اعتباریابی الگوی استراتژی های اکتساب تکنولوژی سازمان بهزیستی
محورهای موضوعی : تخصصی
مژگان رحیمی
1
(گروه مدیریت فناوری، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران)
محمود محمدی
2
(گروه مدیریت صنعتی، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران)
حسن مهرمنش
3
(گروه مدیریت صنعتی، واحد تهران مرکزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران)
کلید واژه: تعیین استراتژی, اکتساب تکنولوژی, سازمان بهزیستی, داده بنیاد,
چکیده مقاله :
اﻧﺘﺨﺎب اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋی ﮐﻼن در ﻫﺮ ﺳﺎزﻣﺎن و ﺑﻨﮕﺎه اﻗﺘﺼﺎدی ﻧﻘﺶ ﺑﺴﺰاﯾﯽ را در آﯾﻨﺪه آن ﺳﺎزﻣﺎن دارد. از آﻧﺠﺎ ﮐﻪ ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﺳﺎزﻣﺎن ﻣﺤﺪود اﺳﺖ و ﺳﺎزﻣﺎن ﻧﻤﯽﺗﻮاﻧﺪ در ﺗﻤﺎﻣﯽ ﻓﻨﺎوریﻫﺎی ﺧﻮد ﺳﺮﻣﺎﯾﻪﮔﺬاری ﻧﻤﺎﯾﺪ ﻟﺬا ﺗﻌﯿﯿﻦ اوﻟﻮﯾﺖ ﻓﻨﺎوریﻫﺎی ﺳﺎزﻣﺎن و ﺗﻌﯿﯿﻦ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﮋی ﻣﻨﺎﺳﺐ ﺑﺮای اﯾﻦ ﻓﻨﺎوریﻫﺎ ﺑﺴﯿﺎر ﻣﻬﻢ اﺳﺖ. هدف از تحقیق حاضر ارائه مدلی جهت تعیین استراتژیهای اکتساب تکنولوژی در در سازمان بهزیستی براساس نظریه زمینه ای کلاسیک بود. این تحقیق از نوع کاربردی طبقهبندی می‌شود. همچنین، از نظر چگونگی گردآوری دادههای مورد نیاز، در گروه «تحقیق آمیخته اکتشافی» است. جامعه آماری تحقیق در بخش کیفی شامل صاحب نظران حوزه مدیریت تکنولوژی و مدیران ارشد سازمان بهزیستی شهر تهران بود و اما روش نمونهگیری آن نظری بود. جامعه آماری بخش کمّی در برگیرنده کلیه مدیران و کارشناسان سازمان بهزیستی شهر تهران بود. در بخش کمّی پژوهش از روش نمونهگیری غیر احتمالی در دسترس استفاده می‌شود. لذا حجم نمونه بر اساس فرمول کوکران شامل 292 نفر مدیران و کارشناسان سازمان بهزیستی شهر تهران تعیین شد. براساس داده بنیاد کلاسیک گلیزری نقشه مدل تعیین استراتژیهای اکتساب تکنولوژی در سازمان بهزیستی مشخص شد. بر اين اساس استراتژیهای سازمانی بر مبناي استراتژیهای فنی و از طریق استراتژیهای مالی و استراتژیهای محیطی و با درنظر گرفتن عوامل مداخلهگر منجر به پیامدهای اثربخشی سازمان، رضایت ارباب رجوع و انطباق با نیازهای جامعه هدف می‌شود. نوع روابط ميان نشانگر و مضامین مدل تعیین استراتژیهای اکتساب تکنولوژی در سازمان بهزیستی نيز با توجه به كدگذاري صورت گرفته در قالب مدل ارائه گرديد.
Choosing a macro strategy in every organization and economic enterprise has a great role in the future of that organization. Since the organization's resources are limited and the organization cannot invest in all its technologies, it is very important to determine the priority of the organization's technologies and to determine the appropriate strategy for these technologies. The aim of the current research was to provide a model to determine the technology acquisition strategies in the welfare organization based on the classical contextual theory. This research is classified as applied. Also, in terms of how to collect the required data, it is in the "exploratory mixed research" group. The statistical population of the research in the qualitative part included experts in the field of technology management and senior managers of Tehran Welfare Organization, but the sampling method was theoretical. The statistical population of the quantitative part included all the managers and experts of Tehran welfare organization. Non-probability sampling method is used in the quantitative part of the research. Therefore, the sample size was determined based on Cochran's formula, including 292 managers and experts of Tehran welfare organization. Based on the data of Glaseri Classical Foundation, the model map for determining the technology acquisition strategies in the welfare organization was determined. Based on this, organizational strategies based on technical strategies and through financial strategies and environmental strategies and taking into account the intervening factors lead to the consequences of the organization's effectiveness, client satisfaction and compliance with the needs of the target society. The type of relationships between the indicators and themes of the model for determining technology acquisition strategies in the welfare organization was also presented according to the coding done in the form of the model
1. Abu Bakar, M. F., Talukder, M., Quazi, A., and Khan, M. I. Adoption of Sustainable Technology in the Malaysian SMEs Sector: Does the Role of Government Matter? Information 11:215 , 2020. doi: 10.3390/info11040215. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar.
2. Ahluwalia, S., and Kassicieh, S. Effect of Financial Clusters on Startup Mergers and Acquisitions. Int. J. Financ. Stud. 10:ijfs10010001, 2022. doi: 10.3390/ijfs10010001. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar.
3. Ahuja, G., and Katila, R. Technological Acquisitions and the Innovation Performance of Acquiring Firms: A Longitudinal Study. Strateg. Manag. J. 22, 197–220, 2001. doi: 10.1002/smj.157. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
4. Akcali, B. Y., and Sismanoglu, E. Innovation and the Effect of Research and Development (R&D) Expenditure on Growth in Some Developing and Developed Countries. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 195, 768–775, 2015. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.474. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
5. Altawalbeh, M., Fong, S. F., Thiam, W., and Alshourah, S. Mediating Role of Attitude, Subjective Norm And Perceived Behavioural Control In The Relationships Between Their Respective Salient Beliefs And Behavioural Intention To Adopt E- Learning Among Instructors In JordanianUniversities. J. Educ. Pract. 11:2015, 2019. Google Scholar..
6. Andrade, C. The P Value and Statistical Significance: Misunderstandings, Explanations, Challenges, and Alternatives. Ind. J. Psychol. Med. 41, 2019, 210–215. doi: 10.4103/IJPSYM.IJPSYM_193_19. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
7. Andrade, J., Franco, M., and Mendes, L. Facilitating and Inhibiting Effects of Organisational Ambidexterity in SME: an Analysis Centred on SME Characteristics. J. Knowl. Econ. 2022:9. doi: 10.1007/s13132-021-00831-9. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
8. Appolloni, A., Chiappetta Jabbour, C. J., D’Adamo, I., Gastaldi, M., and Settembre-Blundo, D. Green recovery in the mature manufacturing industry: The role of the green-circular premium and sustainability certification in innovative efforts. Ecol. Econ. 193:107311, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107311. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
9. Archer, L., Sharma, P., and Su, J.-J. SME credit constraints and access to informal credit markets in Vietnam. Int. J. Soc. Econ. 47, 2020,787–807. doi: 10.1108/IJSE-11-2017-0543. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
10. Ashok, M., Narula, R., and Martinez-Noya, A. How do collaboration and investments in knowledge management affect process innovation in services? J. Knowl. Manag. 20, 2016, 1004–1024. doi: 10.1108/JKM-11-2015-0429/FULL/HTML. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
11. Callegati, E., Grandi, S., and Napier, G. Business incubation and venture capital. An international survey on synergies and challenges. Abu Dhabi: IKED, 2005. Google Scholar. .
12. Cao, Q., Xie, P., Jiao, M., and Duan, W. The larger scientific and technological human scale, the better innovation effect? Evidence from key universities in China. Scientometrics 126, 2021, 5623–5649. doi: 10.1007/s11192-021-04019-5. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
13. Chan, S. H., and Lay, Y. F. Examining the reliability and validity of research instruments using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). J. Balt. Sci. Educ. 17, 2018, 239–251. doi: 10.33225/JBSE/18.17.239. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
14. Combi, M. “Cultures and Technology: An Analysis of Some of the Changes in Progress—Digital, Global and Local Culture BT,” in Cultural Heritage in a Changing World, eds K. J. Borowiecki, N. Forbes, and A. Fresa (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 2016, 3–15. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-29544-2_1. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
15. Conte, A., and Vivarelli, M. Succeeding in innovation: key insights on the role of R&D and technological acquisition drawn from company data. Empir. Econ. 47, 2014, 1317–1340. doi: 10.1007/s00181-013-0779-1. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
16. Cortright, J. New Growth Theory, New Growth Theory, Technology and Learning: Technology and Learning: A Practitioner’s Guide A Practitioner’s Guide. Portland, OR: City Observatory, 2001. Google Scholar..
17. Daft, R. Essential Organization Theory and Design. Natorp Blvd Cincinnati, OH: South-Western College Pub, 1992. Google Scholar..
18. Dash, G., and Paul, J. CB-SEM vs PLS-SEM methods for research in social sciences and technology forecasting. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 173:121092, 2021. doi: 10.1016/J.TECHFORE.2021.121092. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
19. Dintoe, S. Technology innovation diffusion at the University of Botswana: A comparative literature survey. Int. J. Educ. Dev. Using Inf. Commun. Technol. 15:2692019. Google Scholar..
20. Ehlers, M.-H., and Kerschner, C. A framework of attitudes towards technology in sustainability studies, applied to instructors of ecological economics. Vienna: IPA, 2013. Google Scholar..
21. Fartash, K., Davoudi, S. M. M., Baklashova, T. A., Svechnikova, N. V., Nikolaeva, Y. V., Grimalskaya, S. A., et al. The impact of technology acquisition & exploitation on organizational innovation and organizational performance in knowledge-intensive 22. organizations. Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 14, 2018, 1497–1507. doi: 10.29333/EJMSTE/84835. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
23. Francini, S., McRoberts, R. E., D’Amico, G., Coops, N. C., Hermosilla, T., White, J. C., et al. An open science and open data approach for the statistically robust estimation of forest disturbance areas. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 106:102663, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.jag.2021.102663. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
24. Franke, G., and Sarstedt, M. Heuristics versus statistics in discriminant validity testing: a comparison of four procedures. Internet Res. 29, 2019, 430–447. doi: 10.1108/IntR-12-2017-0515. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
25. Gabriel, K. P., and Aguinis, H. How to prevent and combat employee burnout and create healthier workplaces during crises and beyond. Bus. Horiz. 2021:37. doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2021.02.037. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
26. Garcia, R., and Calantone, R. A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: a literature review. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 19, 2002, 110–132. doi: 10.1016/S0737-6782(01)00132-1. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
27. Gastaldi, L., Lessanibahri, S., Tedaldi, G., and Miragliotta, G. Companies’ adoption of Smart Technologies to achieve structural ambidexterity: an analysis with SEM. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 174:121187, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121187. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
28. Griliches, Z. Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey. J. Econ. Lit. 28, 1990,1661–1707. Google Scholar..
29. Hadjielias, E., Dada, O., Discua Cruz, A., Zekas, S., Christofi, M., and Sakka, G. How do digital innovation teams function? Understanding the team cognition-process nexus within the context of digital transformation. J. Bus. Res. 122, 2021, 373–386. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.08.045. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
30. Hair, J. F. J., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., and Sarstedt, M. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). London: SAGE Publications, Inc, 2017. Google Scholar..
31. Hameed, W. U., Basheer, M. F., Iqbal, J., Anwar, A., and Ahmad, H. K. Determinants of Firm’s open innovation performance and the role of R & D department: an empirical evidence from Malaysian SME’s. J. Glob. Entrep. Res. 81, 2018, 1–20. doi: 10.1186/S40497-018-0112-8. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
32. Heshmati, A. The effect of credit guarantees on SMEs’ R&D investments in Korea. Asian J. Technol. Innov. 23, 2015, 407–421. doi: 10.1080/19761597.2015.1131955. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar. .
33. Higgins, C., and Walker, R. Ethos, logos, pathos: Strategies of persuasion in social/environmental reports. Account. Forum 36, 2012,194–208. doi: 10.1016/j.accfor.2012.02.003. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
34. Hu, A. G. Innovation and Economic Growth in East Asia: An Overview. Asian Econ. Policy Rev. 10, 2015, 19–37. doi: 10.1111/aepr.12078. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
35. Huggins, R., and Thompson, P. Entrepreneurship, innovation and regional growth: a network theory. Small Bus. Econ. 45, 2015,103–128. doi: 10.1007/s11187-015-9643-3. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
36. Itoandon, E. Status Report on Science. Secretariat Abuja: Technology and Innovation in Nigeria, 2016. Google Scholar..
37. Iveroth, E., and Bengtsson, F. Changing behavior towards sustainable practices using Information Technology. J. Environ. Manage. 139C, 2014, 59–68. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.11.054. PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
38. Jepson, W., Brannstrom, C., and Persons, N. “We Don’t Take the Pledge”: Environmentality and environmental skepticism at the epicenter of US wind energy development. Geoforum 43, 851–863. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2012.02.002. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
39. Keinz, P., and Marhold, K. Technological competence leveraging projects via intermediaries: Viable means to outbound open innovation and mediated capability building? Int. J. Proj. Manag. 39, 2021, 196–208. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2020.10.006. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
40. Khin, S., and Ho, T. Digital technology, digital capability and organizational performance: A mediating role of digital innovation. Int. J. Innov. Sci. 11:83, 2018. doi: 10.1108/IJIS-08-2018-0083. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
41. Khin, S., and Ho, T. C. F. Digital technology, digital capability and organizational performance: A mediating role of digital innovation. Int. J. Innov. Sci. 11, 2019, 177–195. Google Scholar..
42. Komninos, N., Kakderi, C., Collado, A., Papadaki, I., and Panori, A. Digital Transformation of City Ecosystems: Platforms Shaping Engagement and Externalities across Vertical Markets. J. Urban Technol. 28, 2021, 93–114. doi: 10.1080/10630732.2020.1805712. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
43. Leidner, D., and Kayworth, T. Review: A Review of Culture in Information Systems Research: Toward a Theory of Information Technology Culture Conflict. MIS Q. 30, 2006, 357–399. doi: 10.2307/25148735. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
44. Lubart, T. I., and Sternberg, R. J. An investment approach to creativity: Theory and data. Creat. Cogn. Approach 1995, 271–302. Google Scholar..
45. Mallinguh, E., Wasike, C., and Zoltan, Z. Technology Acquisition and SMEs Performance, the Role of Innovation, Export and the Perception of Owner-Managers. J. Risk Financ. Manag. 13:jrfm13110258, 2020. doi: 10.3390/jrfm13110258. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
46. Martín-de Castro, G., Delgado-Verde, M., Navas-López, J. E., and Cruz-González, J. The moderating role of innovation culture in the relationship between knowledge assets and product innovation. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 80, 2013, 351–363. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2012.08.012. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
47. Nguyen, K. T. P., Yeung, T., and Castanier, B. Acquisition of new technology information for maintenance and replacement policies. Int. J. Prod. Res. 55, 2017, 2212–2231. doi: 10.1080/00207543.2016.1229069. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
48. Owen-Jackson, G. Teaching design and technology in secondary schools: a reader. London: Routledge, 2002. Google Scholar..
49. Pan, W., Xie, T., Wang, Z., and Ma, L. Digital economy: An innovation driver for total factor productivity. J. Bus. Res. 139, 2022, 303–311. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.09.061. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
50. Peterson, R. A., and Kim, Y. On the relationship between coefficient alpha and composite reliability. J. Appl. Psychol. 98, 2013,194–198. doi: 10.1037/a0030767. PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
51. Quartey, P., Turkson, E., Abor, J. Y., and Iddrisu, A. M. Financing the growth of SMEs in Africa: What are the contraints to SME financing within ECOWAS? Rev. Dev. Financ. 7, 2017, 18–28. doi: 10.1016/j.rdf.2017.03.001. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
52. Renko, M., Yli-Renko, H., and Denoo, L. Sold, not bought: Market orientation and technology as drivers of acquisitions of private biotechnology ventures. J. Bus. Ventur. 37:106022, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2020.106022. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
53. Rogers, E., and Singhal, A. “Diffusion of Innovations,” in An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and Research, eds M. Salwen and D. W. Stacks (Norwood, NJ: Lawrence), 1996, 409–420. Google Scholar..
54. Rogers, E., Singhal, A., and Quinlan, M. “Diffusion of Innovations,” in An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and Research, 3rd Edn, eds M. Salwen, D. W. Stacks, and K. C. Eichhorn (New York, NY: Routledge), 2019, 182–186. doi: 10.4324/9780203710753-35. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar.
55. Romer, P. New goods, old theory, and the welfare costs of trade restrictions. J. Dev. Econ. 43, 1994, 5–38. doi: 10.1016/0304-3878(94)90021-3. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
56. Romer, P. M. Why, Indeed, in America? Theory, History, and the Origins of Modern Economic Growth. Am. Econ. Rev. 86, 1996, 202–206. Google Scholar..
57. Romer, P. M., and Griliches, Z. Implementing a National Technology Strategy with Self-Organizing Industry Investment Boards. Brookings Pap. Econ. Act. Microeconomics 1993, 345–399. doi: 10.2307/2534742. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar.
58. Rosenzweig, P. M. No Title. Acad. Manag. Rev. 18, 2022, 370–374. doi: 10.2307/258765. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar.
59. Sahin, I. Detailed review of Rogers’ diffusion of innovations theory and educational technology-related studies based on Rogers’ theory. Turkish Online J. Educ. Technol. 5, 2006, 14–23. Google Scholar..
60. Shrum, L., Liu, M., Nespoli, M., and Lowrey, T. Persuasion in the Marketplace: How Theories of Persuasion Apply to Marketing and Advertising. London: SAGE, 2012. doi: 10.4135/9781452218410.n19. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
61. Stanley, P., and Swann, B. “Organisational culture and its impact on service delivery,” in The handbook of forensic learning disabilities, eds T. Riding, C. Swann, and B. Swann (London: Routledge), 2021, 169–190. Google Scholar..
62. Sternberg, R. J. The assessment of creativity: An investment-based approach. Creat. Res. J. 24, 2012, 3–12. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2012.652925. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
63. Sternberg, R. J., and Lubart, T. I. An Investment Theory of Creativity and Its Development. Hum. Dev. 34, 1–31, 1991. Google Scholar..
64. Sternberg, R. J., and Lubart, T. I. Investing in Creativity. Psychol. Inq. 4, 1993, 229–232. Google Scholar.
65. Sternberg, R. J., O’Hara, L. A., and Lubart, T. I. Creativity as Investment. Calif. Manage. Rev. 40, 1997, 8–21. doi: 10.2307/41165919.. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
66. Stratton, S. J. Population Research: Convenience Sampling Strategies. Prehosp. Disaster Med. 36, 2021, 373–374. doi: 10.1017/S1049023X21000649..
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar. 67. Strobl, A., Bauer, F., and Degischer, D. Contextualizing deliberate learning from acquisitions: The role of organizational and target contexts. J. Bus. Res. 139, 2022,194–207. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.09.043. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
68. Tolba, A., Seoudi, I., and Fahmy, K. Factors influencing intentions of Egyptian MSME owners in taking commercial bank loans. J. Small Bus. Entrep. 27, 2014, 497–518. doi: 10.1080/08276331.2015.1102478. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
69. Tsilionis, K., and Wautelet, Y. A model-driven framework to support strategic agility: Value-added perspective. Inf. Softw. Technol. 141:106734, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.infsof.2021.106734. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
70. Wang, T., Gao, J., Jia, Y., and Wang, C. L. The double-edged sword effect of adaptation strategy on performance: The mediation of legitimacy and synergy. J. Bus. Res. 139, 2022, 448–456. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.10.004. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
71. Winship, C., and Zhuo, X. Interpreting t-Statistics Under Publication Bias: Rough Rules of Thumb. J. Quant. Criminol. 36, 2020, 329–346. doi: 10.1007/S10940-018-9387-8. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
72. Wyrwicka, M. Technological Culture and Its Interpretation: Research Results in Poland. Hum. Factors Ergon. Manuf. Serv. Ind. 21, 2011, 178–187. doi: 10.1002/hfm.20254. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
73. Xiao, S., Lew, Y. K., and Park, B. II International new product development performance, entrepreneurial capability, and network in high-tech ventures. J. Bus. Res. 124, 2021, 38–46. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.048. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
74. Xiaolong, T., Gull, N., Iqbal, S., Asghar, M., Nawaz, A., Albasher, G., et al. Exploring and Validating the Effects of Mega Projects on Infrastructure Development Influencing Sustainable Environment and Project Management. Front. Psychol. 12:663199, 2021. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.663199. PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text Google Scholar..
75. Yasa, N. N. K., Ekawati, N. W., and Rahmayanti, P. L. D. THE ROLE OF DIGITAL INNOVATION IN MEDIATING DIGITAL CAPABILITY ON BUSINESS PERFORMANCE. Eur. J. Manag. Mark. Stud. 2019:636. Google Scholar..
76. Yatsenko, Y., and Hritonenko, N. Technological Breakthroughs and Asset Replacement. Eng. Econ. 54, 2009, 81–100. doi: 10.1080/00137910902893656. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..
77. Zirra, D. Investment’s Efficiency Handbook - Theory and practice. Bucharest: Editura Universitară, 2020. doi: 10.5682/9786065916005. CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar..