organizational structures (structures are important to how firms processes knowledgebecause organizational members interact not only as individuals, but also as actorsperforming organizational roles; and c), the student firm’s familiarity with the teacher firm’sAbsorptiveCapacity
23set of organizational problems.The way a firm deals with organizational problems is said to be a function of thedominant logic of that firm, or the ‘common thread’ running through all the objectives ofthe firm (Lane and Lubatkin, 1998:465). As Lane and Lubatkin state: “Even if the studentsunderstands the know‐what (scientific knowledge) and the know‐how that shaped it (theknowledge processing systems) its ability to commercially apply the new knowledge willlargely depend on the degree to which its know‐why (dominant logic) overlaps with theteacher’s… the more familiar the student is with the types of problems or projects that theteacher prefers, the more readily it will be able to commercially apply new knowledge fromthat teacher” (Lane and Lubatkin, 1998:466).Absorbing intra‐industry knowledge is shown to be supported by more in‐formalcontacts between employees. This knowledge can easily be spread between people as thisknowledge is easily understood due to the homogeneity of the knowledge from one’s ownindustry. Inter‐industry knowledge on the contrary is best shared through formal channelsand the employees will need some more general skills in structuring problems and gatheringinformation on previously unknown subjects. An organization’s absorptive capacity willdepend on the absorptive capacity of its individual members, but it is argued that anorganization’s absorptive capacity is not simply the sum of the absorptive capacity of itsemployees; some aspects are distinctly organizational (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990). Theorganizational level capability relates to the ability of the organization as a whole tostimulate and organize the transfer of knowledge across departments, functions andindividuals and even between firms. As absorptive capacity is said to be incremental innature, a firm’s ability to appropriate new external knowledge will depend largely on priorexperience with collaboration and of whether the employees hold related knowledge(Cohen and Levinthal, 1990: 128). Various studies have shown that firms benefit more fromcollaboration when they have some (but not all) technological capabilities in common withtheir partners (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990; Lane and Lubatkin, 1998; Sampson, 2007). Whenfirms choose to utilize external knowledge sources in their R&D process it often serves thepurpose of accessing complementary knowledge, i.e. knowledge that add to and match theknowledge already at hand. A potential useful resource for the accumulation of knowledgevia R&D is pre‐existing know‐how within the firm. This kind of complementary knowledgecan produce economies of scope, which ‘arises from inputs that are shared or utilized jointly
24without complete congestion’ (Willig, 1979, in Helfat, 1997:340). A firm’s exposure to
Upload your study docs or become a
Course Hero member to access this document
Upload your study docs or become a
Course Hero member to access this document
End of preview. Want to read all 34 pages?
Upload your study docs or become a
Course Hero member to access this document
Term
Spring
Professor
Dr Lee
Tags
partner
