-16.
[5] 袁立科, 韩秋明. 知识产权限制对中国制造技术追赶的影响研究[J]. 经济问题探索, 2017,(6):39-45.
[6] Sedighi M, Splunter S V, Brazier F, et al. Exploration of Multi-layered Knowledge Sharing Participation: The Roles of Perceived Benefits and Costs[J]. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2016, 20(6):1247-1267.
[7] 吴言波, 邵云飞, 殷俊杰. 战略联盟知识异质性对焦点企业突破性创新的影响研究[J]. 管理学报, 2019, 16(4):541-549.
[8] 朱小燕, 王磊. UACC时代的管理理论研究与探索—“管理学在中国”2018年会(第11届)述评[J]. 管理学报, 2019, 16(5):652-655.
[9] Vandermerwe S, Rada J. Servitization of Business: Adding Value by Adding Services [J]. European Management Journal, 1988, 6(4):314-324.
[10] Wallin J, Parida V, Isaksson O. Understanding Product-service System Innovation Capabilities Development for Manufacturing Companies[J]. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 2015, 26(5):763-787.
[11] Kwiatkowski C, Gebauer H, Kamp B, et al. Servitization and Deservitization: Overview, Concepts, and Definitions[J]. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 2017, 60(1):4-10.
[12] Bustinza O F, Bigdeli A Z, Baines T. Servitization and Competitive Advantage: The Importance of Organizational Structure and Value Chain Position[J]. Research-Technology Management, 2015, 58(5):53-60.
[13] 和征, 陈菊红. 基于产品服务融合的服务型制造企业服务创新方法研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2015, 24(3):240-247.
[13] Grubic T. Remote Monitoring Technology and Servitization: Exploring the Relationship[J]. Computers in Industry, 2018(100):148–158.
[13] 罗建强, 胡炳坤. 混合产品提供前后知识缺口识别与补救研究[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2019, 36(22): 127-134.
[14] 卢福财, 胡平波. 全球价值网络下中国企业低端锁定的博弈分析[J]. 中国工业经济, 2008(10):23-32.
[15] 马海燕, 贺伟. 俘获型网络中的治理、绩效与升级[J]. 宏观经济研究, 2013(8):8-17.
[16] Le P B, Lei H. Fostering Knowledge Sharing Behaviours Through Ethical Leadership Practice: The Mediating Roles of Disclosure-based Trust and Reliance-based Trust in Leadership[J]. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 2018(5):1-13.
[17] 姜骞, 唐震. 知识搜索战略、动态学习与创新孵化绩效——定制化服务的调节效应[J]. 软科学, 2018, 32(8):34-37.
[18] 胡贝贝, 王胜光, 张秀峰. 创新经济体知识生产中的规模递增效应—基于我国高新区的实证检验[J]. 科研管理, 2017, 38(2):52-58.
[19] Kwahk K Y, Park D H. The Effects of Network Sharing on Knowledge-sharing Activities and Job Performance in Enterprise Social Media Environments [J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2016, 55:826-839.
[20] Grabe M E, Bas O, Van Driel I I. Defecting From The Gutenberg Legacy: Employing Images to Test Knowledge Gaps[J]. Journal of Communication, 2015, 65(2):300-319.
[21] 屠年松, 曹宇芙. 知识产权保护对服务业全球价值链地位的影响研究—基于OECD国家面板数据的实证研究[J]. 软科学, 2019, 33(6):37-41.
[22] Rahman M S, Osmangani A M, Daud N M, et al. Knowledge Sharing Behaviors Among non Academic Staff of Higher Learning Institutions: Attitude, Subjective Norms and Behavioral Intention Embedded Model [J]. Library Review, 2016, 65(1/2):65-83.
[23] 叶伟巍. 激励众包网络化创新的知识产权制度研究[J]. 管理世界, 2017, (6):176-177.
[24] 吉亚辉, 曹希广. 产业集聚的知识溢出对区域经济差距的影响——基于制造业与服务业的比较研究[J]. 中国科技论坛, 2017, (12):106-113.
[25] 张旭梅, 黄陈宣. 逆向供应链企业间知识共享的决策机制研究[J]. 管理学报, 2013, 10(2):233-237.
[26] Chesbrough H, Rosenbloom R S. The Role of The Business Model in Capturing Value from Innovation: Evidence from Xerox Corporation’s Technology Spin-off Companies[J]. Industrial and Corporate Chang, 2002, 11(3):529-555.
[27] 孟庆春, 李慧慧. 基于新产消合一考虑链间竞争的供应链价值最大化研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2015, 23(3):168-176.
[28] 曹勇, 程前, 周蕊等. 独占机制对创新绩效的影响:知识泄露与竞争对手吸收能力的调节效应[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2019, 36(7):98-104.
[29] 和征, 张志钊, 李勃. 云制造供应链知识转移激励的演化博弈模型[J]. 中国机械工程, 2020, 31(6):695-705.
基金
国家自然科学基金项目:“服务衍生情境下混合产品匹配机制与定价策略研究”(71772080,2018.01—2021.12)。