Replication of existing routines in new contexts is an important value-creating strategy for organizations. This paper synthesizes the state of research on replication and organizes the literature around two broad themes: forward knowledge flows (i.e. from a replicator to a replicatee) and reverse knowledge flows. The authors show that the theoretical assumptions of existing research leave important questions around the replication of routines unaddressed. More specifically, they identify research gaps in regard to micro-level processes of replication. Little is understood about the performance of routines in practice and, related to that, the processes through which routines change during replication. Drawing on recent theorizing on organizational routines, in particular the relationship between the ostensive and performative aspects, helps the authors to unpack the micro-level processes of forward and reverse knowledge flows. This paper opens two new trajectories for research on replication: (1) a focus on the actions of individual actors in the enactment of organizational routines provides new possibilities for understanding how replication is an inherently political process;(2) conceptualizing change as endogenous within the performance of routines offers a route to a more nuanced understanding of change and deviation in the process of replication. The paper closes with a summary of major theoretical arguments, questions for further research and implications for practitioners.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to assess the cultural influences on knowledge sharing behavior in project teams.Design/methodology/approachIn this paper a simulation setting is used to assess the cultural influences on knowledge sharing. All intercultural simulations were part of an educational program, in intercultural management (MBA level) and of executive development programs respectively.FindingsThe findings in the paper show that different cultural backgrounds of team members due to different ethnicities, gender, national culture or functions create a context of cultural complexity, which might affect knowledge sharing in a negative way. The results of the simulations show that the different identities of team members have an important influence as they might trigger sentiments of negative stereotyping. The findings also reveal that knowledge sharing is only likely to occur if new project members are welcomed emotionally as valuable contributors to a common task.Research limitations/implicationsGiven the exploratory nature of this paper, it suggests using the results as a starting ground for future empirical research. The propositions that were developed on the basis of the research may be tested in subsequent studies applying a different research methodology.Practical implicationsBased on the paper's findings, recommendations for project management in situations of cultural complexity are developed.Originality/valueThe paper extends existing knowledge on cultural influences in knowledge sharing especially in the context of project teams.

This paper presents one of the first studies to identify and explain the marketization work of a strategic net. Through a study of the Stevenage Bioscience Catalyst -a strategic net formed to support the marketization of Life Science Discoveries -we generate insights into the everyday work that makes marketization happen. Marketization is understood as the process that enables the conceptualisation, production and exchange of goods. Our findings focus on one specific form of marketization work found to be core to the strategic net: conceptualisation work. Three forms of conceptualisation work are identified: conceptualising actors' roles, conceptualising markets and conceptualising goods. These manifest as routinized, recursive practices. Our analysis reveals how these practices gather together multiple forms of scientific, technical and market knowledge to generate new market devices that transform market rules and conventions, and introduce new methods and instruments of valuation that change the market. In contrast to extant studies that claim a strategic net's activities influence markets; our findings position the conceptualisation work of the strategic net as constitutive of markets and the broader system of provision for 'healthcare' and 'health futures'.

Research on knowledge strategies argues that the configuration of activities used by companies to acquire new and leverage existing knowledge is an important influencing factor of company performance. However, we do not know very much about how companies actually structure knowledge acquisition. In addition, we do not know which configurations of knowledge acquisition are conducive to company performance. Furthermore, knowledge strategies have largely been neglected in the context of young and entrepreneurial companies. Drawing on an explorative analysis of quantitative and qualitative data, we investigate strategies and activities for knowledge acquisition in the context of young biotechnology companies in Germany. The study reveals four distinct knowledge acquisition strategies (low key, mid range, focus and explorer) and shows that these strategies differ in their relation to company performance as a result of their configuration of knowledge acquisition activities and the type of knowledge acquired.

In this article, we investigate a crucial factor in open strategy research: participation. By drawing on the attention-based view, we argue that the degree of participation in both analog and digital practices of open strategy is the result of “attention contests.” These attention contests arise as the attention structure of Open Strategy initiatives (as quasi-temporary organizations) and the attention structure of the main organization compete for actors’ limited attention. As these attention structures collide, four tensions emerge (process ambiguity, status transitions, time constraints, and identity shifts). We argue that the impact of these tensions is contingent on the type of Open Strategy practice; digital or analog forms of Open Strategy-making. Therefore, we offer a new theoretical understanding of why and how actors participate in Open Strategy initiatives. Based on this, we offer various mechanisms of how firms can facilitate meaningful participation in these different practices. This essay opens up promising avenues for future Open Strategy and participation research.