Competing explanations for knowledge exchange: Technology sharing within the globally dispersed R&D of the multinational enterprise

Abstract

This paper explores five competing theories for technological knowledge sharing within the globally dispersed R&D function of the multidivisional, multinational firm. These five broad explanations for why a knowledge transaction occurs are: (1) economic, (2) technological, (3) organizational, (4) geographic, and (5) sociological. In addition to occurrence, likelihood of knowledge exchange success prompted by various explanations is considered. Ultimately the determination of which argument-or combination of arguments-offers the greatest explanatory power for the sharing of intermediate technological knowledge may be answered empirically.

Managing scientific and technical experts in R&D: beyond tensions, conflicting logics and orders of worth

“…From a theoretical standpoint, we support Batifoulier and Larquier (), who recognized the suitability of convention theories to diagnose or explain concrete problems faced by organizations. Our findings also provide empirical support for claims made by Ensign and Hébert () about the need for research that will reconcile various perspectives. Through hybridization and consideration of the various logics research can provide empirical findings that are relevant for practice.…”

“…Ensign and Hébert () explored five competing ideas to explain why technological knowledge‐sharing occurred within the globally dispersed R&D function of the multidivisional, multinational firm. These explanations were: (1) economic, (2) technological, (3) organizational, (4) geographic and (5) sociological.…”

Bridging Knowledge Gaps: Returnees and Reverse Knowledge Spillovers from Chinese Local Firms to Foreign Firms

“…As we discussed above, obtaining external knowledge across international boundaries is not straightforward, and prior studies of knowledge exchange at individual level (Allen 1990;Ensign and Hébert 2009; have found that social relationships of individuals affect knowledge diffusion. This literature has suggested that knowledge receivers and knowledge senders need to share a common ground and understand the social and cultural context in which knowledge is developed (Buckley et al, 2005;Harzing, et al, 2011).…”

A performance evaluation model for cooperation and exchange projects of NSFC

“…Projects of collaborative research category relatively pro duce outputs could be clearly measured by academic achievements of papers, patents, rewards and so on. Never theless, perceived output of exchange category is more fo cused on the intangible aspect [12], such as communication, researchers training and increased awareness of R&D.…”