نقش قابلیتهای مدیریتی پویا و آمادگی سازمانی در تحول شهر هوشمند (مورد مطالعه: شهرداری تهران)
محورهای موضوعی : مطالعات مدیریت شهرینوید آهنگری 1 , سید محسن میر 2
1 - دکتری جغرافیا و برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشگاه خوارزمی تهران، ایران.
std_navid.ahangari@alumni.khu.ac (نویسنده مسئول)
2 - دکتری مدیریت و برنامه‌ریزی فرهنگی، دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد،دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران. mohsen.mir16885@gmail.com
کلید واژه: قابلیتهای مدیریتی پویا, آمادگی سازمانی, تحول شهر هوشمند, شهرداری تهران,
چکیده مقاله :
مقدمه و هدف پژوهش: قابلیتهای مدیریتی پویای و آمادگی سازمانی مدیریت شهری دو رکن اساسی تحول شهر هوشمند را تشکیل می‌دهند تا به مدیران کمک کنند با استفاده از فرصت‌ها و پیکربندی مجدد منابع سازمانی، شهر خود را در مسیر توسعه به سمت شهر هوشمند هدایت نمایند. در این راستا، پژوهش حاضر باهدف نقش قابلیتهای مدیریتی پویا و آمادگی سازمانی در تحول شهر هوشمند تدوین‌شده است. روش پژوهش: روش تحقیق از نظر هدف کاربردی، ازنظر شیوه گردآوری داده ها کمی، از نظر نوع توصیفی - تحلیلی از شاخه مدل سازی معادلات ساختاری می باشد. ابزار گرداوری داده ها پرسشنامه پیمایشی استاندارد می باشد. جامعه آماری کلیه کارکنان ستادی اداره کل های انتخابی شهرداری تهران به تعداد 324 نفر می باشد که حجم نمونه به تعداد 176 نفر مشخص گردید. برای تجزیه‌وتحلیل داده ها از آزمون فریدمن و رویکرد حداقل مربعات جزئی (Smartpls) استفاده‌شده است. یافته ها: نتایج نشان داد که وضعیت میانگین متغیرهای قابلیت های مدیریتی پویا (03/3)، آمادگی سازمانی (36/3) و شهر هوشمند (31/3) در بین دامنه 51/2 تا 5/3 یعنی سطح نیمه مطلوب قرار دارند. نتایج در بخش رتبه بندی مؤلفه ها نشان داد که مؤلفه آمادگی استراتژیک (45/8) در رتبه اول اهمیت و مؤلفه قابلیت نوآوری (18/6) در رتبه آخر اهمیت قرار دارند. نتایج در بخش تحلیل استنباطی نشان داد که تأثیر قابلیت های مدیریتی پویا بر شهر هوشمند در سطح ضریب معنا داری (27/3) و بر آمادگی سازمانی در سطح ضریب معنا داری (69/5) مستقیم و معنادار است. تأثیر قابلیت های مدیریتی پویا بر شهر هوشمند با اثر میانجی آمادگی سازمانی در سطح ضریب معناداری (68/3) مستقیم و معنا دار است. همچنین تأثیر آمادگی سازمانی بر شهر هوشمند در سطح ضریب معناداری (42/5) مستقیم و معنا دار است. نتیجه گیری: بنابراین قابلیتهای مدیریتی پویا و آمادگی سازمانی به طور گسترده ای می توانند به‌عنوان پایه ای ضروری برای توجه به چالش های تحول شهر هوشمند شناخته شوند.
Introduction and purpose: Dynamic management capabilities and organizational readiness are the two fundamental pillars of smart city transformation that enable managers to guide their city towards a development path for a smart city by utilizing opportunities and reconfiguring Organizational resources. In this regard, the current research was conducted with the aim of exploring the role of dynamic management capabilities and organizational readiness in the evolution of smart cities. Methods: The research methodology employed a practical approach for the purpose of collecting quantitative data using a descriptive-analytical type, specifically through the use of structural equation modeling. The data collection tool is a standard survey questionnaire. The statistical population comprises 324 staff members of the Department of Elections of Tehran Municipality, with a sample size of 176 individuals. Data analysis was conducted using Friedman's test and the Partial Least Squares approach (Smartpls). Results: The results indicate that the average status of variables, including dynamic management capabilities (3.03), organizational readiness (3.36), and smart city (3.31), ranges from 2.51 to 3.5, implying a semi-optimal level. In terms of the ranking of components, the strategic readiness component (8.45) holds the highest importance, whereas the innovation capability component (6.18) holds the least importance. Furthermore, the inferential analysis section indicates that dynamic management capabilities have a direct and significant impact on the smart city at the level of significance coefficient (3.27) and on organizational readiness at the level of significance coefficient (5.69). The effect of dynamic management capabilities on the smart city is also direct and significant with the mediating effect of organizational readiness at the level of significance coefficient (3.68). Moreover, the effect of organizational readiness on the smart city is direct and significant at the level of significance coefficient (5.42.( Conclusion: Therefore, dynamic management capabilities and organizational readiness are essential foundations for addressing the challenges of smart city transformation.
_||_
Adner, R., Helfat, C. E. (2003). Corporate effects and dynamic managerial capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 1011–1025. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.331
Alkhamery, N., Zainol, F. A., & Al-Nashmi, M. (2021). The Role of Dynamic Capabilities in Reconfiguring Operational Capabilities for Digital Business Transformation. The Journal of Management Theory and Practice (JMTP), 2(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.37231/jmtp.2021.2.1.59.
Appio, F. P., Lima, M., & Paroutis, S. (2019). Understanding smart cities: Innovation ecosystems, technological advancements, and societal challenges. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 142, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. techfore.2018.12.018 Armenakis, A. A., Harris, S.
Barrutia, J.M., Echebarria, C., Aguado-Moralejo, I., Apaolaza-Ibáñez, V., Hartmann, P. (2022). Leading smart city projects: Government dynamic capabilities and public value creation, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C). DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121679.
Chong, M., Habib, A., Evangelopoulos, N., Park, H. W. (2018). Dynamic capabilities of a smart city: An innovative approach to discovering urban problems and solutions. Government Information Quarterly, 35(4), 682–692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. giq.2018.07.005
Cinite, I., Duxbury, L. E., Higgins, C. (2009). Measurement of perceived organizational readiness for change in the public sector. British Journal of Management, 20(2), 265–277. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2008.00582.x
Cocchia, A. (2014). Smart and digital city: A systematic literature review. Smart city, 13–43.
Csukas, M. S., Szabo, R. Z. (2021). The many faces of the smart city: Differing value propositions in the activity portfolios of nine cities. Cities, 112. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cities.2021.103116
de Jong, M., Joss, S., Schraven, D., Zhan, C. J., & Weijnen, M. (2015). Sustainable-smart-resilient-low carbon-eco-knowledge cities; making sense of a multitude of concepts promoting sustainable urbanization. Journal of Cleaner Production, 109, 25–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.004
Gil-Garcia, J. R., Pardo, T. A., Nam, T. (2015). What makes a city smart? Identifying core components and proposing an integrative and comprehensive conceptualization. Information Polity, 20(1), 61–87. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP- 150354
Guenduez, A.A., Mergel, I. (2022), The role of dynamic managerial capabilities and organizational readiness in smart city transformation, Cities-103791, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103791.
Gupta, A., Panagiotopoulos, P., & Bowen, F. (2015). Toward capabilities approach to smart city management. In M. Janssen, K. Axelsson, O. Glassey, B. Klievink, R. Krimmer, I. Lindgren, … D. Trutnev (Eds.), Open and big data management and innovation. Cham: Springer.
Hair Jr., J.F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M., Gudergan, S.P. (2017). Advanced Issues in Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. saGe publications.
Hair, J.F., Risher, J.J., Sarstedt, M. Ringle, C.M. (2019), When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM, European Business Review, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 2-24.
Helfat, C. E., Campo-Rembado, M. A. (2016). Integrative capabilities, vertical integration, and innovation over successive technology lifecycles. Organization Science, 27(2), 249–264. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2015.1045
Helfat, C. E., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, M., Peteraf, M. A., Singh, H., Teece, D. J., Winter, S. G. (2007). Dynamic capabilities: Understanding strategic change in organizations. Malden, Mass: Blackwell Publishing.
Helfat, C. E., Martin, J. A. (2015). Dynamic managerial capabilities: Review and assessment of managerial impact on strategic change. Journal of Management, 41(5), 1281–1312. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314561301
Helfat, C. E., Raubitschek, R. S. (2018). Dynamic and integrative capabilities for profiting from innovation in digital platform-based ecosystems. Research Policy, 47 (8), 1391–1399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.01.019.
Heubeck, T., Managerial capabilities as facilitators of digital transformation? Dynamic managerial capabilities as antecedents to digital business model transformation and firm performance, Digital Business, Volume 3, Issue 1, June 2023, 100053. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.digbus.2023.100053
Israilidis, J., Odusanya, K., & Mazhar, M. U. (2021). Exploring knowledge management perspectives in smart city research: A review and future research agenda. International Journal of Information Management, 56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijinfomgt.2019.07.015
Ji, T, Chen, J-H, Su, Y-C. (2021), Towards people-centric smart city development: Investigating the citizens’ preferences and perceptions about smart-city services in Taiwan, Sustainable Cities and Society14 January 2021Volume 67 (Cover date: April 2021) Article 102691
Kamolov, S., Kandalintseva, Y. (2020). Defining the Readiness for Smart City Concept: Russian Municipalities Study," Springer Books, in: Julia Kovalchuk (ed.), Post-Industrial Society, chapter 0, pages 211-221, Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-59739-9_17.
Khan, H. H., Malik, M. N., Zafar, R., Goni, F. A., Chofreh, A. G., Klemes, J. J., & Alotaibi, Y. (2020). Challenges for sustainable smart city development: A conceptual framework. Sustainable Development, 28(5), 1507–1518. https://doi.org/10.1002/ sd.2090
Khoa, B.T. (2022). Dataset for the electronic customer relationship management based on S-O-R model in electronic commerce, Data in Brief12 March 2022. 42. Article 108039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2022.108039
Komninos, N., Mora, L. (2018). Exploring the big picture of smart city research. Scienze Regionali, 1, 15–38.
Kumar, H., Singh, M. K., Gupta, M. P., Madaan, J. (2020). Moving towards smart cities: Solutions that lead to the smart city transformation framework. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.04.024.
Laufs, J., Borrion, H., Bradford, B. (2020). Security and the smart city: A systematic review. Sustainable Cities and Society, 55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102023.
Lin, T.C., Sheng, M. L., Wang, K. J. (2020). Dynamic capabilities for smart manufacturing transformation by manufacturing enterprises, Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 28:3, 403-426, DOI: 10.1080/19761597.2020.1769486.
Linde, L., Sjodin, D., Parida, V., Wincent, J. (2021). Dynamic capabilities for ecosystem orchestration a capability-based framework for smart city innovation initiatives. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. techfore.2021.120614
Lokuge, S., Sedera, D., Grover, V., Xu, D. M. (2019). Organizational readiness for digital innovation: Development and empirical calibration of a construct. Information & Management, 56(3), 445–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2018.09.001
Marchal, V., Dellink, R., van Vuuren, D., Clapp, C., Château, J., Lanzi, E., van Vliet, J. (2012). OECD environmental outlook to 2050: the consequences of inaction. http:// www.oecd.org/env/indicators-modelling-outlooks/oecd-environmental-outlook- 1999155x.htm, Accessed date: 30 May 2018.
Mergel, I. (2018). Open innovation in the public sector: Drivers and barriers for the adoption of Challenge.gov. Public Management Review, 20(5), 726–745. https://doi. org/10.1080/14719037.2017.1320044
Mora, L., Deakin, M., Reid, A. (2019). Strategic principles for smart city development: A multiple case study analysis of European best practices. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 142, 70–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.035
Mora, L., Deakin, M., Reid, A., Angelidou, M. (2019). How to overcome the dichotomous nature of smart city research: Proposed methodology and results of a pilot study. Journal of Urban Technology, 26(2), 89–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10630732.2018.1525265
Neumann, O., Matt, C., Hitz-Gamper, B.S., Schmidthuber, L., Stürmer, M. (2019). Joining forces for public value creation? Exploring collaborative innovation in smart city initiatives. Gov. Inf. Q. 36 (4), 101411.
Nicolas, C., Kim, J., Chi, S. (2020). Quantifying the dynamic effects of smart city development enablers using structural equation modeling. Sustainable Cities and Society, 53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101916
Ogiemwonyi, O. (2022). Factors influencing generation Y green behaviour on green products in Nigeria: An application of theory of planned behaviour, Environmental and Sustainability Indicators 13 (2022) 100164, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2021.100164.
Patr ̃ao, C., Moura, P., Almeida, A. (2020). Review of Smart City Assessment Tools Smart. Cities 2020, 3(4), 1117-1132; https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities3040055
Ridder, H. G., Doege, V., Martini, S. (2007). Differences in the implementation of diagnosis-related groups across clinical departments: A german hospital case study. Health Services Research, 42(6), 2120–2139. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475- 6773.2007.00723.x
Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M, Hair, J.F. (2021). Partial least squares structural equation modeling. In: Handbook of market research. Cham: Springer International Publishing; p. 587e632 pp. 587e632. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-57413-4_15.
Sert-Ozen, A., Kalaycioglu, O. (2022). The Effect of Occupational Moral Injury on Career Abandonment Intention Among Physicians in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic, Safety and Health at WorkAvailable online 15 December 2022In press, corrected proof. DOI: 10.1016/j.shaw.2022.12.002.
Shwedeh, F., Hami, N., Abu Bakar, S. Z., Mat Yamin, F., and Anuar, A. (2022). The Relationship between Technology Readiness and Smart City Performance in Dubai. Journal of Advanced Research in Applied Sciences and Engineering Technology. 29, 1, 1–12. DOI:https://doi.org/10.37934/araset.29.1.112.
Teece, D. J. (2012). Dynamic capabilities: Routines versus entrepreneurial action. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1395–1401. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 6486.2012.01080.x
Teece, D. J. (2016). Dynamic capabilities and entrepreneurial management in large organizations: Toward a theory of the (entrepreneurial) firm. European Economic Review, 86, 202–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2015.11.006
Vogl, T. M., Seidelin, C., Ganesh, B., Bright, J. (2020). Smart technology and the
emergence of algorithmic bureaucracy: Artificial intelligence in UK local authorities.
Public Administration Review, 80(6), 946–961. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13286.
Weiner, B. J. (2009). A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Science, 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-67
Wilson, C., Mergel, I. (2022). Overcoming barriers to digital government: Mapping the strategies of digital champions. Government Information Quarterly. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.giq.2022.101681.
Yigitcanlar, T., Degirmenci, K., Butler, L., & Desouza, K. C. (2022). What are the key factors affecting smart city transformation readiness? Evidence from Australian cities. Cities, 120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.10343.
Yigitcanlar, T., Kamruzzaman, M., Buys, L., Ioppolo, G., Sabatini-Marques, J., da Costa, E. M., Yun, J. J. (2018). Understanding ’smart cities’: Intertwining development drivers with desired outcomes in a multidimensional framework. Cities, 81, 145–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2018.04.003
Zhao, F., Fashola, O. I., Olarewaju, T. I., & Onwumere, I. (2021). Smart city research: A holistic and state-of-the-art literature review. Cities, 119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cities.2021.103406.
Zheng, C. J., Yuan, J. F., Zhu, L., Zhang, Y. J., Shao, Q. H. (2020). From digital to sustainable: A scientometric review of smart city literature between 1990 and 2019. Journal of Cleaner Production, 258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120689.
