No abstract

Dominant research streams in the knowledge transfer field, such as the positivist and social constructionist approaches, largely assume that knowledge transfer is accomplished through instructions and/or socially constructed practices. Underlying these views is the belief that texts and practices carry with them the codes necessary for their own decoding and therefore enable an unproblematic knowledge transfer. In contrast, we argue that the decoding of information into meaningful knowledge is always mediated by people's private and cultural models, which are created from the unique combination of their cognitive dispositions (i.e. acumen, memory, creativity, volitions, emotions) and socio-cultural interaction. The degree to which people apply these models reflectively and/or categorically (i.e. automatically) depends on the need for cognition as well as environmental demands and feedback. Therefore, knowledge transfer is always tentative, because it depends on the application of private and cultural models along the continuum that goes from reflective to categorical processing. We present first a critique of the positivist and social constructionist positions; then we introduce a socio-cognitive model that captures and explicates socio-cognitive processes involved in sense making during knowledge transfer. Finally, we explore future research streams and managerial implications. Copyright (c) Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2008.

An important stream of the organizational failure literature has proposed process models to describe how firms fail. Despite much progress, this stream is currently at a crossroads. Previous process models try to capture how failure unfolds in singular models that describe organizational failure as the result of either inertia or extremism or as a mixture of both. However, it remains unclear how these competing explanations are related and what underlying mechanisms explain why organizational failure processes unfold as they do. We address these issues by examining failure processes using a qualitative meta‐analysis research design. The qualitative meta‐analysis allows us to analyse and synthesize the wealth of previously published single‐case studies in order to develop process models of organizational failure. The most salient finding of our analysis is that failure processes converge around four distinct process archetypes, which we name imperialist, laggard, villain, and politicized. Each process archetype can be explained by the interplay of distinct rigidity and conflict mechanisms. Differentiating the four process archetypes and explaining the underlying mechanisms helps to resolve some contradictions in the previous failure process literature.

Successful client-consultant relationships depend on trust, but trusting is difficult in the nonroutine, high-stake context of consulting. Based on a sample of 15 clients and 16 consultants in Australia, we develop a grounded model that explains the process of trust granting in the context of client-consultant relationships. Our model builds upon two influential research streams on trust in the literature, the ABI model (Mayer et al., 1995) and Zucker's (1986) generic modes of trust, and combines their insights with a process perspective on trusting as proposed by Möllering (2001). By acknowledging the process nature of trust as a leap of faith resulting from socio-cognitive (-emotional) interactions we move away from the passive evaluation of trustworthiness. Our findings suggest that trusting is a process that involves three social practices: (1) signaling ability and integrity; (2) demonstrating benevolence; and (3) establishing an emotional connection. Our study contributes to the trust literature on consulting and to trust research more generally by advancing a process approach and emphasizing the social, not merely mental, nature of trusting as involving a leap of faith.

Purpose -Internationalization process research has conceptualized the cross-border move of firms as a process of learning. Yet, little attempts have been made to develop a constructivist learning theory of the internationalizing firm. The aim of this paper is to apply a contemporary learning theoretical framework to analyze the internationalization of professional service firms. Design/methodology/approach -A constructivist theory of learning is applied. Findings -The paper explains learning during the internationalization process of professional service firms as a process of social interaction with the socio-cultural environment. The paper outlines specific individual and social mechanisms through which firms acquire new knowledge when moving across borders and embed themselves into a new socio-cultural market domain.Research limitations/implications -The argument is theoretical in nature and has particular implications for future empirical research, which may investigate the specific social learning mechanisms of the internationalizing firm in particular professional service industries and cultural settings. Originality/value -The application of a constructivist theory of learning to the internationalization of professional service firms is unique until now to the research field.