An internation knowledge managemen

8/14/2019 An internation knowledge managemen

1/12

624

An International Knowledge Management Strategy: Evaluation, Transfer, andMeasurement

Peter Massingham Rajendran PandianUniversity of Wollongong, Australia

Abstract

Executives are becoming increasingly concerned about the role of knowledge and knowledge-based resources increating sustainable competitive advantage for the organisation. Given the increasing globalisation of business, muchattention has focused on knowledge transfer between organizations, mostly in an international context. While peopleaccept that knowledge management influences an organisations performance, most are still confused about how.Most measures of organisation success profit, market share are generally indirect results of good knowledgemanagement and are affected by many other factors. Generally, organisation success is linked to tangible assets, eg.

factories, rather than intangible resources such as knowledge. Using data gathered from 21 executive depthinterviews within a case firm with 17 separate business units spread over 6 Asian countries, this paper examines theneed for deeper analysis to see the linkages between knowledge and organisation success. We aim to develop astrategic framework for knowledge management that links knowledge resources with their transfer internationally,measured against performance targets.

We dont know what we dont know, the Vice President Human Resources said.What do you think you need to know? I asked.We are in the process of trying to change from 100 years as a manufacturing company that has focused onoperational efficiencies to becoming a customer total solutions company. We need to understand our customers,we need to know about their business, their markets, and how we can add value for them with our products, hereplied.What are the implications if you dont do this? I asked.

We wont survive, he replied.

Knowledge is now the organisations key strategic resource (Ghoshal, Bartlett, and Moran, 2000;Grant, 1996; Anand, Glick, and Manz, 2002). While people accept that knowledge influences an organisations

performance, many are still confused about how. Most measures of organisation success profit, market share are generally indirect results of good knowledge management and are affected by many other factors. Generally,organisation success is linked to tangible assets, eg. factories, rather than intangible resources such asknowledge. Managers require a framework for evaluating the contribution of knowledge to the organisations

performance in order to make strategic decisions about knowledge resource development, acquisition anddeployment, particularly in an international business context.

There has been an increasing research impetus in knowledge management within international business (see Teece, 1976; Mansfield and Romeo, 1980; Zander, 1991; Simonin, 1999; Bresman, Birkinshawand Nobel, 1999; Liesch and Knight, 2001; also the SMJ 1996 Special Issue on Knowledge Management and

the Organisation). Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) created significant interest with their argument that Japanesecompanies have become successful because of their skills and expertise at organizational knowledge creationand that their international success has largely been due to their knowledge management.

Despite this recognition of its importance, many managers still struggle to understand the role of knowledge in creating sustainable competitive advantage for their organisations. The executive quoted above isfortunate because he has identified customer knowledge as the key to his organisations success but, as we shallsee, that is just the beginning of his journey into knowledge management. Managers need to know whichknowledge resources are most valuable so that they can make resource decisions. The knowledge-based view isa new field of strategic management that has begun to examine how to manage knowledge resources. This fieldhas evolved from the resource-based view (RBV) (see Wernerfelt, 1984; Chatterjee and Wernerfelt, 1991;Barney, 1986, 1991, 2001; and Conner, 1991). According to Barney (2001), resource based logic can helpmanagers more completely understand the kinds of resources that can generate sustained strategic advantages.


2/12


3/12

626

Knowledge transfer

Thirdly, I adopt the broad definition of knowledge combination, knowledge creation, or learning (see e.g.

Bartlett & Ghoshal, 1989; Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). I also adopt the view that knowledge transfer impliessuccessful transmission of resources from one organization to another, in that the organization accumulates or assimilates new knowledge (Zander, 1991). International transfer of knowledge can generally occur in threemodes. Firstly, transfer can occur between two units of the same organization (Bresman, Birkinshaw, and

Nobel, 1999). Secondly, it occurs in various forms of partnership, such as alliances, joint ventures, and licensingarrangements (Simonin, 1999). Thirdly, it can occur through a pure market transaction between two independentorganizations (Massingham and Gregory, 2002).

Knowledge transfer depends on how easily that knowledge can be transported, interpreted, andabsorbed (Hamel, et al; 1989). Researchers recognize that there are particular management challenges in thetransfer and the process of organizational learning between subsidiaries or partners (Simonin, 1999). Knowledgetransfer in international business is also complicated by geography and cultural distance.

Research on intra-firm knowledge transfer, e.g. between subsidiaries, has highlighted the tacitness of knowledge as a barrier to transfer (see Zander, 1991; Szulanski, 1996) and the influence of network centrality

and absorptive capacity on innovation and firm performance (Tsai, 2001). Research on knowledge acquisitionhas examined the articulateness of knowledge and the influence of organizational settings: size, technology,recency of acquisition (see Bresman, Birkinshaw, and Nobel, 1999). Simonin (1999) has investigated developeda conceptual model of knowledge ambiguity that identifies the following seven potential barriers to knowledgetransfer: tacitness, specificity, complexity, experience, partner protectiveness, cultural distance, andorganizational distance. Finally, research on knowledge purchase has looked at the tacitness and volume of knowledge (Anand, Glick, and Manz, 2002) and psychic distance and speed of competition (Massingham andGregory, 2002).

Tacitness and absorptive capacity

This current research found that tacitness and absorptive capacity were two important factors in internationalknowledge transfer. The most obvious knowledge characteristic influencing its transferability is the distinction

between codified or explicit and tacit knowledge. Most researchers agree that codified know-what knowledgeis more easily articulated, captured and able to be transferred compared with the tacit know-how that explainsthe accumulated practical skill or expertise that allows one to do something smoothly and efficiently (Kogutand Zander, 1992). Tacit knowledge cannot be easily communicated and shared, is highly personal, deep rootedin action and in an individuals involvement within a specific context (Nonaka, 1994). It is commonly referredto as the knowledge in peoples heads. Researchers agree that the most important knowledge is tacit (Nonaka& Takeuchi, 1995) but that the transfer of tacit knowledge between organizational members is exceptionallydifficult (Grant, 1996).

Similarly, the organizational setting influences the transfer of knowledge. Firms must have pre-requisite knowledge and skills relevant to the knowledge required, that is, absorptive capacity (see Cohen andLevinthal, 1990) or the ability to learn from the transfer of knowledge. This capacity is gained through having

prior experience with the knowledge domain. For example, if the firm seeks knowledge about the marketcharacteristics of an overseas location, it must have some knowledge of the steps involved in foreign market

analysis, perhaps some basic understanding of the country(ies) involved), and, most importantly, know how touse the information to make decisions about market entry and so on. As Grant (1996) points out, there is a

paradox in this. If the recipient of knowledge knows too much compared with the dispatcher of knowledge,there is really no need for a transfer of knowledge, but if it knows too little, it will not be able to capture and usethe knowledge transferred.

Strategic themes

Finally, we use Kaplan and Nortons (2001) framework of strategy maps as a way to measure the contribution of knowledge to the organizations performance. Strategy maps provide executives with a framework for describing and managing strategy in a knowledge economy. Kaplan and Norton introduce the concept of strategic themes as the drivers of knowledge-based strategy. Strategic themes are the recipe for combining the


4/12

627

intangible ingredients of skills, technologies and organizational climate with internal processes, such as sourcingand distribution, to create tangible outcomes-customer loyalty, revenue growth, profitability. The themes reflectwhat the management team believes must be done to succeed and allow organizations to segment their

knowledge-based strategy into several categories, e.g. build the franchise, increase customer value, achieveoperational excellence, and be a good corporate citizen. The relative importance of these themes will vary for each organization.

The relationship between knowledge resources and strategy

The first step in understanding the contribution of knowledge is to tie it to the organizations strategy. Our casefirm is pursuing a differentiation strategy by trying to create customer value through offering superior technicalsupport, in the design, construct and after sales stages.

The firm wants to eliminate its customers management headache of dealing with multiple contractorsthrough becoming a one-stop-shop for its customers. Its strategic themes are: customer service excellence,corporate governance, information & knowledge management, market leadership, manufacturing excellence,

people & community, and zero harm. Its key knowledge-based strategy, in Kaplan and Nortons terms, is toCreate Customer Value.

Evaluating knowledge resources

Organizations can evaluate knowledge resources in two ways. First, they should identify what knowledge isnecessary to achieve the more important strategic themes. Second, they can use RBV logic to determine whether their knowledge resources meet the criteria for being a sustainable source of competitive advantage.

Linking knowledge resources to strategic themes

Our case firms most important strategic theme is to Create Customer Value. In order to achieve this, it must pursue a customer intimacy strategy. This requires alignment between the firms internal activities and thefirms value proposition that may be done through Customer Management Processes. This alignment betweenthe firms knowledge-based strategy Creating Customer Value and its activities identifies what it needs toknow to achieve the strategy. In this case, it needs knowledge about solution development, customer servicerequirements, relationship management processes, and advisory service strategies. The firm needs deepknowledge about its customers, their markets, and how to use this knowledge to create value for them.

The firms next most important strategic theme is to Build the Franchise. While its growth objectiveswill result from creating customer value, this will be incremental growth. In order to achieve more quantumgrowth, it must identify and capture new market opportunities through large-scale investment decisions. Interms of alignment between the knowledge-based strategy and activities, it needs knowledge about macro-environment, microenvironment and government indicators to enable market opportunities to be assessed andinvestment decisions made with confidence. In also needs product development, speed to market and in somecases joint venture/partnership knowledge in order to capture market opportunities.

Do the knowledge resources meet resource-based view criterion?

Once the organization has determined what knowledge resources it requires, it should then assess whether theseresources represent a source of sustainable competitive advantage. This can be done through a fairly simplechecklist of RBV attributes e.g. is the knowledge resource unique to the firm? Is it easily substituted by other knowledge? Is it easily imitated by competitors? Is it easily leaked i.e. can the knowledge just walk out thedoor? Is it durable? If the answer to these questions is yes, the organization is likely to have a knowledgeresource that creates a source of sustainable competitive advantage. Our case firm believes it has the potential tohave sustainable advantage in both its key strategic themes due to the scope of its Asian operations, which it

believes is unmatched by competitors.


5/12

628

Transferring knowledge resources

While there are numerous processes related to the transfer of knowledge in international business, they can becategorized based on the characteristics of the knowledge (explicit vs. tacit) and the organizational setting(absorptive capacity). Examples of such problems and the type of knowledge resources involved are shown inExhibit 1. Explicit knowledge can be obtained from external sources, such as strategic alliances or consultants,through the use of impersonal communication such as electronic data exchange, reports, as well as faxes andemails. Tacit knowledge, however, requires personal communication that allows for direct and intensecommunication between individuals. Absorptive capacity determines the ability of subsidiary staff to understandand apply the knowledge resource. Low absorptive capacity means staff have little existing knowledge, whilehigh absorptive capacity indicates that have good existing knowledge that they can use to recombine with newknowledge to apply to problems.

When discussing knowledge transfer with our case firm executives, it became clear that tacitness andabsorptive capacity were two major problems. The major cause of frustration amongst executives is the volumeof knowledge lost by the firm in recent years. This has occurred because the firm has downsized and has lostmany experienced staff whose knowledge was not formally captured before they left. This has left a knowledgevacuum that has not been filled. It is also a result of the mobility of senior staff. When they begin a new role,much of the knowledge gained from the previous role is lost, particularly the explicit knowledge. As oneexecutive said I wouldnt know where to find all the reports I had from my last job, probably lost in a filingcabinet somewhere. This problem is compounded by the need for relationships to source tacit knowledgewithin an international context. Managers feel that the only way they can locate what they need to know isthrough relationships or knowing whom to contact and, if their personal networks have been lost - through staff leaving the firm or not maintaining contact then their tacit knowledge is often lost also.

Managing explicit knowledge with low absorptive capacity

Managing explicit knowledge with low absorptive capacity is necessary to solve moderately structured problemsthat require small quantities of factual information, approved policy or procedures, or basic knowledge thataddresses key strategic themes. When explicit knowledge is sought by subsidiaries with low absorptive capacity,

basic reports, emails, telephone calls and similar means of communication can be used to transfer theknowledge. The primary means of obtaining such knowledge for these subsidiaries is through codified methods,mainly reports.

Managing explicit knowledge with high absorptive capacity

Managing explicit knowledge with high absorptive capacity is necessary to solve relatively structured problemswhere there is some confidence that cause-effect relationships are understood. Explicit knowledge can be acritical source of competitive advantage for subsidiaries with the capacity to appreciate the significance of theinformation. The cause-effect relationship emerges from an awareness of the firms strategic themes. For example, our case firm requires a deep knowledge of its markets and customers: markets to identify investmentopportunities to pursue growth strategies and customers to understand how to create value in pursuit of the totalsolutions strategy.

Organizations can manage explicit knowledge for high absorptive capacity subsidiaries by designing ITsystems (see Goh, 2002) that capture knowledge relevant to their strategic themes. Examples include economicand political indicators, customer performance ratings and so on. High absorptive capacity individuals will havethe skills to interpret market and customer data to make strategic decisions.

Organizations can provide managers with the ability to interpret explicit market and customer knowledge by sending them on study tours to observe what is happening in mature markets in North Americaand Europe.

Managing tacit knowledge with low absorptive capacity

Managing tacit knowledge with low absorptive capacity is necessary to involve staff in making critical businessdecisions requiring consultation with internal and external subject matter experts. Examples include business


6/12

629

planning, new product and new market decisions, introduction of major new systems (e.g. our case firms newIT system), and other large-scale decisions that are relatively unfamiliar and irregular. When tacit knowledge issought by subsidiaries with low absorptive capacity, new structures and processes must be created in order to

create multiple informal and formal communication channels at appropriate levels of the organization. The primary means of obtaining such knowledge for these subsidiaries is through the process of socialization (see Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995).

This Vice-President Finance explains the depth of knowledge necessary to make large-scale investmentdecisions:

Our business needs to grow. In order to make the correct investment decisions, we need to havedetailed knowledge of existing and target markets. We need also to understand our relative competitive positionin each market, particularly potential new markets. We need to understand our technical and humancapabilities. We need to be aware of the strategic context when examining market opportunities e.g. what is the

Boards view on investing in the Philippines? If they are not interested, we shouldnt even be looking at the Philippines. There are very few staff in our organization that are across all of these issues.

The knowledge necessary to contribute to these major decisions is not easily transferable. ThePresident of our case firms Thailand business suggested this knowledge only comes through diversity of

experience gained by working in multiple countries in various roles over many years.

Managing tacit knowledge with high absorptive capacity

Managing tacit knowledge with high absorptive capacity is necessary to solve ill structured problems with highambiguity about cause and effect relationships. Examples include customer relationship management,transferring best practice processes, introducing improvement cycle-processes. When tacit knowledge is sought

by subsidiaries with high absorptive capacity, organizations often use external experts e.g. consultants, tofacilitate the knowledge sharing amongst staff. The primary means of obtaining such knowledge for thesesubsidiaries is through the process of direct involvement of key experts in highly interactive exchanges.Organizations should ensure that staff with high absorptive capacity, are brought together, on a regular basis, toshare knowledge and solve problems related to its strategic themes.

Managers, then, attempting to manage international knowledge transfer must first determine what type

of knowledge is being transferred and the absorptive capacity of those staff involved in the transfer. I havesuggested various processes that can assist knowledge transfer under four different scenarios involving the typeof knowledge and the absorptive capacity of staff.

Measuring the contribution of knowledge to performance

While it is important to identify the organizations most important knowledge resources, and to effectivelytransfer this knowledge across international boundaries, it is also necessary to measure its contribution to theorganizations performance. In line with the strategic orientation of the resource-based view, managers must beable to measure the outcomes of their knowledge resource decisions. The various steps that organizations canuse to measure the contribution of knowledge are outlined in table 1.

Measuring the value created from knowledge resources

Organizations can measure the value created by their knowledge resources by examining their contribution totheir business performance targets. Our case firm uses indicators under the headings of business excellence,customer satisfaction, profitability, safety, and human performance. Table 2 highlights the contribution of our case firms knowledge of business development processes and customer relationship management against its

performance indicators.

Table 1:PREPARING AN ORGANIZATIONAL FOR INTERNATIONAL KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENTMethod Actions

Identifystrategic themes

Develop corporate level strategy i.e. scope of business Develop business level strategy i.e. differentiation, cost leadership, focus Prioritize the four strategic themes - build the business, customer intimacy,


7/12

630

operational excellence, and corporate citizenship based on business levelstrategy

Identifyimportantactivities

Summarize the organizations business processes in functional and/or valuechain terms

Rank these processes in terms of their perceived contribution to theorganizations performance

Map the causal inter-relationships between the processesUnderstand thenature of necessaryknowledge

Identify what the organization needs to know to perform well in its moreimportant activities e.g. a knowledge template

Identify what part of this knowledge is explicit and tacit

Developabsorptivecapacity

Map absorptive capacity against each knowledge template Staff training and study tours Use external subject matter experts IT systems designed to address strategic themes

Central library of published material: reports, memos, files etc linked to theIT system Formal processes in key activities (e.g. Hitchhikers Guide to Being a President)

Create value Identify how the knowledge resources underlying each strategic theme createsvalue for the firm e.g. how understanding of markets improves customer relationships

Measure performance

Link each strategic theme to the organizations performance indicators Examine how the organizations knowledge resources in each strategic theme

contributes to each indicator

Specifically, table 2 demonstrates that there is a causal relationship between knowledge resources andorganization performance.

Towards a knowledge management strategy for international business

Researchers have focused mainly on identifying barriers to international knowledge transfer within the intra-firm and acquisition contexts, supplemented by some recent work on purchasing knowledge resources.Researchers have yet to develop a strategic framework for managing knowledge within an international businesscontext, although Goh (2002) has developed a sound framework for effective knowledge transfer.

In this article I have drawn upon theoretical and empirical research in a range of areas including theresource and knowledge based theories of the firm, learning theories and performance measurement. I haveidentified many of the practical challenges of managing knowledge in international business and ways to resolvethem. (see Figure 1.) In addition, it indicates several steps that organizations should take to prepare aninternational knowledge management strategy (see Table 1). Finally, the article has identified ways thatknowledge resources can contribute to international business performance (see Table 2).


8/12

631

Table 2: THE CONTRIBUTION OF KNOWLEDGE RESOURCES: SOME EXAMPLESActivity Performance

indicator Contribution

Businessexcellence

Improved working capital turns and debtor days willresult from more efficient business models

Customer satisfaction

Increased sales growth will result from identifying the best market opportunities

Increased gross profit will result from identifying profitable market segments and customers

Profitability Improved EBIT margin will result from making thecorrect investment decisions

Safety A critical risk factor that must be addressed before any proposal can proceed

Understanding of staff and environmental risksenables them to be managed or the project to bediscarded

Businessdevelopment

Strategic theme:Build the franchise

Human performance

Staff development will occur by involving people inthe business development process

Staff satisfaction will occur through the confidenceresulting from the business growing by making thecorrect investment decisions

Customer Business Reduce inventory turns through understanding of lead

Absorptivecapacity

Type of knowledge

Explicit Tacit

High

Low

Figure 1.

Appropriate methods for managing international knowledgetransfer

Staff training (explain context of knowledge), basic reports,

emails, telephone calls,leadership teleconferences &

video conferences

Examples of knowledge sought: regular market intelligence (surveys) and informalcustomer feedback

IT systems that captureknowledge relevant to their strategic themes, study tours

Examples of knowledge sought: basicmacro-environment data and formalcustomer feedback on performance

Formal organisational processes, project teams with diversity of experience, mentoring, formal

training

Examples of knowledge sought: macro-environment data; micro-economic data,and government data necessary for large-scale decisions

Regular meetings within andacross functions and geography,development of trust and other

cooperation drivers

Examples of knowledge sought: includecustomer relationship management,transferring best practice processes,introducing improvement cycle-processes


9/12

632

excellence times Improved inventory turns through understanding

customers purchasing and sales patternsCustomer satisfaction

Improved delivery performance through understandingof lead times

Improved sales growth through being a total solutions provider

Increased gross profit through being able to charge a premium due to superior service

Increase gross profit through having a more efficient,integrated supply chain

Increased gross profit through customer profitabilityanalysis

Profitability Lower conversion costs to sales if production staff increase productivity through understanding the

importance of customer work batches Lower conversion costs to sales through reducingwaste and unnecessary product features fromunderstanding customer requirements

Lower overheads to sales through flexible staffingfrom understanding customer demand

Safety Improved safety through understanding customer delivery interface

relationshipmanagement

Strategic theme:Create Customer Value

Human performance

Improved staff development and satisfaction throughlearning how to deal with customers and havingsatisfied customers

Specifically, several methods for enabling organizations to manage their international knowledgeresources are listed in the table: including identifying strategic themes, identifying important activities,understanding the nature of important knowledge, developing absorptive capacity, creating value that addressesthe strategic themes, and measuring the performance outcomes. In addition, each method is put into practicethrough the use of several supportive actions. For example, the identification of strategic themes is achievedthrough action steps such as determining and agreeing on corporate and business level strategy, identifying whatneeds to be done to achieve this strategy, categorizing these actions within the strategy theme definitions, i.e.

build the business, customer intimacy, operational excellence, and corporate citizenship. Such efforts shouldensure the organization understands what it needs to do and know to implement its strategy. Together thesemethods and supporting actions can help establish an international knowledge management approach that willenable mangers to make knowledge resource decisions with confidence.

Organizations seeking a sustainable competitive advantage in todays dynamic international businessenvironment must ensure they understand the value of their most important resource knowledge. They need tomanage knowledge transfer, by understanding the characteristics of their knowledge resources and theabsorptive capacity of their subsidiaries. Finally, managers should measure the contribution of their knowledgeresources to the organizations performance within the context of progress towards their strategic themes.Knowledge is now the organizations most important resource. Understanding why knowledge is important will

become the international managers most important skill.


10/12

633

References

[1] Aharoni, Y. 1966. The Foreign Investment Decision Process , Harvard University Press.

[2] Anand, V; Glick, W.H. and C.C. Manz. 2002. Thriving on the knowledge of outsiders: Tappingorganisational social capital, Academy of Management Executive , 16(1): 87-101.

[3] Andersen, Otto. 1993. On the Internationalization Process of Firms: A critical analysis. Journal of International Business Studies , 24 (2): 209-224.

[4] Barney, J. 1986. Strategic factor markets: expectations, luck and business strategy, Management Science. 32: 1231-1241.

[5] Barney, J. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management . 17: 99-120.

[6] Barney, J. 2001, Is the resource-based "view" a useful perspective for strategic management research?Yes; The Academy of Management Review , 26 (1): 41-57

[7] Bartlett, C. A. and Sumantra Ghoshal. 1989. Managing Across Borders . MA.; Harvard BusinessSchool Press.

[8] Bresman, Henrik; Julian Birkinshaw; and Robert Nobel. 1999. Knowledge transfer in internationalacquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies . 30 (3): 439-462.

[9] Chatterjee, S. and Wernerfelt, B. (1991) The Link between Resources and Type of Diversification: Theory and Evidence, Strategic Management Journal , 12:33-48.

[10] Cohen, W. M. and D.A. Levinthal. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning andinnovation, Administrative Science Quarterly , 35(1), pp 128-152.

[11] Conner, K. 1991. An historical comparison of resource-based theory and five schools of thought withinindustrial organizational economics: do we have a new theory of the firm? Journal of Management . 17:121-154.

[12] Eisenhardt, K.M. 1989a. Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review , 14 (4): 532-550.

[13] Eisenhardt, K.M. 1989b. Making fast strategic decisions in high-velocity environments. Academy of Management Journal . 32: (3) 543-576.

[14]

Ghoshal, S.; C.A. Bartlett & P. Moran. 2000. Value creation: the new millennium managementmanifesto. In S. Chowdhury, editor. Management 21C . Prentice Hall.

[15] Goh, S.C. 2002. Managing effective knowledge transfer, Journal of Knowledge Management , 6 (1):23-30.

[16] Grant, R.M. 1996. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal ,Winter Special Issue, 17, pp 109-122.

[17] Hamel, G. Y. Doz and C.K. Prahalad. 1989. Collaborate with your competitors, and win, Harvard Business Review , 67(2), pp 83-103.


11/12

634

[18] Johanson, Jan and Finn Wiedersheim-Paul. 1975. The internationalization of the firm - Four SwedishCases. Journal of Management Studies , 12 (3): 305-22.

[19] Johanson, Jan and Vahlne, Jan-Erik. 1977. The internationalization process of the firm - a model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments. Journal of International

Business Studies , 8 (1): 23-32.

[20] Johanson, Jan and Vahlne, Jan-Erik. 1990. The mechanism of internationalization . International Marketing Review , 7 (4): 11-24.

[21] Kaplan, R.S. and D. P. Norton, 1996. The Balanced Scorecard . Harvard Business School Press.Boston, Massachusetts.

[22] Kaplan, R.S. and D. P. Norton, 2001. The Strategy-Focused Organisation . Harvard Business SchoolPress. Boston, Massachusetts.

[23] Kogut, B. and U. Zander. 1992. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science , 3 (3): 383-397.

[24] Kogut, B. and U. Zander. 1995. Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinationalcorporation. Journal of International Business Studies . 26(4): pp 625-644.

[25] Lam, Long W. and Louis P. White. An adaptive choice model of the internationalization process. International Journal of Organizational Analysis ; 7 (2): 105-134.

[26] Mansfield, E. and A. Romeo. 1980. Technology transfer to overseas subsidiaries by U.S. based firms,Quarterly Journal of Economics , 95: 737-750.

[27] Massingham, P.R. and G. Gregory. 2002. Purchasing knowledge resources in the internationalisation of the firm, paper presented at the Strategic Management Society Conference , Paris, France.

[28] Nonaka, I. 1994. A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science , 5: 14-37.

[29] Nonaka, Ikujiro and Hirotake Takeuchi. 1995. The knowledge-creating company . New York: OxfordUniversity Press.

[30] Oliver, C. 1997. Sustainable competitive advantage: Combining institutional and resource-based views;Strategic Management Journal , 18 (9): 697-719

[31] Priem, R.L. and J.E. Butler, 2001. Is the resource-based "view" a useful perspective for strategicmanagement research? Academy of Management Review, 26 (1): 22-41.

[32] Schulz, Martin. 2001. The uncertain relevance of newness: organizational learning and knowledgeflows. Academy of Management Journal , 44 (4): 661-681.

[33] Simonin, Bernard L. 1999. Ambiguity and the process of knowledge transfer in strategic alliances.Strategic Management Journal . 20: 595-623.

[34] Stopford, N. and L.T. Wells. 1972. Managing the Multinational Enterprise: Organization of the Firmand Ownership of the Subsidiaries , Longman.

[35] Szulanski, G. 1997. Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice withinthe firm . Strategic Management Journal , 17 (Summer Special Issue): 27-43.


12/12

635

[36] Teece, D.J. 1976. The multinational corporation and the resource cost of international technology

transfer , Cambridge, Massachusetts: Ballinger.

[37] Tsai, W. 2001. Knowledge transfer in intra-organizational networks: effects of network position andabsorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance, Academy of Management Journal , 44(5): 996-1004.

[38] Van Maanen, J. 1979. Reclaiming Qualitative Methods for Organizational Research: A Preface. Administrative Science Quarterly , 24: 520-526.

[39] Wernerfelt, B. (1984) A Resource-Based View of the Firm, Strategic Management Journal , 5:171-181.

[40] Yin, Robert K. 1993. Applications of Case Study Research . Newbury Park, California, SagePublications.

[41] Zander, U. 1991. Exploiting a technological edge: Voluntary and involuntary dissemination of technology . Stockholm: Institute of International Business.

[42] Zander, U. and B. Kogut. 1995. Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities: An Empirical Test, Organization Science , 6(1): pp 76-92.

Documents

An internation knowledge managemen