3.2-165-Gajowiak S u g g e s t e d c i t a t i o n : Gajowiak, M. (2016). High-Tech SMEs in the concept of intelligent organizations: The reconstruction of the approach in the light of empirical research. In: M. Kosała, M. Urbaniec & A. Żur (Eds.), Entrepreneurship: Antecedents and Effects (“Przed- siębiorczość Międzynarodowa”, vol. 2, no. 2). Kraków: Cracow University of Economics, pp. 165-177. High-Tech SMEs in the concept of intelligent organizations: The reconstruction of the approach in the light of empirical research Małgorzata Gajowiak Poznan University of Technology Faculty of Engineering Management, Department of Economic Science ul. Strzelecka 11, 60-965 Poznań, Poland e-mail: malgorzata.gajowiak@put.poznan.pl Abstract: The objective of this paper is to present the concept of intelligent organizations, which is nowadays believed to be the highest developed form of a company and to check if high-tech small and me- dium enterprises (SMEs) from Greater Poland region are run according to the concept of intellec- tual entrepreneurship. Verification whether the high-tech SMEs meet the criteria of intelligent or- ganizations was tested on a sample 44 SMEs using a survey CATI tool. Data analysis consisted of comparing the values of three statistical measures (dominant, median, arithmetic average) of sev- enteen items. The survey results confirm that these enterprises base their actions on intellectual capital, which becomes the most important element of business management in the strategic per- spective. Thus, their actions are consistent with the concept of intellectual entrepreneurship. The originality of this work lies in studying the concept of intellectual entrepreneurship taking into account companies from high-tech industry. Up till now companies from Greater Poland region were analysed just for their level of innovations, not intellectual capital. It is important to encourage more companies to be run according to the intellectual entrepreneurship concept due to unstable circumstances worldwide. Keywords: globalization; intellectual entrepreneurship; intelligent organization; human capital; social capital JEL codes: O31, O32 1. INTRODUCTION It is difficult to find an example of a wealthy country with a closed economy. Open borders and free movement of the means of production, final goods and services until recently guaranteed both economic development and technological progress around the world (Geenhuizen & Ratti, 2001). Ideal examples of this are the econ- omies of such countries as South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and China. And although the literature points to numerous indisputable advantages of the internationalisation of markets, institutions and outcomes, and their aggregated 166 Małgorzata Gajowiak form of globalization, its disadvantages must also be pointed out. It can undoubt- edly be attributed with the following negative traits: the lack of global coordination, the impairment of authoritarian state in the economy, the accumulation of negative externalities, the dominance of microeconomic interest and the relaxation of rigor in terms of risk-taking by managers (Harrison, 2007). These aspects "contributed to a violation of the fundamental economic balance between the need for growth and profitability and the pursuit of security. The other side of the disturbed balance between profitability and security is economic instability" (Szymański, 2011, p. 15). Obvious examples of such instability can, in turn, be found in such countries as Greece and Cyprus, where the disregard for economic security has shaken not only their economies, but – given the high degree of dependence – also the entire European Community. Economic reality is now characterized by the scarcity of confidence, trust and stability. Modern enterprises do business in an environment of generalized insecu- rity that hinders strategic planning in the long term, but promotes opportunistic be- haviour (Cook & Kramer, 2004; Roubin & Mihim, 2011). As a consequence, veri- fication, or adjustment activities have become increasingly difficult in observed high complexity of modern world, and it forces a new look at entrepreneurship and competitiveness. In literature one may find new concepts for understanding entre- preneurship in terms of new ideas, knowledge management, intellectual capital, in- novation diffusion, as well as the ways of organizing the company (Ismail, Poolton &Sharifi, 2011; Teece, 2007). The main purpose of this article is to point out the concept of an intelligent organization, which conducts its activity based on intellectual capital, and the syn- ergy of human, social and organizational capitals. Bendkowski (2012, p. 21) states that the idea behind an intelligent organization "is to use its resources of knowledge with their simultaneous restoration and renovation. Thus, allowing for high flexi- bility and smooth adaptation to the environment and the anticipation of external conditions". The theoretical background of the problem has been further enhanced by the prospect of research on the high-tech SMEs sector in Greater Poland. The participation in the study (using CATI technique) was confirmed by 44 entities of which 32 were small, and 12 medium-sized companies. By using statistical measures (like dominant, median and arithmetic average) the sample companies were analysed and results have been presented. 2. THE CONCEPT OF AN INTELLIGENT ORGANIZATION More than thirty years ago Peter Drucker proclaimed that global societies had en- tered the era of discontinuity and uncertainty (Drucker, 2015). For this reason, as described by Szymański (2011), a critical reflection on classical and neo-classical approach to the analysis of reality made sense not just 50, 30 and 20 years ago, but also makes sense at present. It is even more apparent knowing that these schools recognize any fluctuations as normal economic phenomena, which should not cause unrest, because they are temporary. At the same time, the well-functioning market High-tech SMEs in the concept of intelligent organizations: The … 167 mechanism will ultimately lead to balance. The author adds, however, that today "qualitative transformations require substantial revision of the guidelines" (Szy- mański, 2011, p. 37). Also Joseph Stiglitz notes that "science quite often so strongly believes in assumptions or they are so firmly entrenched in our thinking that no one realizes the fact that these are only assumptions. (...) Economists assume that infor- mation is excellent, although they understand that it is not the case. Theorists hope that the world of imperfect information works very similar to the world of perfect information" (Stiglitz, 2010, p. 297). The range of current changes resulting from the opening of economies and their internationalisation, complex phenomena of offshoring, industrial and even economic relocation, force one to reject the classical concept of full rationality, and thus the idealized model of homo oeconomicus. According to Janasz, "progressive globalisation will increasingly affect development prospects for individuals, organ- izations, cities, regions, countries and even continents" (Janasz, 2012, p. 61). More- over, some authors claim that a new kind of society is now forming, namely "homo globalis" (Strenger, 2011). In such a dynamic environment where the extrapolation of past experiences and the anticipation of foreseeable trends are impossible, and where the culture of insecurity and mistrust is constantly growing, the unmistakability of resources is gaining importance (Jashapara, 2006). In particular such resources that allow con- stant adaptation to a changing reality. According to Ratajczak-Mrozek (2010, p. 45) "under hypercompetition permanent competitive advantage is replaced by a series of instantaneous states of comparative advantage. This means that companies, in- stead of trying as long as possible to keep their well-established competitive ad- vantage, should constantly search for new ways to maintain their dominant posi- tions, which means to constantly question and demolish their current advantage and the advantage of their competitors". Thus, contemporary management paradigms need to be gradually redefined and broadened with such strategic, and at the same time, intangible elements as: knowledge, skills, experience and leadership, human capital, as well as trust, loyalty and credibility – collectively referred to as social capital (Libertowska, 2014, p. 96). Moreover, the importance of creativity and in- novativeness has been growing along with high flexibility and seamless adaptation to the environment (Brilman, 2012; Easterby-Smith, Lyles & Petraf, 2009; Eisen- hardt, 1989; Kogut & Zandar, 1992). The concept of intellectual entrepreneurship with intellectual capital at its foundations is an answer to these new, difficult conditions. As observed by Baron and Armstrong (2007, p. 9) "the concept of intellectual capital composed of three elements points out that while individuals (human capital) create, maintain and use the knowledge, which is multiplied by the interactions between them (social capi- tal) and consequently it generates institutionalized knowledge which is owned by the organization (organizational capital)". According to Love, Fong and Irani (2005, p. 1), this specific type of entrepreneurship involves "establishing a basis of material wealth of intangible knowledge". Janasz (2012, p. 31) adds that natural 168 Małgorzata Gajowiak features of this type of enterprise are creativity and innovativeness. Intelligent or- ganizations are thus identified as the highest stage of enterprise improvement. The table below presents the main differences between a traditional organization, and an intelligent one. Table 1. The features of traditional and intelligent organizations Traditional Organization Intelligent Organization Work fully utilizes only the knowledge of a small part of employees Work is based on the knowledge of all participants Hierarchical structure Network structure Functional management system The dominance of intellectual capital management The dominance of routine work, repeata- bility and procedures The dominance of activities involving innovative so- lutions Individual or group work Teamwork Work involves the performance of duties Design work The use of individual skills Synergy in teamwork Strong position of managers No typical managerial positions, and if they exist, a manager acts as a coach and an inspirer Orientation inside the company to maintain internal balance Orientation on the outside and creating a global value Top-down coordination Coordination by team participants Source: (Mikula & Ziębicki, 2000) quoted in (Bendkowski, 2012). In the context of intellectual entrepreneurship particular significance is at- tributed to human capital, including knowledge as a strategic element, which allows the creation of competitive advantage (called knowledge-based view) (Kogut & Zander, 1992, p. 391). There is no doubt that knowledge is rare and it depends on context. Each enterprise produces appropriate knowledge, which means that it is difficult to forge (Bendkowski, 2012, p. 21). Thus, the willingness of companies for creative and innovative solutions to new problems and undertaking an entrepre- neurial approach with a simultaneous risk appearing in connection with new, un- certain and revolutionary changes "remains associated with the intelligent use of knowledge aimed at creating new knowledge and new skills, which lead to the re- alization of unique projects. All this allows one to unlearn routine, traditional and customary behaviours" (Janasz, 2012, p. 30). Moreover, it is worth noting that the literature emphasizes particular im- portance of tacit knowledge, which arises within organizations and becomes subject to rapid transfer between the employees of a company and between the company and its environment (Nonaka, 1995). This knowledge can become an important source of innovations, and thus can contribute to gaining competitive advantage in the future. It allows giving up the strategies of imitation. It means moving away from technological approach to knowledge popular in the 80s and 90s and taking up a social approach in which knowledge is created as a result of mutual interaction and group learning (Janasz, 2012). According to Czop (2001, p. 98), "[...] it is thanks to the many interactions occurring between the participants of organizations, High-tech SMEs in the concept of intelligent organizations: The … 169 the processes of transferring information and knowledge and the learning pro- cesses, that an organization is able to survive on the market. A modern organization inspires and supports the learning of all its members, constantly transforms itself, expanding its creative possibilities for the efficient creation of the future". Thus, the second element of intellectual capital – social capital grows in im- portance. "Focusing on people creates an atmosphere of harmony within a company and facilitates the use of wealth and originality of employee personality traits, fill- ing a wider social and cultural role. This makes the people and the relationships between them the greatest good of a company" (Grzanka, 2009, p. 10). This sug- gests that in an intelligent organization the appropriate selection of employees in terms of skills and qualifications should go hand in hand with social skills. The concept of intellectual entrepreneurship emphasizes the role of cultural factors and the system of fundamental values in the process of decision-making. 3. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDY AND THE ANALYSED SAMPLE Within the framework of the project undertaken in the period between May 2013 and November 2014, titled "The role of intangible assets in shaping competitive advantage of high-tech companies in Greater Poland," a survey of small and me- dium-sized enterprises from the high-tech sector1 was conducted. All the partici- pants were located in the Greater Poland region. The basic research problem was to identify the extent to which these entities use soft factors of production in ac- quiring their superior position over their competitors. The questions in the survey also made it possible to assess the extent to which these companies are aware of new trends in the management of modern enterprises and whether they are guided by the concept of intellectual entrepreneurship. The essence of the study stemmed from the fact that "companies predominantly attach importance to current effi- ciency and represent the traditional approach" (Janasz, 2012, p. 35), while too little number of business entities chooses a strategy based on change, innovation and flexibility (Brilman, 2012; Easterby-Smith, Lyles & Petraf, 2009; Liu & Liang, 2014). For this reason, the undertaken study focused on the high-tech enterprises (in- dustry approach), which are generally the units focused on pro-innovation activi- ties. According to the governmental report titled "Competitiveness of high-tech companies", "industry of high technology, due to high intensity of the processes of research and development, is a specific sector, the analysis of which provides not only information on the impact of R&D, but also on competitiveness and the ability of the economy to absorb the results of the work in the fields of science and tech- nology" (Ministry of Economy, 2009, p. 3). These companies are characterized by specific features, which allow them to achieve competitive advantages over their 1 The classification of advanced technology industries was adopted in accordance with Polish Classification of Activities (PKD 2007) and included the following: (C 21), (C 26), (C 30.3), (J 59), (J 60), (J 61), (J 62), (J 63), (M 72). 170 Małgorzata Gajowiak large counterparts. It is possible to distinguish, amongst others, the following (Glinka & Gudkova, 2011): 1. More flexible management structure than in the case of large companies. 2. Less bureaucracy, which provides greater freedom of action for businesses and the possibility of an easier assignment of innovative activities as priorities in the development strategy. 3. The possibility of freezing a much smaller share in earlier generations of tech- nology than in the case of large companies. The choice of the territorial scope was due to the fact that the region of Greater Poland during the period 2008-2012 significantly differed in comparison to other provinces in the country in terms of the size of investment in innovative activities and R&D activities of small and medium-sized industrial and service enterprises, as well as in terms of the largest number of significant concentration of the people employed in high-tech industries (PARP, 2006). The analysis of data obtained from the statistical office indicated that 215 en- tities had met the criteria for selection defined in the project. The study was com- plete for the given population. Finally, the participation in the study (using CATI technique, i.e. Computer-Assisted Telephone Interview) was confirmed by 44 en- tities (maneuverability at 20%), of which 32 were small (10-49 employment level), and 12 medium-sized (50 to 249 employees) companies. The main research tool was a survey consisting of 27 questions divided the- matically into two parts. The first part concerned the degree of innovation and com- petitiveness, the other – social capital in the organization. 4. INTELLECTUAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN LIGHT OF EMPIRICAL RESEARCH The basic premise of the study was the statement that "the challenges faced by to- day's organizations highlight the need to take into account not only quantitative factors but also qualitative indicators of competitiveness while creating competitive advantage" (Machaczka, 2014). Enterprises predestined to build such an advantage, especially by means of intangible assets, are companies belonging to the high-tech sector. Therefore, the questionnaire consisted of 17 questions about the resources and skills, which in the opinion of managers of these companies, allow one to gain competitive advantage. The distribution of replies is presented in the table below. From the above set of resources (skills) constituting competitive advantage of companies respondents on a scale of 1 (lowest rating) to 5 (highest rating) most appreciated the following: − human capital (me=5, d=5, �̅=4,63); − tendency of a company to learn (me=4,5, d=5, �̅=4,18); − social capital of employees (me=4, d=5, �̅=4,13). These factors can therefore be considered as a set of determinants, which al- low the creation of competitive advantage for small and medium-sized enterprises High-tech SMEs in the concept of intelligent organizations: The … 171 in the high-tech sector of Greater Poland region. In addition, these results indicate that the analysed entities primarily valuate intangible resources so difficult to imi- tate and emulate and so crucial for the concept of intellectual entrepreneurship. The first tangible factor in the form of company's finances has been positioned sixth. Table 2. The importance of resources and skills to shape competitive advantage Assets Median Mode Arithmetic mean 1. Human capital 5 5 4.63 2. Company's eagerness to learn 4.5 5 4.18 3. Social capital of employees 4 5 4.13 4. Social capital in relation to business partners 4 5 3.95 5. Flexibility of organizational structures and activities 4 5 3.63 6. Know-how and corporate image 4 4 3.95 7. Research and development activity 3 3 2.86 8. Shortening the period of the commercialization of results 3 3 3.13 9. The processes of organizational learning 3 3 3.30 10. Patents and licenses 3 1 2.63 11. The state of company’s finance 4 4 3.95 12. Implemented innovations 4 4 3.95 13. Quality management system 3 3 3.50 14. Company's location 3 4 3.04 15. Machines, production equipment 3 3 3.18 16. Logistics 3 3 3.00 17. Others 3.5 4 3.16 Source: own study. The highest importance attributed to human capital – the aggregate of knowledge, skills and experience, clearly shows that these elements are treated by the analysed companies as a strategic resource in which it is necessary to invest. This approach is consistent with the concept of a knowledge-based economy which, from a microeconomic perspective, assumes that knowledge remains an undisputed source of competitive advantage for most businesses, including those of small and medium size (Koźminski, 1996). Moreover, according to Edvinsson and Malone (1997, p. 34), human capital embodies the dynamics of an intelligent organization through its creativity and innovativeness. It is worth noting that among the 44 sur- veyed units there are 32 innovative entities, i.e. those which have introduced inno- vations in the past three years. In the opinion of the respondents the second most important factor (also in this case an intangible production factor) is a company's eagerness to learn. This re- source becomes crucial in the context of the acquisition of competitive advantage in a situation where "sustainability has been devalued, while transience is rapidly gaining value" (Bauman, 2001, p. 161). Therefore, a specific challenge faced by enterprises today is the relentless "creative destruction" in thought and action, as addressed by J.A. Schumpeter (2014, p. 192), who identified it with the impact of the implementation of innovations, when "better behaviour forced the destruction 172 Małgorzata Gajowiak of the old". Thus, Schumpeter played a significant role in the rejection of the neo- classical approach to equilibrium and stability. As Szymański (2012, p. 169) aptly adds, "the market is changing in an erratic and turbulent way. On the other hand, the company itself faces difficulties in adapting to changes, and it regards especially its leadership, which does not demonstrate an adequate capacity to change and re- mains in with its behaviours in the old era of continuity. [...] As a consequence, it causes an imbalance between the market reactions and the reactions of enterprises". Therefore, the importance of organizational learning also increases. It is a process in which the acquired knowledge increases the ability to both solve current prob- lems, as well as undertake more effective actions (Wang & Ahmed, 2007; Zott, 2003). Thus, this process facilitates a high flexibility of action (Brett, 2002). Similar conclusions have been reached by Senge (2006), who stated that organizations that are able to build competitive advantage in the future are those which can take a fresh look at the place and importance of social capital of a given organization, and those, which will learn to use the involvement of employees and their ability to learn in a right way (Chen, 2008; Wang, Cheng & Lin, 2013). The third important factor that managers of the analysed companies recognize is the importance of their employees' social capital – their mutual relationships based on, inter alia, trust, loyalty, or even credibility in the process of gaining com- petitive advantage. Entrepreneurs should, therefore, take measures to strengthen trust (which constitutes a fundamental resource of social capital) between employ- ees and their superiors as well as among employees themselves. This fact is espe- cially important in the light of a very low trust of employees towards their superiors observed in Poland. As becomes clear from the research of the Institute Great Place to Work Poland, less than 50% of workers share the opinion that business is con- ducted in an honest and ethical way, and that they feel appreciated in their work environment (Forum Odpowiedzialnego Biznesu, 2015). For this reason, the fact that social capital is valorised in the analysed companies is encouraging. The more so with the fact that a number of studies confirm its positive impact on economic activity (Adler & Kwon, 2002; Coleman, 1990; Fukuyama, 1996; Granovetter, 1973; Lin, 2000, Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1989). It is now seen as a pro-development factor affecting the success of an organization and the achievements of individuals, because it reduces opportunistic behaviours, incites greater accountability in eco- nomic interactions, and provides access to resources, including tacit knowledge and its faster diffusion between employees (Gajowiak, 2010). As noted by Grzanka (2009, p. 126), social capital allowing access to important information and other strategic resources has a significant impact on the ability of companies to adapt to both challenges and opportunities that emerge in the environment. The more possi- bilities for interaction between employees, the more social capital is created, "which results from the fact that new knowledge accumulated by a company creates new opportunities in the environment". Thus, it seems true that knowledge and val- ues shared by people slowly replace three elementary principles of competitiveness, namely cost advantage, higher quality of goods and services and the speed of re- sponse to customer needs (Grzanka, 2009). Moreover, as stressed by F. Fukuyama, High-tech SMEs in the concept of intelligent organizations: The … 173 social capital is the driving force for innovative behaviour, and its absence may act as a drag for such a behaviour (Fukuyama, 1996). Entrepreneurship, including the intellectual one, is based on the phenomenon of social interaction and the methods of operation of business entities are the result of "a game of interinfluence and ne- gotiation" (Gajowiak, 2013, p. 62). It should also be added that in the context of intellectual entrepreneurship it is worth pointing to organizational capital. And so, according to the study, the repre- sentatives of high-tech SMEs from Greater Poland (over 80% of them) attach im- portance to the development of organizational capital by introducing, inter alia, the latest quality systems and software for data storage and processing. 5. CONCLUSIONS Over the last few years a model focused on continuity and evolutionariness has been created among entrepreneurs. This model, however, is becoming inadequate in a situation of discontinuity of the modern world. As rightly pointed out by Szy- manski (2011, p. 164) "the unsuitability of enterprises for non-linear change is an expression of insufficient capacity for creative destruction in thinking and action". Therefore, it becomes necessary to use the resources (particularly the intangible ones) intelligently, and aim at increasing pro-innovation behaviour. The role of in- tangible values continues to rise, as the existence of modern organizations is con- ditioned by innovations mentioned herein as well as by gaining the trust of custom- ers, by creating brand and by effectively responding to changing reality. Baron and Armstrong (2007, p. 11) conclude that "the success in these areas depends precisely on the people". Thus, organizations aspiring to be "intelligent" must base their ac- tivities on intellectual capital representing the following three basic elements: hu- man capital, social capital and organizational capital. It remains undisputed that in addition to extensive knowledge and highly skilled employees, crucial to further development of a company are social skills, which determine the acceptance com- mon values and common culture, and sharing them (Hayes & Upton, 1998; Teece, Pisano & Shuen, 1997). Thus, social capital becomes a resource enabling the trans- fer of knowledge between employees, as well as between a company's closer and farther surroundings. Taking it into account contributes to the reduction of transac- tion costs and increases the innovativeness of business entities. Therefore, it can be equated with the common good worth investing in (Lauzikas & Dailydaite, 2015). As aptly noted by Będzik (2010, p. 15), "in the face of the depletion of cheap re- sources and easy ability to achieve economic growth, the socio-economic develop- ment regarding all aspects of life in highly developed societies would not be possi- ble without strengthening ties and trust among the members of society. Whatever the next step in evolution will be called, civil and information society, knowledge- based economy, each form requires cooperation, ties, the flow of information and trust". The survey conducted among high-tech SMEs from Greater Poland confirms that these enterprises base their actions on intellectual capital, which becomes the 174 Małgorzata Gajowiak most important element of business management in the strategic perspective. Thus, their actions are consistent with the concept of intellectual entrepreneurship. The managers of these companies are aware that human capital, the willingness of a company to learn, and social capital created among employees are the most im- portant factors influencing company’s position on the market. These three elements are crucial in the context of the creation of their innovative attitudes and behaviour. The main limitation of the study is its sample size. 44 entities from the total group of 215 companies, which met the criteria of the project, took part in a survey. As a fact, the results may not be generalized in regard to the level and kind of com- petitiveness of high-tech sector. Secondly, as discovered while conducting the study, not all companies were not “high-tech”, as they have not created so far any innovations and the level of expenditures spent on R&D is less than 5%. That prob- lem is commonly and strictly connected with “industry approach” to high-tech sec- tor, which was assumed in the study. It should be also emphasize here, that it would be interesting to conduct in the future comparative study taking into account small and medium high-tech compa- nies with the biggest ones and getting to know which of them base their functioning more on intellectual capital and in how the managers approach the developing this crucial resource. REFERENCES Adler, P., & Kwon, S. (2002). Social capital: the good, the bad and the ugly. In E.L. Lesser (Ed.), Knowledge and social capital: foundations and applications. Butterworth- Heinemann: Boston. Baron, A., & Armstrong, M. (2007). Human Capital Management. Achieving Added Value Through People. London & Philadelphia: Kogan Page. Będzik, B. (2010). Deficyt kapitału społecznego zwiastunem nadchodzących kłopotów, ACTA Scientarium Polonorum, Oeconomica, 9(1), 15-21. Bendkowski, J. (2012). Interaktywno-sieciowy model kształtowania wspólnot działań w kreowaniu i dyfuzji wiedzy w organizacjach. Gliwice: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Śląskiej. Brett, R. (2002). Creating Intelligent Organization. The Journal for Quality & Participa- tion, 12. Brilman, J. (2012). Réconcilier démocratie et gestion. Paris: L'Harmattan. Chen, C.C. (2008). An Objective-oriented and Product-line-based Manufacturing Perfor- mance Measurement. International Journal of Production Economics, 112(1), 380- 390. Coleman, J.S. (1990). Foundation of Social Theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Cook, K.S., & Kramer, R.M. (2004). Trust and distrust in organizations: dilemmas and approaches. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Czop, K. (2001). Wiedza, zmiana i uczenie się jako determinanty kultury nowoczesnej or- ganizacji. Zarządzanie Wiedzą, No 1, 98-105. Drucker, P.F. (2015). Innovation and Entrepreneurship. New York: Routledge. High-tech SMEs in the concept of intelligent organizations: The … 175 Easterby-Smith, M., Lyles, M.A., & Petraf, M.A. (2009). Dynamic Capabilities: Current Debates and Future Directions. British Journal of Management, 20(s1), S1-S8. Edvinsson, L., & Malone, M.S. (1997). Intellectual Capital: realizing your company’s trust value by finding it’s hidden brainpower. New York: Harper Business. Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study research. Academy of Mana- gement Review, 14(4), 532-550. Forum Odpowiedzialnego Biznesu (2015). Menedżerowie CSR. Wyniki badania. War- szawa. Fukuyama, F. (1996). Trust. The Social Virtues and The Creation of Prosperity. New York: Simon & Schuster. Gajowiak, M. (2010). Sources of social capital creation. Poznan: Publishing House of Poz- nan University of Technology. Gajowiak, M. (2013). The Role of Social Capital in the Activities of Internationalized Food Processing SMEs. Confrontation of Theoretical Findings with Empirical Ones. Oeco- nomia Copernicana, No 4, 59-76. Geenhuizen, M.S., & Ratti, R. (2001). Gaining Advantage from Open Borders: An Active Space Approach to Regional Development. Hampshire: Ashgate. Glinka, B., Gudkova, S. (2011). Przedsiębiorczość. Warszawa: Oficyna Wolters Kluwer business. Granovetter, M.S.(1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 6, 1360-1380. Grzanka, I. (2009). Kapitał społeczny w relacjach z klientami. CRM a społeczny potencjał przedsiębiorstwa. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo CeDeWu.PL.. Harrison, A. (2007). Globalization and poverty. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Hayes, R.H., & Upton, D.M. (1998). Operation-based Strategy. California Management Review, Berkley, California.. Ismail, H. S., Poolton, J., & Sharifi, H. (2011). The Role of Agile Strategic Capabilities in Achieving Resilience in Manufacturing-based Small Companies. International Jour- nal of Production Research, 49(18), 5469-5487. Janasz, W. (2012). Przedsiębiorczość i przedsiębiorcy jako kategorie współczesnych orga- nizacji. In J. Wiśniewska, K. Janasz (Eds.), Innowacyjność organizacji w strategii inteligentnego i zrównoważonego rozwoju. Warszawa: Difin. Jashapara, A. (2006). Knowledge Management: An Integrated Approach. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities and the replication of technology, Organization Science, 3(3), 383-397. Koźmiński, A. (1996). Zarządzanie. Teoria i praktyka. Warszawa: PWN. Lauzikas, M., & Dailydaite, S. (2015). Impacts of social capital on transformation from efficiency to innovation-driven business. Journal of Business Economics and Man- agement, 16(1), 37-51. 176 Małgorzata Gajowiak Libertowska, A. (2014). The importance of social capital as a factor determining the in- crease in corporate value. In F. Bylok, E.I. Ubreziova, L. Cichobłaziński (Eds.), Man- agement and Managers Facing Challenges of the 21st Century. Godollo: Szenst Istvan Egyetemi Kiado Nonprotif Kft. Lin, N. (2000). Inequality in social capital. Contemporary Sociology, 29(6), 785-795. Liu, Y., & Liang, K. (2014). Evaluating and developing resource-based operations strategy for competitive advantage: an exploratory study of Finnish high-tech manufacturing industries. International Journal of Production Research, 53(4), 1019-1037. Love, P., Fong, P.S.W., & Irani, Z. (2005). Management of knowledge in project environ- ments. Elsevier: Butterworth Heinemann. Machaczka, J. (2014). Wstęp. In J. Machaczka (ed.), Determinanty konkurencyjności współczesnych organizacji. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie. Mikuła, B., & Ziębicki, B. (2000). Organizacja inteligentna a organizacja ucząca się. Prze- gląd Organizacji, 5(1), 32-37. Ministry of Economy. (2009). Report Competitiveness of high-tech companies. Warsaw. Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242-266. Nonaka, J. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 18-21. PARP. (2006). Perspektywy rozwoju małych i średnich przedsiębiorstw wysokich techno- logii w Polsce do 2020 roku. Warszawa. Ratajczak-Mrozek, M. (2010). Sieci biznesowe a przewaga konkurencyjna przedsiębiorstw zaawansowanych technologii na rynkach zagranicznych. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Uni- wersytetu Ekonomicznego w Poznaniu. Roubin, N., & Mihm, S. (2011). Crisis Economics: A Crash Course in the Future of Fi- nance. London: Penguin Book. Schumpeter, J.A. (2014). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Martino Fine Books. Senge, P. M. (2006). The Fifth Discipline: The Art. And Practice of the Learning Organi- zation. Bantam Doubleday: Dell Publishing Group INC. Stiglitz, J.E. (2010). Freeall: Free markets & the Sinking of the Global Economy. London: Penguin Books. Strenger, C. (2011). Fear of insignificance: searching for meaning in the twenty-first cen- tury. Basingstoke : Palgrave Macmillan. Szymański, W. (2011). Niepewność i niestabilność gospodarcza, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Difin. Teece, D. (2007). Explicating Dynamic Capabilities: The Nature and Microfoundations of (Sustainable) Enterprise Performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319- 1350. Teece, D.J., Pisano G., & Shuen A. (1997). Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Manage- ment. Strategic Management Journal, 509-533. High-tech SMEs in the concept of intelligent organizations: The … 177 Wang, C. L., & Ahmed P. K. (2007). Dynamic Capabilities: A Review and Research Agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9(1), 31-51. Wang, C.L., Cheng, C. Y., & Lin, S.K. (2013). Distributed Feedback Control Algorithm in an Auction-based Manufacturing Planning and Control System. International Journal of Production Research, 51(9), 2667-2679. Zott, C. (2003). Dynamic Capabilities and the Emergence of Intraindustry Differential Firm Performance: Insight from a Simulation Study. Strategic Management Journal, 24(2), 97-125. Acknowledgement and Financial Disclosure The article came into being within the project no. 503222/11/143/DSMK/0545 entitled 'The role of non-material resources in creating competitive advantage by high-tech SMEs from Wielkopolska Region' financed by Ministry of Science and Higher Education con- ducted by Małgorzata Gajowiak and Andżelika Libertowska in the years 2013-2014.