CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 367International Business and FDIInnovation and Knowledge ManagementGlobal trade, sustainability, and social impact

Knowledge connectivity: An agenda for innovation research in international business

Open access
Cano-Kollmann, Marcelo, Cantwell, John, Hannigan, Thomas J, Mudambi, Ram, Song, Jaeyong·2016·Journal of International Business Studies
DOI 10.1057/jibs.2016.8
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1057/jibs.2016.8

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Governments of host countries and domestic firms must adapt to gain access to new knowledge, while MNEs must alter their strategies and resources to both capture returns and protect their market positions.

    “The governments of host countries and domestic firms must adapt to gain access to new knowledge, while MNEs must alter their strategies and resources to both capture returns and protect their market positions (Cano-Kollmann et al., 2016)”

    From Innovation in and from emerging economies: New insights and lessons for international business research (2021) · cites this paper as Cano-Kollmann et al., 2016

    The Dynamic Nature of Knowledge Connectivity in GVCs (page unavailable) says MNEs must develop orchestrating competencies and stay at the leading edge of knowledge to maintain competitive advantage. The Introduction (page unavailable) describes firms and locations as co-evolving, but the copy does not specifically say that host-country governments and domestic firms must adapt to access new knowledge, or that MNEs must change their resources to capture returns. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • While recent conceptual studies have called for a closer examination of specific mechanisms for knowledge transfer in a GVC, few empirical studies have addressed this.

    “Further, while recent conceptual studies have called for a closer examination of specific mechanisms for knowledge transfer in a GVC (Pietrobelli & Rabellotti, 2011;Cano-Kollmann, Cantwell, Hannigan, Mudambi, & Song, 2016;Kano, 2018), few empirical studies have addressed this.”

    From Global value chains: A review of the multi-disciplinary literature (2020) · cites this paper as Cano-Kollmann, Cantwell, Hannigan, Mudambi, & Song, 2016

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 47

  1. Abell, P., Felin, T., & Foss, N. 2008. Building micro-foundations for the routines, capabilities, and performance links. Managerial and Decision Economics, 29(6): 489-502.
  2. Adams, P., Brusoni, S., & Malerba, F. 2011. Knowledge, supply and demand in industrial development: A sectoral systems perspective. Innovation and Development, 1(2): 167-185.
  3. Aldrich, H. E., & Martinez, M. A. 2001. Many are called, but few are chosen: An evolutionary perspective for the study of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(4): 41-56.
  4. Amin, A., & Cohendet, P. 2004. Architectures of knowledge: Firms, capabilities, and communities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  5. Andersson, U., Buckley, P., & Dellestrand, H. 2015. In the right place at the right time: The influence of knowledge governance tools on knowledge transfer and utilization in MNEs. Global Strategy Journal, 5(1): 27-47.
  6. Andersson, U., Forsgren, M., & Holm, U. 2002. The strategic impact of external networks: Subsidiary performance and competence development in the multinational corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 23(11): 979-996.
  7. Andersson, U., Gaur, A., Mudambi, R., & Persson, M. 2015. Unpacking interunit knowledge transfer in multinational enter- prises. Global Strategy Journal, 5(3): 241-255.
  8. Baldwin, C., & von Hippel, E. 2011. Modeling a paradigm shift: From producer innovation to open collaborative innovation. Organization Science, 22(6): 1399-1417.
  9. Bathelt, H., Malmberg, A., & Maskell, P. 2004. Clusters and knowledge: Local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation. Progress in Human Geography, 28(1): 31-56.
  10. Beugelsdijk, S., McCann, P., & Mudambi, R. 2010. Introduction: Place, space and organization -Economic geography and the multinational enterprise. Journal of Economic Geography, 10(4): 485-493.
  11. Birkinshaw, J. M., & Hood, N. 1998. Multinational subsidiary evolution: Capability and charter change in foreign-owned subsidiary companies. Academy of Management Review, 23(4): 773-795.
  12. Brannen, M. Y. 2004. When Mickey loses face: Recontextualiza- tion, semantic fit and the semiotics of foreignness. Academy of Management Review, 29(4): 593-616.
  13. Brusoni, S., Prencipe, A., & Pavitt, K. 2001. Knowledge specializa- tion, organizational coupling and the boundaries of the firm: Why do firms know more than they make? Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(4): 597-621.
  14. Buckley, P. J., & Casson, M. 1976. The future of the multinational enterprise. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  15. Cantwell, J. A. 2013. Blurred boundaries between firms, and new boundaries within (large multinational) firms: The impact of decentralized networks for innovation. Seoul Journal of Econom- ics, 26(1): 1-32.
  16. Cantwell, J. A. (Ed) 2015. An introduction to the eclectic paradigm as a meta-framework for the cross-disciplinary analysis of international business. In, The eclectic paradigm: A framework for synthesizing and comparing theories of interna- tional business from different disciplines or perspectives. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  17. Cantwell, J. A., Dunning, J. H., & Lundan, S. M. 2010. An evolutionary approach to understanding international business activity: The co-evolution of MNEs and the institutional environ- ment. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(4): 567-586.
  18. Cantwell, J.A., & Mudambi, R. 2011. Physical attraction and the geography of knowledge sourcing in multinational enterprises. Global Strategy Journal, 1(3-4): 206-232.
  19. Cantwell, J. A., & Santangelo, G. D. 1999. The frontier of international technology networks: Sourcing abroad the most highly tacit capabilities. Information Economics and Policy, 11(1): 101-123.
  20. Cantwell, J. A., & Zhang, Y. 2009. The innovative multinational firm: The dispersion of creativity, and its implications for the firm and for world development. In S. Collinson, & G. Morgan (Eds), Images of the multinational firm. Chichester: Wiley.
  21. Doz, Y. L., Santos, J., & Williamson, P. 2001. From global to metanational: How companies win in the knowledge economy. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
  22. Dunning, J. H. 1988. The eclectic paradigm of international production: A restatement and some possible extensions. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(1): 1-31.
  23. Dunning, J. H., & Norman, G. 1983. The theory of the multi- national enterprise: An application to multinational office loca- tion. Environment and Planning A, 15(5): 675-692.
  24. Frost, T. S. 2001. The geographic sources of foreign sub- sidiaries' innovations. Strategic Management Journal, 22(2): 101-123.
  25. Gibson, C., & Zellmer-Bruhn, M. E. 2001. Metaphors and mean- ing: An intercultural analysis of the concept of teamwork. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(2): 274-303.
  26. Ghoshal, S., & Nohria, N. 1989. Internal differentiation within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 10(4): 323-337.
  27. Hannigan, T. J., Cano-Kollmann, M., & Mudambi, R. 2015. Thriving innovation amidst manufacturing decline: The Detroit auto cluster and the resilience of local knowledge production. Industrial and Corporate Change, 24(3): 613-634.
  28. Hegel, G. W. F. 1807. The phenomenology of spirit. (Trans. 1977 by A. V. Miller) Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  29. Kant, E. 1781. The critique of pure reason. (Trans. 1998 by P. Guyer & A. Wood) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  30. Koza, M. P., & Lewin, A. Y. 1998. The co-evolution of strategic alliances. Organization Science, 9(3): 255-264.
  31. Levinthal, D. 1997. Adaptation on rugged landscapes. Manage- ment Science, 43(7): 934-950.
  32. Lissoni, F. 2001. Knowledge codification and the geography of innovation: The case of Brescia mechanical cluster. Research Policy, 30(9): 1479-1500.
  33. Lorenzen, M., & Mudambi, R. 2013. Clusters, connectivity and catch-up: Bollywood and Bangalore in the global economy. Journal of Economic Geography, 13(3): 501-534.
  34. Marshall, A. 1920. Principles of economics, 8th edn. London: Palgrave Macmillan, (Original work published 1890).
  35. Maskell, P., Bathelt, H., & Malmberg, A. 2006. Building global knowledge pipelines: The role of temporary clusters. European Planning Studies, 14(8): 997-1013.
  36. Mudambi, R. 2008. Location, control and innovation in knowledge-intensive industries. Journal of Economic Geography, 8(5): 699-725.
  37. Mudambi, R., & Navarra, P. 2004. Is knowledge power? Knowl- edge flows, subsidiary power and rent seeking within MNCs. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(5): 385-406.
  38. Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. 1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
  39. Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Nagata, A. 2000. A firm as a knowledge-creating entity: A new perspective on the theory of the firm. Industrial and Corporate Change, 9(1): 1-20.
  40. Pinch, S., Henry, N., Jenkins, M., & Tallman, S. 2003. From 'industrial districts' to 'knowledge clusters': A model of knowledge dissemination and competitive advantage in industrial agglomerations. Journal of Economic Geography, 3(4): 373-388.
  41. Rugman, A. M. 1980. A new theory of the multinational enter- prise internationalization versus internalization. Columbia Jour- nal of World Business, 15(1): 23-29.
  42. Saxenian, A. 2006. The new argonauts: Regional advantage in a global economy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  43. Schotter, A., & Beamish, P. W. 2011. Performance effects of MNC headquarters-subsidiary conflict and the role of boundary spanners: The case of headquarter initiative rejection. Journal of International Management, 17(3): 243-259.
  44. Song, J. 2014. Subsidiary absorptive capacity and knowledge transfer within multinational corporations. Journal of Interna- tional Business Studies, 45(1): 73-84.
  45. Song, J., Almeida, P., & Wu, G. 2003. Learning-by-hiring: When is mobility more likely to facilitate interfirm knowledge transfer? Management Science, 49(4): 351-365.
  46. Song, J., & Shin, J. 2008. The paradox of technological capabil- ities: A study of knowledge sourcing from host countries of overseas R&D operations. Journal of International Business Stu- dies, 39(2): 291-303.
  47. Vernon, R. 1966. International investment and international trade in the product cycle. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80(2): 190-207.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cano-Kollmann, M., Cantwell, J., Hannigan, T. J., Mudambi, R., & Song, J.
Affiliations
  • Ohio University (US)
  • Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
  • Temple University (US)
  • Seoul National University (KR)
Corresponding author
Cantwell, John
ORCID
Venue
Journal of International Business Studies
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2016-03-11
Volume
47
Issue
3
Pages
255-262
ISSN
  • 0047-2506 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-6990
DOI
10.1057/jibs.2016.8
OpenAlex
W2293584067
Cited by
367
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 47 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 10
FWCI
83.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of International Business Studies (publishedVersion)
  • Rutgers University Community Repository (Rutgers University) (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Rutgers University Community Repository (Rutgers University)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › International Business and FDI
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Global trade, sustainability, and social impact
Keywords
multinational corporations, innovation process, global value chains, economic geography, location theory, knowledge transfer, global value creation, research agenda

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review