Advertisement

The Nature and Dimensions of Knowledge Mobility for Competitive Advantage

  • Pia Hurmelinna-Laukkanen
  • Heidi Olander
  • Max Von Zedtwitz
Chapter
Part of the Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning book series (IAKM, volume 6)

Abstract

Knowledge exchange generally leads to mutual benefits, but unintentional knowledge transfer may have negative consequences for the original knowledge owner. Knowledge loss may be caused by, e.g., key employees leaving, and if key knowledge assets are obtained by competitors, it may harm the competitiveness of the firm. As the dynamics of overall knowledge mobility are rather abstract and difficult to grasp, this study first reviews the debate on the relevance of knowledge mobility and protection for competitive advantage. To identify the dimensions of knowledge mobility we seek explanations for how and why knowledge moves, what kind of knowledge moves, and where and how knowledge flows occur. Based on earlier literature and empirical evidence from qualitative research, we develop a categorization of dimensions of knowledge mobility. In particular, we suggest that intentionality of knowledge mobility reveals other dimensions of the type, modality, and locus. This categorization allows a sharper analytical evaluation of the nature of the connection between knowledge mobility and protection.

References

  1. Adler, P. (1995). Interdepartmental interdependence and coordination: The case of the design/manufacturing interface. Organization Science, 6(1), 147–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alegre, J., Sengupta, K., & Lapiedra, R. (2013). Knowledge management and innovation performance in a high-tech SMEs industry. International Small Business Journal, 31(4), 454–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alexy, O., George, G., & Salter, A. (2013). Cui Bono? The selective revealing of knowledge and its implications for innovative activity. Academy of Management Review, 38(2), 270–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bae, J., & Lawler, J. J. (2000). Organizational and HRM strategies in Korea: Impact on firm performance in an emerging economy. Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 502–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bai, O., Wei, J., & Yang, Y. (2015). Governing knowledge mobility in service innovation network for innovation performance. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1, 14125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Birkinshaw, J. (2002). Managing internal R&D networks in global firms: What sort of knowledge is involved? Long Range Planning, 35(3), 245–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bishara, N. D. (2006). Covenants not to compete in a knowledge economy: Balancing innovation from employee mobility against legal protection for human capital investment. Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law, 27, 287–322.Google Scholar
  8. Bogers, M. (2011). The open innovation paradox: Knowledge sharing and protection in R&D collaborations. European Journal of Innovation Management, 14(1), 93–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chang, J. Y., Choi, J. N., & Kim, M. U. (2008). Turnover of highly educated R&D professionals: The role of pre-entry cognitive style, work values and career orientation. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 81(2), 299–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006). Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 659–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dougherty, V. (1999). Knowledge is about people, not databases. Industrial and Commercial Training, 31(7), 262–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Durst, S., Aggestam, L., & Aisenberg Ferenhof, H. (2015). Understanding knowledge leakage: A review of previous studies. VINE, 45(4), 568–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eriksson, P., & Kovalainen, A. (2008). Qualitative methods in business research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fornahl, D., Zellner, C., & Audretsch, D. B. (2005). The impact of regional social networks on the entrepreneurial development (Vol. 6). New York: SpringerGoogle Scholar
  17. Franco, A. M., & Filson, D. (2006). Spin-outs: Knowledge diffusion through employee mobility. The RAND Journal of Economics, 37(4), 841–860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Frishammar, J., Ericsson, K., & Patel, P. C. (2015). The dark side of knowledge transfer: Exploring knowledge leakage in joint R&D projects. Technovation, 41(1), 75–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gassmann, O., & Enkel, E. (2004). Towards a theory of open innovation: Three core process archetypes. In Proceedings of the R&D Management Conference (pp. 1–18). Lisbon, Portugal, July 6–9.Google Scholar
  20. Gurteen, D. (1998). Knowledge, creativity and innovation. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2(1), 5–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P., & Olander, H. (2014). Coping with rivals’ absorptive capacity in innovation activities. Technovation, 34(1), 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P., Olander, H., Blomqvist, K., & Panfilii, V. (2012). Orchestrating R&D networks: Absorptive capacity, network stability, and innovation appropriability. European Management Journal, 30(6), 552–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P., & Soininen, A. (2011). Different paths of appropriation – Patent strategies and licensing practices for closed and open innovation. International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, 4(3), 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jiang, X., Li, M., Gao, S., Bao, Y., & Jiang, F. (2013). Managing knowledge leakage in strategic alliances: The effects of trust and formal contracts. Industrial Marketing Management, 42(6), 983–991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kale, P., Singh, H., & Perlmutter, H. (2000). Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: Building relational capital. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 217–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Laursen, K., & Salter, A. (2006). Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal, 27(1), 131–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lipparini, A., Lorenzoni, G., & Ferriani, S. (2014). From core to periphery and back: A study on the deliberate shaping of knowledge flows in interfirm dyads and networks. Strategic Management Journal, 35(4), 578–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Manhart, M., & Thalmann, S. (2015). Protecting organizational knowledge: A structured literature review. Journal of Knowledge Management, 19(2), 190–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Messeni Petruzzelli, A., Albino, V., Carbonara, N., & Rotolo, D. (2010). Leveraging learning behavior and network structure to improve knowledge gatekeepers’ performance. Journal of Knowledge Management, 14(5), 635–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Minbaeva, D. B., Mäkelä, K., & Rabbiosi, L. (2012). Linking HRM and knowledge transfer via individual-level mechanisms. Human Resource Management, 51(3), 387–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Moen, J. (2005). Is mobility of technical personnel a source of R&D spillovers? Journal of Labor Economics, 23(1), 81–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Olander, H., & Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P. (2015). Perceptions on employee knowledge-risks in multinational, multilevel R&D organizations – Managing knowledge leaking and leaving. International Journal of Innovation Management, 19(3), 1540006-1–1540006-28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Olander, H., Vanhala, M., Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P., & Blomqvist, K. (2016). Preserving prerequisites for innovation: Employee-related knowledge protection and organizational trust. Baltic Journal of Management, 11(4), 493–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Park, H., Ribiere, V., & Schulte, W. D. (2004). Critical attributes of organizational culture that promote knowledge management technology implementation success. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(3), 106–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  36. Polanyi, M. (1967). The tacit dimension. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  37. Porter Liebeskind, J. (1996). Knowledge, strategy, and the theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(1), 93–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ritala, P., Olander, H., Michailova, S., & Husted, K. (2015). Knowledge sharing, knowledge leaking and relative innovation performance: An empirical study. Technovation, 35(1), 22–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rose, R. C., & Kumar, N. (2006). The influence of organizational and human resource management strategies on performance. Performance Improvement, 45(4), 18–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2001). Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises. Strategic Management Journal, 22(3), 237–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Saviotti, P. P. (1998). On the dynamics of appropriability of tacit and codified knowledge. Research Policy, 26, 843–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schulz, M., & Jobe, L. A. (2001). Codification and tacitness as knowledge management strategies: an empirical exploration. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 12(1), 139–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Segarra-Ciprés, M., Roca-Puig, V., & Bou-Llusar, J. C. (2014). External knowledge acquisition and innovation output: an analysis of the moderating effect of internal knowledge transfer. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 12(2), 203–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Silverman, D. (2005). Doing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  45. Singh, J. (2008). Distributed R&D, cross-regional knowledge integration and quality of innovative output. Research Policy, 37(1), 77–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Swan, J., Newell, S., Scarbrough, H., & Hislop, D. (1999). Knowledge management and innovation: Networks and networking. Journal of Knowledge Management, 3(4), 262–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(1), 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zander, U., & Kogut, B. (1995). Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities: An empirical test. Organization Science, 6(1), 76–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zhang, X., & Jiang, J. Y. (2015). With whom shall I share my knowledge? A recipient perspective of knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 19(2), 277–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13(3), 339–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pia Hurmelinna-Laukkanen
    • 1
  • Heidi Olander
    • 2
  • Max Von Zedtwitz
    • 3
  1. 1.University of OuluOuluFinland
  2. 2.Lappeenranta University of TechnologyLappeenrantaFinland
  3. 3.Kaunas University of TechnologyKaunasLithuania

Personalised recommendations