In Search of Precision in Absorptive Capacity Research: A Synthesis of the Literature and Consolidation of Findings

Abstract

This paper addresses two fundamental problems in the absorptive capacity (AC) literature: conceptual ambiguity on what AC is and a lack of synthesized empirical findings showing how AC matters for firm outcomes. We take a two-pronged approach to address these problems: (1) conceptual distillation of the literature to discern the core AC dimensions, outcomes, and contingent external knowledge conditions and (2) meta-analysis of the empirical literature to synthesize the findings. For conceptual distillation, we identify three dimensions of AC: absorptive effort (i.e., the knowledge-building investments made by a firm), absorptive knowledge base (i.e., the current knowledge stock of a firm), and absorptive process (i.e., a firm's internal procedures and practices related to knowledge diffusion). We develop these dimensions by explicating their theoretical roots, functions, mechanisms, and corresponding measures. Leveraging the conceptual distillation, we conduct meta-analyses of the empirical literature and synthesize key

Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) for topic modeling of the CFPB consumer complaints

“…For example meta-analysis has been used to conduct statistical inference from multiple studies with the aim of detecting relationships among evolving topics in a field of research (e.g. Song et al, 2018). However, it needs a manual review of all the studies which is a time consuming process.…”

Evolving Absorptive Capacity: The Mediating Role of Systematic Knowledge Management

“…In the theoretical development of the concept [24], [25], researchers have reconceptualised absorptive capacity as a form of dynamic capability characterized by four distinct dimensions: acquisition, assimilation, transformation, and exploitation [26], [27], [28]. The acquisition dimension of absorptive capacity is related to routines for identifying and acquiring knowledge that resides outside of the firms' boundary.…”

“…The second literature gap concerns the relationship between systematic knowledge management and different aspects of innovation outcomes [34]. There has been considerable research establishing the positive relationship between absorptive capacity and innovation output such as number of new products launched and financial performance exclusive of new product launch [28], [35], [36], [37], [38], and in technology sourcing [39] However, it is uncertain whether new product launch necessarily results in better financial performance [28], [40].…”

“…i.e., high levels of systematic knowledge management results in a fewer number of higher performing innovations. One implication is that knowledge management research should include both quantitative and performance innovation outcomes [28].…”

Capacidade Absortiva e Conhecimento Tácito: um Estudo nas Gerações Millennials, X e Baby Boomers

“…Para Song et al (2018), a capacidade absortiva possui três dimensões: esforço absortivo (isto é, os investimentos para construção de conhecimento feitos pela empresa), base de conhecimento de absorção (isto é, a capacidade atual de conhecimento de uma organização) e o processo de absorção (que são os procedimentos e práticas internas de uma instituição relacionadas à difusão do conhecimento). Zahra e George (2002), identificaram 4 dimensões de capacidade absortiva: a capacidade de aquisição (envolve a identificação e aquisição de novos conhecimentos), a capacidade de assimilação (permite que o conhecimento seja analisado, processado, interpretado e compreendido), capacidade de transformação (refere-se à capacidade de combinar o conhecimento existente com o novo conhecimento) e capacidade de exploração (implica em rotinas e competências organizacionais para impulsionar e aproveitar o novo conhecimento.…”