기술기반 부품,소재기업의 성장전략 분석 = The Growth Strategies of Technology-based Materials and Components Fifms

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Technology-based materials and components firms are important players in the national econo-my, as these firms provide the competitive nucleus in industries which use their products as inputs. Among small and medium sized rums (SMEs), technology-based materials and components firms have demonstrated strong growth even in the midst of the global economic depression. Korean firms of this type have become significant players in the global marketplace. However, the common success factors of these firms have not been investigated in a systematic way to date. By identifying the firm characteristics, paths of growth and success factors which have led to the success of firms producing similar products we will be better positioned to frame the most effective government support policy for industry and the needs of SMEs. To analyze the above objectives, we have adopted the following case study framework: Using background theories of resources and capabilities, and the characteristics of organization and external environments (market and industry), each firm`s characteristics are reviewed in the dimensions of organization, control and incentives, networks, market position, and the six forces of the industry as well as each firm`s position in it. Furthermore, by focusing on firm strategy with regards to technology development, commercialization, growth and performance, we have identified the strategic fits among success factors in the backdrop of the organiza-tional characteristics, industrial forces and cooperation network structures in the value chain. The strategic foci identified are upgrading, diversification and alliances. The upgrading strategies used by firms are progress, product, functionality, technology, and inter-sectoral product upgrading. The diversification strategies include product and geographic dimemsions. The strategic alliances employed are backward and for-ward integration as well as network strategies. This study analyzes the growth strategies of technology-based materials and components rums. From the digital electronics, materials and industrial electronics industries, we selected 19 firms that have been success-ful in developing technologies and utilizing them in the market. By reviewing the organizational character-istics of the rums (including the CEO`s risk profile), their industrial environments, and their strategies, we have tried to identify and categorize the common factors of their success. The firms are divided into two technology types: Original technology and application technology. In addi-tion to the corresponding products and the value chain of the firms, their alliance and cooperation types have also been considered in order to recognize the relevant growth strategies. Although this paper explains the success factors in firm growth, the framework is not dynamic which may explain the current leading factor - progress - in the performance of firm growth. The analysis highlights several points which may suggest im- portant strategic fits of technology-driven firms. The strategic fits are categorized firstly according to their technology type, since these types dictate the most prominent characteristic differences between firms that may thereupon affect the differences in product production and growth strategies. The findings of the study are as follows. First, in the case of original technology firms, if there exist entry barriers and few substitutes in the industry, the firms use low risk upgrading strategies such as improvement of products and technology, rather than high-risk innovative strategies such as inter-sectoral new product development. The incumbent firms do not need to take on risky projects in a secure market. However, when the CEO is a risk taker, the firm tries to expand to foreign markets with big allied firms. In these cases, the firm will take a `little` bold step such as vertical integration in the value chain, related diversification or inter-sectoral product development. Typically, the risk-taking CEO attempts to use external financial resources for such projects, while the risk-averse CEO will choose to use retained earnings inside the firm instead. In a mature market, firms are likely to finance from external sources to balance the risk associated with exploring inter-sectoral product development. Second, in an alliance strategy, an original technology firm having a good relationship with a customer firm will pursue foreign expansion with an interdependent customer firm through forward alliance, in order to diversity products and/or develop new products inter-sectorally. On the other hand, the application technology firm in cooperation with a customer firm of higher bargaining power will use the customization strategy for their ally abroad with help from the ally. Third, in the application firm`s case, a strategy employing mass production is used to utilize production economies of scale. The economies of scale from mass production will ensure the price competitiveness of the firm in the market. Brand reputation along with low price from mass production in the various marketing channels allows the firm to pursue localization technology upgrading and inter-sectoral product development. Fourth, localization technology upgrading leads to securing a sustainable technology brand, which in turn makes external financing possible. The vertical alliance, forward as well as backward, also helps with related diversification and inter-sectoral diversification. Vertically-allied firms thus develop a core competency in for-eign expansion with the help of the big buyer firm`s power in marketing channels. In the virtuous cycle of mass production comprising strategic alliances with backward and forward firms, and technology/product up-grading and diversification - vertical alliances are the key success factor in the survival and growth of materials and components firms. Fifth, growth strategies are dependent upon the nature of the CEOs` risk profile. With a risk-taking CEO, outside financing is preferred for innovation and product development, while a risk-averse CEO prefers to use internal funding for less risky projects and for compensating researchers. Original technology firms use verti-cal integration in the value chain, while application technology firms use vertical alliances. From the results of this study a few policy recommendations are suggested: Government support in the form of technology or financing is very important for the survival of technol-ogy-driven firms. Also, alliances with big firms are essential in the growth of technology-driven firms. Government policy to promote alliances between big firms and small to medium sized firms is a must to secure sustainable growth of SMEs. Since technology-driven firms use external research funds for innovative activities such as development of new products, external financing needs to be available to firms with innovative but high-risk projects. The government may support those firms by providing credit guarantees or financial support. However, tight mon-itoring should accompany generous support for high risk projects to avoid the pitfalls of moral hazard. Foreign marketing channel access and local information in foreign countries are also valuable assets to the success of technology-driven firms in international expansion. Governments may provide this information and connect firms to foreign marketing channels in expansion markets, enhancing the sustainability of technol-ogy-driven firm growth. The study has the following limitations. By selecting successful firms as cases, this study does not cover the initial stage of the firm`s growth. Although the objective of this study is to identify the success factors of the technology-driven firms, the survival of the SMEs in the initial stage is very crucial for the ensuing growth after the survival. The distinctions between original technology firms and application strategies are not quite conspicuous, although there are many different aspects between firms in two technology categories. If we have enough number of firms, more systematic statistical analysis of the success factors that guarantee the high returns of the technology-driven firms.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김영배, "혁신형 중소기업 : 기업특성, 기술학습과 경영성과" 과학기술정책연구원 2005

2 민철구, "혁신주도형 중소기업 육성을 위한 정책방안 : 공급가치사슬의 관점에서" 과학기술정책연구원 5-07, 2005

3 홍장표, "한국, 미국, 일본의 기업간 거래관계와도급형 거래의 개혁방안" 한국지역사회학회 12 (12): 43-69, 2004

4 한정화, "중소기업과 시장 및 정부, 무엇이 문제인가?" 주제발표자료 2005

5 김선화, "중소기업 성장 결정요인에 관한 연구" 한국중소기업학회 31 (31): 237-254, 2009

6 함준호, "중소기업 금융과 은행의 역할: 혁신 중소기업을 중심으로" 한국은행 11 (11): 108-141, 2005

7 배준우, "우리나라 기술집약적 벤처기업의 국제화 과정에 대한 사례연구" 한국중소기업학회 6 (6): 41-74, 2003

8 서울대학교, "부품소재기술개발사업 성과분석사업 2차년도 보고서" 산업자원부 2003

9 윤병섭, "대기업과 중소기업 사이 성과공유제 성공요인 분석" 한국중소기업학회 32 (32): 83-113, 2010

10 전국경제인연합회, "기업의 대․중소기업 협력실태와 시사점" 2005

11 Leonard-Barton, D, "Wellspring of Knowledge : Building and Sustaining the Sources of Innovation" HBS Press 1995

12 Teece, D. J, "Towards an Economic Theory of the Multi-product Firm" North-Holland 3 : 39-63, 1982

13 Rumelt R. P, "Theory, Strategy, and Entrepreneurship. in: New Technology-Based Firms and The Emergence of New Industries : Some Employment Implications" 3 : 87-99, 1988

14 Porter, M. E, "The Structure within Industries and Companies' Performance" 61 (61): 214-227, 1979

15 Davis, G, "The Decline and Fall of the Conglomerate Firm in the 1980s : The Deinstitutionalization of the an Organizational Form" 59 : 547-570, 1994

16 Tushman, M. L, "Technological discontinuties and organizational environments" 31 : 439-465, 1986

17 Mowery, D, "Technological Overlap and Interfirm Coordination: Implication for the Resource-based View of the Firm" 27 : 507-523, 1998

18 Park, C, "Studies on value chain-based innovation system : Evidence from the intermediate goods industry in Korea" Seoul National University 2006

19 Coleman, J, "Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital" 94 : 95-120, 1988

20 Stuart, T, "Network Positions and Propensities to Collaborate : An Investigation of Strategic Alliance Formation in a High-technology Industry" 43 : 668-698, 1998

21 Powell, W, "Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation : Networks of Learning and Biotechnology" 116-145, 1996

22 Hicks, D, "Highly innovative small firms in the markets for technology" 34 : 703-716, 2005

23 Hitt, M, "Guest Editor's Introduction to The Special Issue, Strategic Entrepreneurship : Entrepreneurial Strategies for Wealth Creation" 22 : 479-491, 2001

24 Christensen, C. M, "Explaining the attacker's advantage : Technological paradigms, organisational dynamics and the value network" 24 : 233-257, 1995

25 Klepper, S, "Entry by Spinoffs" Mimeo 2000

26 Eisenhardt, K. M, "Building Theories from Case Study Research" 14 : 532-550, 1989

27 Henderson, R. M, "Architectural innovation: the reconfiguring of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms" 35 (35): 9-30, 1990

28 Chang, S. J, "An Evolutionary Perspective of Diversification and Restructuring : Entry, Exit, and Economic Performance" 17 : 587-611, 1996