The main objective of the paper is to show the importance of building partnerships with suppliers, and to present the results of research verifying the following hypothesis: Most of the furniture industry companies in Lower Silesia take into account the partnership relations with suppliers in their formulated business strategy. The study was carried out using CATI method and included a research sample consisting of 110 enterprises of Lower Silesia. Enterprises were selected using the purposive sampling method. Selection of companies was based on factors such as: regional differences, basic products and the activity period, size organizational and legal form, basic profile of activity. Interviews with companies’ managers were based on an anonymous survey questionnaire. A time frame of research included 2 phases: phase I – exploratory phase: February – May 2013 and phase II – the essential phase: up to early 2014.
The studs has confirmed the formulated hypothesis. Most of the companies of the furniture industry have developed an overall strategy in the form of official or unofficial documents. They are characterized by a high degree of diversity, both in terms of accepted legal form, number of employees, year of establishment, business profile and range of operation. They see the impact of relationships with suppliers on the modernization of the products in the context of improving their quality. Deepening and ordering problems in the field of building partnerships with suppliers in terms of the overall business strategy formulation may be considered a theoretical contribution of this work. The results of the study should help companies in building partnerships with suppliers appropriately using the proposed roadmap; conducting quantitative and qualitative research, to assess the impact of the company's overall strategy on the relationships with suppliers.
This paper describes the most important problems related to the management of intellectual property in startups. Startups have become an inseparable element of the innovative economy. Many of these companies base their development on intellectual capital and innovations. In this context, it is extremely important to legally secure the innovations and protect intellectual property. These activities can often be the decisive factor in the development of startups. This article aims to identify, analyse and evaluate the most important issues related to the management of intellectual property in startups. The first part of this paper presents the performed literature review, which mainly concerns the definition of innovation, the state of entrepreneurship in Poland, and the definition of a startup. The second part of the article deals with the main problems related to the management of intellectual property in startups. It is divided into three issues: underestimating the importance of intellectual property, the lack of intellectual property management strategies in startups and financial challenges of startups. The main results of the research indicate that many startups still have low awareness of what is intellectual property and what can be the consequence of using exclusive rights of others. The protection of intellectual property should become one of the elements of business strategies. However, startups find that the creation of the strategy and its implementation is rather expensive.
Katarzyna Szczepańska-Woszczyna and Joanna Kurowska-Pysz
Augier, M., & Teece, D. J. (2009). Dynamic capabilities and the role of managers in businessstrategy and economic performance. Organization Science, 20(2), 410-421.
Baumann-Pauly, D., Wickert, C., Spence, L. J., & Scherer, A. G. (2013). Organizing corporate social responsibility in small and large firms: Size matters. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(4), 693-705.
Bos‐Brouwers, H. E. J. (2010). Corporate sustainability and innovation in SMEs: evidence of themes and activities in practice. Business
. Every employee in the main role]. Poznań, Poland: Exemplum.
Inamori, K. (2013). Amoeba Management. The Dynamic Management System for Rapid Market Response. Boca Raton, USA: CRC Press.
Kazuo Inamori Official Website. http://global.kyocera.com/inamori Kyocera Consulting Group. https://www.kcmc.co.jp/en/about_us/dounyuu.html
Levine, S. (2006). High performance organizations: creating a culture of agreement. Handbook of BusinessStrategy, 7(1), 375-380.
Moon, M. M. (2015). The new 70:20:20: The changing face
1. M. Nowicka-Skowron, “Logistics objectives in view of a businessstrategy,” Freiberger Forschungshefte, Freiberg: D 238 Wirtschaftswissenschaften, 2010, p. 268-277.
2. J.T. Mentzer, D.J. Flint, and G.T.M. Hult, “Logistics service quality as a segment customized-process,” in Journal of Marketing, No. 65, 2001, p. 82-104.
3. C.C. Bienstock, J.T. Mentzer, and M.M. Bird, “Measuring physical distribution service quality,” in Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, No. 25, 1997, p. 31
Leonas Ustinovičius, Arūnas Puzinas, Jovita Starynina, Mantas Vaišnoras, Oksana Černiavskaja and Robertas Kontrimovičius
performance visualisation and management: Challenges and potential. Energy and Buildings , 144 , 218-228.
Greenwood, D., Lockley, S., Malsane, S., & Matthews, J. (2010). Automated compliance checking using building information models . London, England: RICS.
Hardin, B., & McCool, D. (2015). BIM and Construction Management: Proven Tools, Methods, and Workflows . Indianapolis, USA: John Wiley & Sons.
Harris, J. (2013). Integration of BIM and BusinessStrategy . Evanston, USA: Northwestern University.
Hartmann, T., van Meerveld, H., Vossebeld, N
Katariina Koistinen, Ville Uusitalo and Anna Huostila
., Hong, P. & van Dolen, W. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in China: an analysis of domestic and foreign retailers’ sustainability dimensions. BusinessStrategy and the Environment, 19(5), 289-303. DOI: 10.1002/bse.630
7. Wiese, A., Zielke, S. & Toporowski, W. (2015). Sustainability in retailing - research streams and emerging trends. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 43(4). DOI: 10.1108/IJRDM-02-2015-0024
8. Vrechopoulos, A., O’Keefe, R., Doukidis, G. & Siomkos, G. (2004). Virtual store layout: an
of BusinessStrategies , 30 (2), 145-179.
Ugarković, M. (2008). Profit Sharing: Supplement or Substitute? In M. Ugarković (Ed.), Profit Sharing and Company Performance (pp. 71-78). Wiesbaden, Germany: Gabler Verlag, & Springer Fachmedien.
Woolfson, C., Kallaste, E., & Berzins, J. (2011). Industrial Relations and Social Dialogue in the Baltic States-Crisis, Conflict and Compromise. In S. Contrepois, V. Delteil, P. Dieuaide, S. Jeffrys (Eds.), Globalizing Employment Relations (pp. 179-197). London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Urszula Widelska, Laima Jeseviciute-Ufartiene and Zivile Tuncikiene
). Marketing in a time of toxic leadership. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 19 (1), 44-64.
Capon, N., Farley J., Hulbert, J. & Lei, D. (1991). In search of excellence ten years later: strategy and organization do matter. Management Decision, 29 (4), 12-21.
Carneiro, A. (2008). When leadership means more innovation and development. BusinessStrategy Series, 9 (4), 176-184.
Day, G. S. (1999). Creating a market-driven organization. Sloan Management Review, 41 (1), 11-22.
Deschamps, J-P. (2005). Different Leadership skills for
Anna Kononiuk, Anna Sacio-Szymańska and Judit Gáspár
Diversity: Using Foresight and Organizational Policy to Ensure Futures Thinking (forthcoming). London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sarpong, D., Maclean, M., & Alexander, E. (2013). Organizing strategic foresight: a contextual practice of “way finding”. Futures, 53, 33-41. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2013.09.001
Savioz, P., & Blum, M. (2002). Strategic Foresight Tool for SMEs: How the Opportunity Landscape Interacts with BusinessStrategy to Anticipate Technological Trends. Technovation, 22, 91-100. doi: 10.1016/S0166