Alternative control methods for exploiting subsidiary knowledge within an MNE: quantity versus quality

Knowledge transfer and innovation in multinationals: a review of the literature using SCM-TBFO framework

Purpose

Business research has highlighted the importance of knowledge transfer and innovation in multinational firms for better performance outcomes. However, the existing body of literature is characterized by differentiated theories, antecedents and outcomes. This study aims to address this gap by adopting a systematic approach to analyze knowledge transfer and innovation literature from the perspective of multinational organizations.

Design/methodology/approach

This study follows “preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses” (PRISMA) guidelines for conducting a systematic literature review. The study adopts a systematic approach for analyzing the literature using School of thought (S), Contexts (C), Methodologies (M), Triggers (T), Barriers (B), Facilitators (F) and Outcomes (O) framework (SCM-TBFO framework) devised for holistic literature review. The study analyzes 75 articles from reputed journals from 2000 to 2022.

Findings

In general, knowledge transfer and innovation in multinationals is a relatively new area and is evolving rapidly. There are many opportunities to study the various perspectives that are included in the SCM-TBFO framework. The key schools of thought included the evolutionary theory of innovation, institutional theory and internationalization theory. The studies had differing settings or contexts, including China, Europe, the USA and Taiwan. Further, key methodologies that were used included regression, case studies, structural equation modeling (SEM) and theoretical studies. Knowledge transfer and innovation triggers included competitive advantage, competitive pressure, constant requirements for better products and services, foreign direct investment (FDI) and globalization. Knowledge transfer and innovation facilitators were categorized into strategy-related facilitators, organization culture and orientation-related facilitators, and resource-related facilitators. Knowledge transfer and innovation barriers included autonomy, international knowledge dispersion, risk of knowledge leakage, search breadth, ambiguity and institutional voids. Key outcomes of knowledge transfer and innovation in multinationals included financial performance, innovation performance, knowledge flow, transfer effectiveness, patents and new product development.

Originality/value

By synthesizing the literature, the study aims to provide an overview of the current state of research on knowledge transfer and innovation in multinationals. The study develops a holistic model for fostering knowledge transfer and innovation in multinationals. The proposed novel framework can also be applied to perform a holistic assessment of the current literature in various research domains. Further, the study suggests future theory development and research agendas. The study also provides implications for practitioners using the framework to achieve more desirable outcomes.

Interorganizational knowledge sharing in a science and technology park: the use of knowledge sharing mechanisms

Purpose

This paper aims to uncover the combinations of knowledge sharing mechanisms that organizations in a science and technology park in Brazil use to share managerial and technical knowledge.

Design/methodology/approach

This research adopts a qualitative approach that uses a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis to analyze data that are gathered from 51 managers of organizations in a science and technology park.

Findings

The results show that knowledge sharing happens regardless of the type of knowledge. There are more alternative paths that lead to knowledge sharing than to its absence. Regarding the type of knowledge shared, there are more alternative configurations that lead to managerial knowledge sharing than to technical knowledge sharing. Only the older organizations in the science and technology park abstain from knowledge sharing.

Research limitations/implications

Due to the qualitative nature of the study, no generalization is possible. Additionally, the study’s limitation is that it involves organizations from a single science and technology park.

Practical implications

The results offer managers of organizations in science and technology parks to choose from alternative combinations of mechanisms to either boost their knowledge sharing or to promote knowledge protection.

Originality/value

The paper provides an original contribution by identifying the combinations of mechanisms that organizations in a science and technology park use that leads to the sharing of specific knowledge types. The findings also identify the combination of mechanisms that older organizations use that prevents them from sharing knowledge.

The rhetoric of “knowledge hoarding”: a research-based critique

Purpose

This paper responds to a recent trend towards reifying “knowledge hoarding” for purposes of quantitative/deductive research, via a study of information technology (IT) service professionals. A “rhetorical theory” lens is applied to reconsider “knowledge hoarding” as a value-laden rhetoric that directs managers towards addressing assumed worker dysfunctionality.

Design/methodology/approach

A qualitative study of practicing IT service professionals (assumed within IT service management “best practice” to be inclined to hoard knowledge) was conducted over a 34-day period. Twenty workers were closely observed processing IT service incidents, and 26 workers were interviewed about knowledge-sharing practices.

Findings

The study found that IT service practice is characterized more by pro-social collegiality in sharing knowledge/know-how than by self-interested strategic knowledge concealment.

Research limitations/implications

The study concerns a single occupational context. The study indicates that deductive research that reifies “knowledge hoarding” as a naturally occurring phenomenon is flawed, with clear implications for future research.

Practical implications

The study suggests that management concern for productivity might be redirected away from addressing assumed knowledge-hoarding behaviour and towards encouraging knowledge sharing via social interaction in the workplace.

Originality/value

Previous studies have not directly examined the concept of knowledge hoarding using qualitative methods, nor have they considered it as a rhetorical device.

Knowledge sharing and social capital in globally distributed execution

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to assess whether social capital explains level and quality of knowledge sharing in globally distributed execution. More specifically, the study examined how knowledge sharing in combined European–Asian teams of a globally operating engineering and construction company was affected by these teams’ social capital.

Design/methodology/approach

Social capital was approached via constructs covering its structural, relational and cognitive dimensions. Data for 325 employees were collected via an online questionnaire and analysed using multiple regression models.

Findings

The analyses confirm that components of social capital offer powerful explanations of both the level and the quality of knowledge sharing. The study also found many differences in how social capital affects the level versus the quality of knowledge sharing and also in how it works in the European versus the Asian situations. No social capital factor appeared to significantly predict both level and quality knowledge sharing in the European and Asian situations alike.

Originality/value

This study is novel in empirically establishing how knowledge sharing in globally distributed execution is affected by teams’ social capital as an integrative construct bringing together individual and group characteristics.