Trustworthiness, Risk, and the Transfer of Tacit and Explicit Knowledge Between Alliance Partners

Becerra, Manuel; Lunnan, Randi; Huemer, Lars

doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00766.x

Cited by 316 publications

(272 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

229

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The importance of trust in business relationships is highlighted by various authors (Welter 2012;Barney and Hansen 1994;Fink and Kessler 2010;Howorth and Moro 2006). Becerra et al (2008) suggest that knowledge transfer, as an endeavour with high levels of behavioural uncertainty, calls for high levels of trust. Indeed, trust supports arrangements that imply intensive behavioural uncertainty because of intensive knowledge exchange, such as inter-firm cooperative network relations (Doz 1996;Van de Ven and Ring 2006) and alliances (Gulati 1995); it is critical to decisions where information is scarce (Luhmann 2000) and it reduces monitoring and control activities (Zand 1972) and affects performance (McEvily and Zaheer 2005;Gaur et al 2011).…”

Section: Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trust, control and knowledge transfer in small business networks

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to transfer knowledge effectively in the networks of small and medium-sized firms (SMEs) is paramount for supporting firm competitiveness. Our research is the first one that explores the joint effect of trust and control mechanisms on knowledge transfer in the case of networks of SMEs. We use a multiple case study approach based on six Italian networks of SMEs. We analyse the joint impact of different ethical based trustworthiness factors-namely benevolence and integrity-and the levers of control (LOCs)-namely, belief, boundary, diagnostic and interactive LOCs-on knowledge transfer between SMEs in networks. We find that trust substitutes for the implementation of boundary, diagnostic, and belief tools, while it works jointly with interactive tools in order to support knowledge transfer. These insights not only provide a rich foundation for follow-up research, but also inform SME managers about how to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of knowledge transfer with their network partners.

show abstract

Section: Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trust, control and knowledge transfer in small business networks

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yet, a shared working environment is crucial as indicated in the research on conditions for successful collaboration [23]. It enables team development because nonverbal behavior is essential in tacit knowledge transfer, as underlined by Becerra et al [7] in inter-firm collaboration. Establishing joint projects and reconciling functions are therefore crucial to avoid "silo" behaviors and ensure that communication can lead to sufficient creativity.…”

Section: Internal Strategic Relationshipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Logistics, Marketing and Purchasing: Which Interfaces to Improve the Value Creation Process?

Merminod

Fenneteau²,

Paché

2017

Journal of Research in Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The differences between transfer of tacit versus explicit knowledge via trust (cf. Becerra et al, 2008) would be another fruitful avenue for further elaboration of the contributions of this paper.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating knowledge with suppliers at the R&D-manufacturing interface

Rosell

Lakemond

Wasti

2014

Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -Many manufacturing firms source components and subsystems from suppliers. Consequently, the suppliers' product and manufacturing knowledge is a central concern at the interface between R&D and manufacturing. This paper specifically investigates how supplier knowledge is integrated and what role trust plays in knowledge integration with suppliers at the R&D -manufacturing interface. Design/methodology/approach -The study is based on qualitative case studies of two different collaborations with suppliers at one firm. Findings -Two distinct processes are identified. First, capturing represents knowledge integration through decoupling, for which a basic level of trust specifically with regard to the competence of the supplier is necessary. Capturing can take place through interactions that are limited in time and scope. Second, joint learning represents a coupled knowledge integration process and takes place during a more extended period of time preceding and following the R&D-manufacturing interface and builds on relational-based trust. Practical implications -The interface between R&D and manufacturing needs to be extended to include a focus on suppliers' contributions in terms of product and manufacturing knowledge. The choice for suitable knowledge integration processes needs to be guided by concerns about the level of trust and the character of the supplier contributions. Originality/value -The paper adds new insights to previous literature by distinguishing between different types of knowledge integration processes and levels of trust. It bridges the gap between innovation and operations management, and clearly shows that the interface between R&D and manufacturing crosses organizational borders.Key words Knowledge integration; Buyer-Supplier collaboration; Trust; Product development; R&D-manufacturing interface 2 IntroductionSuppliers are increasingly contributing to their buyer's product development processes and acting as production partners (e.g., Appleyard, 2003, Beecham and Cordey-Hayes, 1998, Lau et al., 2010. In a recent report on global manufacturing by KPMG (KPMG, 2012), it is emphasized that tighter collaboration with suppliers is an important trend in the manufacturing industry, not only for manufacturing and logistics, but also specifically with regard to R&D activities. Consequently, the interface between R&D and manufacturing does not only involve internal functions, but includes external supplier relationships. These supplier relationships represent an important source of knowledge that has to cross the R&D -manufacturing interface in order to be integrated. Trust appears to be an important antecedent in these relationships as it increases the likelihood that information is being shared between the organizations (e.g. Ha et al., 2009;Fawcett et al., 2012, Lincoln et al., 1998Squire et al., 2009, Walter, 2003. Consequently, while there is a fair amount of literature on work integration at the R&D-manufacturing interface, the knowledge relationships and knowledge integration proc...

show abstract

Trustworthiness, Risk, and the Transfer of Tacit and Explicit Knowledge Between Alliance Partners

Cited by 316 publications

References 70 publications

Trust, control and knowledge transfer in small business networks

Trust, control and knowledge transfer in small business networks

Logistics, Marketing and Purchasing: Which Interfaces to Improve the Value Creation Process?

Integrating knowledge with suppliers at the R&D-manufacturing interface

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About