The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 14 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Knowledge of the Firm and the Evolutionary Theory of the Multinational Corporation
Open accessAbstract
Firms are social communities that specialize in the creation and internal transfer of knowledge. The multinational corporation arises not out of the failure of markets for the buying and selling of knowledge, but out of its superior efficiency as an organizational vehicle by which to transfer this knowledge across borders. We test the claim that firms specialize in the internal transfer of tacit knowledge by empirically examining the decision to transfer the capability to manufacture new products to wholly owned subsidiaries or to other parties. The empirical results show that the less codifiable and the harder to teach is the technology, the more likely the transfer will be to wholly owned operations. This result implies that the choice of transfer mode is determined by the efficiency of the multinational corporation in transferring knowledge relative to other firms, not relative to an abstract market transaction. The notion of the firm as specializing in the transfer and recombination of knowledge is the foundation to an evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
60 Own interpretation · 9 Own result · 8 Own method · 7 No full text of the sources · 5 Sources not found · 5 No basis given
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“strong support was found for the proposition that the choice of transfer mode is explained by the degree of tacitness of technology.”
- Also stated in: § Results · hedged
“They consistently show that the more tacit the technology is, the more likely it will be transferred to a wholly owned subsidiary.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Abstract
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Results · hedged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The empirical results show that the less codifiable and the harder to teach is the technology, the more likely the transfer will be to wholly owned operations.”
- Also stated in: § Results · hedged
“They consistently show that the more tacit the technology is, the more likely it will be transferred to a wholly owned subsidiary.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Results · hedged
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The following investigation is meant to show that knowledge that is difficult to codify or teach and is also complex will tend to be transferredwithin the firm.”
- Also stated in: § Results · hedged
“The positive coefficient to Complexity indicates that as technologies increase in their complexity, they are more likely to be transferred to wholly owned subsidiaries.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Results · hedged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ourresults suggest, though, that there remains a distinguishable boundary in the knowledge between the partner firms.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We also partitionedthe sample by groupingjoint venturesand wholly owned subsidiaries together.The significance levels of the coefficients deteriorated.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The effect of age of the technology is insignificant.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The above results provide support for the contention that firms specialize in the transfer of knowledge that is difficult to understandand codify.”
- Also stated in: § 16. The validation of the questionnaire design and the reliability and validity of the constructs are discussed in detail in Zander [1991a] and Zander and Kogut [forthcoming]. · hedged
“Ourfindings suggesting that firms specialize in the transfer of relatively tacit and idiosyncratic knowledge are consistent with this broader evolutionary perspective.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 16. The validation of the questionnaire design and the reliability and validity of the constructs are discussed in detail in Zander [1991a] and Zander and Kogut [forthcoming]. · hedged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The coefficients to the variables Codifiabilityand Teachabilityarenegative and significant, indicating that as the knowledge becomes more codified and more easily taught, the more likely it will be transferred to a third party rather than to a wholly owned subsidiary.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“What firms do is to specialize in the creation and transfer of specialized knowledge.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The positive coefficient to Complexity indicates that as technologies increase in their complexity, they are more likely to be transferred to wholly owned subsidiaries.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 25
- Probably not a substantial claim. 15
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Knowledge is transferredby joint ventures, but for uncodified knowledge, the preferred vehicle is transfer between wholly owned units.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The number of previous transfers is negatively related to transfer to wholly owned subsidiaries, contrary to expectation, but the relationship is insignificant.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The multinational corporation arises not out of the failure of markets for the buying and selling of knowledge, but out of its superior efficiency as an organizational vehicle by which to transfer this knowledge across borders.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Firms are social communities that specialize in the creation and internal transfer of knowledge.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is difficult to discuss and analyze the growth of the firm, and its boundaries, in the context of comparative statics.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > 16. The validation of the questionnaire design and the reliability and validity of the constructs are discussed in detail in Zander [1991a] and Zander and Kogut [forthcoming].
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Rather, these costs are derived from the efforts of codifying and teaching complex knowledge to recipients; more efforts must be expended, the less capable the user.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > DIRECT INVESTMENT AND KNOWLEDGEAS A PUBLIC GOOD
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“And surely, when such a decision is considered, an importantaspect would be the extent to which a firm has an advantage in specialized knowledge of cooperating with agents and the extent to which their shared knowledge will further accumulate and provide platforms for future opportunities.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > 16. The validation of the questionnaire design and the reliability and validity of the constructs are discussed in detail in Zander [1991a] and Zander and Kogut [forthcoming].
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Horizontal foreign direct investment is, therefore, the transferof knowledge within the firm and across borders, and in this regard, such transfers are the primary expression of the growth of the firm.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > 16. The validation of the questionnaire design and the reliability and validity of the constructs are discussed in detail in Zander [1991a] and Zander and Kogut [forthcoming].
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Another interpretation,rarely discussed in the literature,is that technologies that are difficult to codify also representplatforms for expansion into future markets.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Multiple respondents for an innovation were not used, though, for some questionnaires, one individual scored the basic information and another answered the section dealing with the manufacturing process.(As the questions did not reflect on the respondent's performance, the risk of misattributionis low.)”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A response rate of 80% was attained; the remaining 20% were similar in size and industry affiliation to the responding organizations.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By our results, tacitness will increase the costs of transfer and decrease the speed by which knowledge is transferred within the firm or between partners.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“What our propositions and empirical tests have sought to put forth is the view that the attributes of knowledge influence the decision of where to draw the boundaries of the firm.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > 16. The validation of the questionnaire design and the reliability and validity of the constructs are discussed in detail in Zander [1991a] and Zander and Kogut [forthcoming].
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In short, the decision to license is not simply based on the costs of this made relative to an internal transfer; it is also influenced by the expectation of revenues that would be foregone by failing to accumulate experiential knowledge in the foreign market.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > 16. The validation of the questionnaire design and the reliability and validity of the constructs are discussed in detail in Zander [1991a] and Zander and Kogut [forthcoming].
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We include these additional two variables in our estimations, as it is unlikely that the three scales measuring codifiability, teachability, and complexity (or any set of measures) can fully specify the tacitness of technology.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“These findings are perfectly consistent with Teece's discovery that the costs of transfer vary widely.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Teece
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In short, it is reasonable to conclude that age and previous transfers act as proxies for a latent variable of tacitness; once more direct measures are provided, their influence should disappear.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“These costs declined with each subsequent transfer and with the experience of the recipient of the technology.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > DIRECT INVESTMENT AND KNOWLEDGEAS A PUBLIC GOOD
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Teece [1977] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Davidson and McFetridge [1984] similarly found that transferto unaffiliatedrecipients is promoted if the firm has transferred technology in the past.However, experience in internal transfers encourages more internal transfers in the future.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Experience with the technology again points to the important relationship between the currentstate of knowledge andlearningcapabilitiesof the adopter.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Davidson and McFetridge [1984] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Competition among firms is based upon their differential capabilities, and their abilities to expand by the creation and replication of new knowledge faster than the imitative and innovative efforts of competitors.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The cost of the transfer of technologies should differ among firms, and these differences should have an effect on the desirability to transfer technology within the firm or by license, independent of the issue of opportunism.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > DIRECT INVESTMENT AND KNOWLEDGEAS A PUBLIC GOOD
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Firms compete on the basis of the superiority of their information and know-how, and their abilities to develop new knowledge by experiential learning.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > 16. The validation of the questionnaire design and the reliability and validity of the constructs are discussed in detail in Zander [1991a] and Zander and Kogut [forthcoming].
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In its more advanced evolution, this process alters the global knowledge of the firm and may result in its transformationtowards a network of subsidiaries characterized by the cross-border transfer of learning.20”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > 16. The validation of the questionnaire design and the reliability and validity of the constructs are discussed in detail in Zander [1991a] and Zander and Kogut [forthcoming].
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [20] 20. Semi-Synthetic Penicillin:PENGLOBE1970 (ASTRA) 24. Selective Beta-Blocker:SELOKEN1970 (HASSLE/ASTRA) 25. Roller Bearing: CC 1972 (SKF)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this sense, the view that we put forth is compatible with an evolutionary perspective on the growth of the firm.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > 16. The validation of the questionnaire design and the reliability and validity of the constructs are discussed in detail in Zander [1991a] and Zander and Kogut [forthcoming].
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One interpretationof this result is that firms are able to transfer these technologies at a lower cost to wholly owned subsidiaries than to third parties.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Contractor[1981] found thattechnologytransfer(via licensing) increases with the number of other firms using a technology, suggesting that spillovers can create a generalized and cumulative capability in its use.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Experience with the technology again points to the important relationship between the currentstate of knowledge andlearningcapabilitiesof the adopter.
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Contractor [1981]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The standardizationof evaluation systems and procedures is an expression of the shared knowledge, values, and assumptions and eases the transfer of knowledge within the firm.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Experience with the technology again points to the important relationship between the currentstate of knowledge andlearningcapabilitiesof the adopter.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These scales measure the latent construct of the tacitness of knowledge.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At any point in time, given the current stock of knowledge of the firm, managers will face the problem of deciding how to service a foreign market: by license, export, or direct investment.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > 16. The validation of the questionnaire design and the reliability and validity of the constructs are discussed in detail in Zander [1991a] and Zander and Kogut [forthcoming].
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At the same time, novel technologies are likely to be less codified.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Discriminant validity could not be tested by factor analysis, but a comparison within and between correlations of the items indicated reasonably strong discrimination.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Construction of the Measures
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These findings lend themselves to the interpretationthatthe experience in internal transfers is codified in a way idiosyncratic to the firm, but once a firm has invested in codifying knowledge for the purpose of licensing, external transfers are subsequently promoted.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Experience with the technology again points to the important relationship between the currentstate of knowledge andlearningcapabilitiesof the adopter.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In a seminal paper, Teece [1977] established that technology is not a public good, estimating the costs of transfer to range from 2% to 59% of total costs of the twenty-seven projects he analyzed.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > DIRECT INVESTMENT AND KNOWLEDGEAS A PUBLIC GOOD
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Teece [1977] source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The more complex a manufacturing technology, the more difficult it should be to transfer or to imitate.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“But what is more important, the second point suggests a notion of team skills independentof individualswhich is difficult to reconcile with a belief that internalization defines the boundary of the firm.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One explanation is simply that such a procedure grouped fifty-three cases of transfer into the joint venture/wholly owned category, and only twentynine into the licensing/contract choice; given the sample size, this imbalance may have affected the results.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
hedgedconditionaln = 53- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The problem with the argument that the firm exists due to market failure is that it is overdetermined; the assumption of opportunism is not needed, only the differential in costs in the transmission of knowledge within the firm as opposed to between firms.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > DIRECT INVESTMENT AND KNOWLEDGEAS A PUBLIC GOOD
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We recognize that this test is by no means fully specified.In particular,we do not look at the capabilities of the recipient.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
The 35 Swedish innovations and 82 transfer cases are representative of technology transfer by multinational corporations generally.
“The innovations were identified from a studyby Walhmark andMcQueen [1986] on 100 majorSwedish innovations.”
“The sample size of the tests thus consists of the eightytwo instances of the transfer of the capability to manufacture.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Markets are imperfect even if they rarely fail, and human behavior can be motivated by self-interest.
“Markets, even if they rarely fail, are imperfect; human behavior can be motivated by self-interest.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Knowledge transfer is not trivial even within the firm.
“That the transfer of knowledge is not trivial even within the firm is a fundamental observation.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > Results
“The number of previous transfers is negatively related to transfer to wholly owned subsidiaries, contrary to expectation, but the relationship is insignificant.”
§ KNOWLEDGE OF THE FIRM AND THE EVOLUTIONARY THEORY OF THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION > AN EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION
“As a secondary interest, we test the variables of the age and previous times transferred,as suggested by Teece and others, and predict a negative relationship to the choice of wholly owned subsidiaries.”
Citations
Cites
Rogers, E. M., Singhal, A., & Quinlan, M. M. (2019) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203710753-35 · Cited by 37,670
An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change.
Loasby, B. J., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1983) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2232409 · Cited by 21,426
Psychometric theory (2nd ed.).
Sitgreaves, R. (1979) · Contemporary Psychology · doi:10.1037/018882 · Cited by 14,384
Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications.
O'Brien, D. P., & Williamson, O. E. (1976) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2230812 · Cited by 13,469
Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.383 · Cited by 12,939
Self-citationTransaction-Cost Economics: The Governance of Contractual Relations
Williamson, O. E. (1979) · The Journal of Law and Economics · doi:10.1086/466942 · Cited by 10,190
An evolutionary theory of economic change
Winter, & Sidney, G. (1982) · Cited by 6,343
Multinational Enterprise and Economic Analysis: Frontmatter
Casson, M., & Caves, R. (1984) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511619113 · Cited by 3,745
Joint ventures: Theoretical and empirical perspectives
Kogut, B. (1988) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250090403 · Cited by 3,333
Self-citationMarkets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications.
Ouchi, W. G., & Williamson, O. E. (1977) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392191 · Cited by 2,733
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- [7]7. Quintus Type Steel Press for Use in the ASEA-STORA Process 1962 (ASEA)
- [15]15. Isostatic Press for Steel Processing 1967 (ASEA)
- [33]33. Casson, Mark. 1987. Thefirmnand the mlarket.Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
- [39]39. Hall, G. & R. Johnson. 1970. Transfers of United Aerospace Technology to Japan. In Raymond Vernon, editor, The technology factor in international trade. New York: Columbia University Press.
- [44]44. Hymer, Stephen. 1976. The international operations of national firms: A study of direct investment. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press (reprint of Ph.D. thesis, Department of Economics, MIT, 1960).
- [45]45. Johnson, Harry. 1970. The efficiency and welfare implications of the multinational corporation. In Charles Kindleberger, editor, The international corporation. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
- [53]53. Nunnally, John C. 1978 (second edition). Psychomletric theory. New York: McGraw Hill.
- [55]55. Rogers, Everett. 1962. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,501–1,600 of 3,993
Contributions of workflow to quality requirements
Nurcan, S., & Rolland, C. (2000) · Knowledge and Process Management · doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-1441(200001/03)7:1 · Cited by 1
Knowledge Management of High-Tech Firms
Lau, C.-M., Lu, Y., Makino, S., Chen, X.-H., & Yeh, R.-S. (2002) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-1095-6_9 · Cited by 26
A Bibliometric Study on Culture Research in International Business
Pinto, C. F., Serra, F. A. R., & Ferreira, M. P. (2013) · Academy of Management Proceedings · doi:10.5465/ambpp.2013.13300abstract · Cited by 23
Captive Offshoring of New Product Development in Brazil
Boehe, D. M. (2010) · Management International Review · doi:10.1007/s11575-010-0054-z · Cited by 23
Khoirunnisa, N. L., & Almahendra, R. (2021) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/jkm-06-2020-0406 · Cited by 23
Introduction: Applications of Evolutionary Economic Geography
Boschma, R. A., & Frenken, K. (2007) · Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks · doi:10.4337/9781847205391.00009 · Cited by 27
Knowledge management enterprise and RFID systems
Reyes, P. M., Worthington, W. J., & Collins, J. D. (2015) · Management Research Review · doi:10.1108/mrr-01-2013-0011 · Cited by 23
The impact of knowledge governance on knowledge sharing
Cao, Y., & Yang, X. (2012) · Chinese Management Studies · doi:10.1108/17506141311307587 · Cited by 115
RetractedFirm‐specific capabilities and foreign direct investment activities of Turkish manufacturing firms
Kaya, H., & Erden, D. (2008) · Journal of Management Development · doi:10.1108/02621710810883643 · Cited by 23
Modeling International Expansion
Martin, X. D., Swaminathan, A., & Tihanyi, L. (2007) · Research methodology in strategy and management · doi:10.1016/s1479-8387(07)04005-2 · Cited by 25
Augmenting versus exploiting entry modes in soft services
Barber, J. P., Villar, C., & Darder, F. L. (2014) · International Marketing Review · doi:10.1108/imr-09-2013-0209 · Cited by 23
Organizational learning: effects of (network) structure and (individual) strategy
Rodan, S. A. (2008) · Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory · doi:10.1007/s10588-008-9028-0 · Cited by 23
Knowledge sources of innovation in a small open economy: The case of Singapore
Wong, P.-K., & Ho, Y. (2007) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-007-0201-x · Cited by 23
Firm heterogeneity, foreign market entry mode and ownership choice
Cieślik, A., & Ryan, M. J. (2008) · Japan and the World Economy · doi:10.1016/j.japwor.2008.07.001 · Cited by 23
Ando, N., Rhee, D. K., & Park, N. K. (2007) · Asia Pacific Journal of Management · doi:10.1007/s10490-007-9052-5 · Cited by 23
Rahman, A. B. A., Bennett, D., & Sohal, A. S. (2008) · International Journal of Production Research · doi:10.1080/00207540802471298 · Cited by 23
EXPLORING THE BORN GLOBAL CONCEPT IN THE BIOTECHNOLOGY CONTEXT
Brännback, M. E., Carsrud, A. L., & Renko, M. (2007) · Journal of Enterprising Culture · doi:10.1142/s0218495807000058 · Cited by 23
Clougherty, J. A., Kim, J. U., Skousen, B. R., & Szücs, F. (2016) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/joms.12205 · Cited by 24
Putzhammer, M., Slangen, A., Puck, J. F., & Lindner, T. (2019) · Journal of International Management · doi:10.1016/j.intman.2019.100703 · Cited by 23
Technological Knowledge Transfer within Chaebols after the 1997-98 Crisis
Lee, J. Y., MacMillan, I. C., & Choe, S. (2010) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2010.02.008 · Cited by 23
A Bibliometric Study of John Dunning’s Contribution to International Business Research
Ferreira, M. P., Pinto, C. S. F., Serra, F. A. R., & Santos, J. C. (2013) · Review of Business Management · doi:10.7819/rbgn.v15i46.1163 · Cited by 23
Entry Strategies for International Construction Markets
Chen, C. (2005) · Cited by 23
Saxenian, A. (2004) · Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · doi:10.1057/9781403943842_7 · Cited by 23
Choi, C. J., Cheng, P. Y. K., Hilton, B., & Russell, E. (2005) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/13673270510630303 · Cited by 56
von Wartburg, I., Rost, K., & Teichert, T. (2006) · International Journal of Learning and Change · doi:10.1504/ijlc.2006.010972 · Cited by 26
Regional and global strategies of multinational enterprises
Rugman, A. M. (2005) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511614071.004 · Cited by 23
District leaders as open networks: emerging business strategies in Italian industrial districtsPreprint
Maria, E. D., & Micelli, S. (2007) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 22
Managing the Internalisation Process - A Theoretical PerspectivePreprint
Preuss, B., Welch, L. S., & Benito, G. R. G. (2008) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1098884 · Cited by 23
Xiao, S. S., & Yu, T. (2024) · International Business Review · doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2024.102302 · Cited by 23
Jafari‐Sadeghi, V., García-Pérez, A., Vrontis, D., & Bedford, D. (2024) · Journal of Enterprise Information Management · doi:10.1108/jeim-09-2024-636 · Cited by 22
Retail Internationalization: Gaining Insights from the Wal-Mart Experience in South Korea
Gandolfi, F. (2009) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 22
Organizational Change Among Emerging Latin American Firms: From “Multilatinas” to Multinationals
Martínez, J. I., Esperança, J. P., & de la Torre, J. R. (2005) · Management Research The Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management · doi:10.1108/15365430580001320 · Cited by 22
Griffith, D. A., Kiessling, T. S., & Dabić, M. (2005) · Thunderbird International Business Review · doi:10.1002/tie.20047 · Cited by 22
The spatial structure of foreign subsidiaries and MNE expansion strategy
Jiang, G. F., Holburn, G. L. F., & Beamish, P. W. (2015) · Journal of World Business · doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2015.12.001 · Cited by 24
Principles or templates? The antecedents and performance effects of cross‐border knowledge transfer
Oldroyd, J. B., Morris, S. S., & Dotson, J. P. (2019) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3079 · Cited by 22
“…and responsive to customers is not only a result of organizational design (e.g., knowledge systems) and social structure (e.g., personal networks; Kogut and Zander, 1993) but also an outcome of how the employees’ and firm’s characteristics enable them to use the codified knowledge in the first…”
BackgroundInfluentialKolk, A., & Pinkse, J. (2022) · JIBS special collections · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-80383-4_11 · Cited by 25
Wu, J., Zahoor, N., Khan, Z., & Meyer, M. S. (2022) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113487 · Cited by 26
International R&D sourcing, innovation and firm age: The advantage of ‘born-international sourcers’
Asimakopoulos, G., Revilla, A. J., & Rodríguez, A. (2022) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102662 · Cited by 22
The effect of national culture on partner buyouts in cross-border biotechnology alliances
Folta, T. B., & Ferrier, W. J. (2000) · The Journal of High Technology Management Research · doi:10.1016/s1047-8310(00)00028-6 · Cited by 22
Hybrid Branch Plants: Japanese Lean Production in Poland's Automobile Industry
Majek, T., & Hayter, R. (2008) · Economic Geography · doi:10.1111/j.1944-8287.2008.tb00368.x · Cited by 22
Western management training in Eastern Europe: trends and developments over a decade
Michailova, S., & Hollinshead, G. (2009) · Human Resource Development International · doi:10.1080/13678860902764050 · Cited by 21
Espedal, B., Gooderham, P. N., & Stensaker, I. G. (2013) · Human Resource Management · doi:10.1002/hrm.21544 · Cited by 22
Lee, P.-C., Lin, C.-T., & Kang, H.-H. (2016) · Quality & Quantity · doi:10.1007/s11135-015-0160-x · Cited by 22
Guo, Y., Liu, Y., Wen, Q., & Li, Y. (2014) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su6063644 · Cited by 22
Knowledge Creation, Innovation and Financial Performance of Firms: Evidence from Vietnam
Nguyen, T. V., Phan, A. T. T., & Nguyen, M. T. T. (2016) · International Journal of Business and Management · doi:10.5539/ijbm.v11n6p95 · Cited by 22
Marketing in Subsistence Markets: Innovation through Decentralization and Externalization
Ritchie, R., & Sridharan, S. (2007) · Advances in international management · doi:10.1016/s1571-5027(07)20009-9 · Cited by 22
Knowledge, knowledge dynamics, and innovation
Scaringella, L. (2016) · European Journal of Innovation Management · doi:10.1108/ejim-05-2015-0031 · Cited by 22
Becoming a great reviewer: Four actionable guidelines
Verbeke, A. C., Glinow, M. A. V., & Luo, Y. (2017) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/s41267-016-0049-5 · Cited by 23
The development of IB as a scientific field
Engwall, L., Pahlberg, C., & Persson, O. (2018) · International Business Review · doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2018.03.009 · Cited by 23
Technological diversity, knowledge flow and capacity, and industrial innovation
Chen, C., Lin, B., Lin, J., & Hsiao, Y. (2018) · Technology Analysis and Strategic Management · doi:10.1080/09537325.2018.1472759 · Cited by 24
Entrepreneurs’ Features Affecting the Internationalisation of Service SMEs
González-Pérez, M. A., Velez-Ocampo, J. F., & Herrera‐Cano, C. (2018) · Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review · doi:10.15678/eber.2018.060201 · Cited by 22
Cantwell, J., Dunning, J. H., & Lundan, S. M. (2015) · Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-137-54471-1_8 · Cited by 26
Upgrading through Innovation in a Small Network Economy: Insights from Taiwan's IT industry
Ernst, D. (2007) · 2007 Atlanta Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Policy · doi:10.1080/10438590802469560 · Cited by 34
Gerybadze, A. (2004) · Gabler Verlag eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-322-91001-1_6 · Cited by 22
The Replication Perspective on Productive Knowledge
Winter, S. G. (2009) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-04480-9_5 · Cited by 22
Ensign, P. C., & Hébert, L. (2009) · The Journal of High Technology Management Research · doi:10.1016/j.hitech.2009.02.004 · Cited by 22
A Systematic Review of the Literature and Theoretical Analysis of Subsidiary Roles
Manolopoulos, D. (2008) · Journal of Transnational Management · doi:10.1080/15475770802059479 · Cited by 24
Closing the circle: the knowledge management spiral of project management
Jugdev, K. (2007) · International Journal of Knowledge Management Studies · doi:10.1504/ijkms.2007.012533 · Cited by 22
Testing impact of knowledge characteristics and relationship ties on project performance
Kang, J. (2007) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/13673270710752153 · Cited by 22
International Trade from Economic and Policy Perspective
Bobek, V. (2012) · InTech eBooks · doi:10.5772/2726 · Cited by 21
Drivers of competence development in different types of multinational R&D subsidiaries
Furu, P. (2001) · Scandinavian Journal of Management · doi:10.1016/s0956-5221(00)00036-1 · Cited by 22
Cannice, M. V., Chen, R. B., & Daniels, J. D. (2003) · The Journal of High Technology Management Research · doi:10.1016/s1047-8310(03)00020-8 · Cited by 22
The influence of organizational learning on performance in Indonesian SMEs
Sampe, F. (2012) · Cross Connect (Southern Cross University) · Cited by 23
Innovation Activities Abroad and the Effects of Liability of Foreignness: Where it HurtsPreprint
Sofka, W. (2006) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.901212 · Cited by 21
Bloodgood, J. M., & Chen, A. N. K. (2021) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/jkm-12-2020-0894 · Cited by 28
Knowledge ambiguity, innovation and subsidiary performance
Ciabuschi, F., & Martín, Ó. M. (2012) · Baltic Journal of Management · doi:10.1108/17465261211219787 · Cited by 21
Demir, R., & Fjellström, D. (2012) · Asian Business & Management · doi:10.1057/abm.2012.13 · Cited by 21
Liu, T., & Li, X. (2022) · Journal of International Management · doi:10.1016/j.intman.2022.100951 · Cited by 21
Foreign market entry decision-making and heuristics: a mapping of the literature and future avenues
Guercini, S., & Milanesi, M. (2022) · Management Research Review · doi:10.1108/mrr-11-2021-0806 · Cited by 29
Does knowledge sharing pay? A multinational subsidiary perspective on knowledge outflows
Mahnke, V., Pedersen, T., & Venzin, M. (2009) · Advances in international management · doi:10.1108/s1571-5027(2009)0000022010 · Cited by 23
Reus, T. (2012) · Advances in mergers & acquisitions/Advances in mergers and acquisitions · doi:10.1108/s1479-361x(2012)0000011007 · Cited by 28
Yoo, S.-J., Sawyerr, O. O., & Tan, W. L. (2015) · The Journal of High Technology Management Research · doi:10.1016/j.hitech.2015.04.002 · Cited by 21
Competitive assets of Malaysian international contractors
Aziz, A., & Wong, S. S. (2010) · Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction · doi:10.1108/13664381011063458 · Cited by 21
Connecting informal networks to management of tacit knowledge
Nie, K., Lin, S., Ma, T., et al. (2010) · Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering · doi:10.1007/s11518-010-5130-1 · Cited by 21
Óladóttir, Á. D., Hobdari, B., Papanastassiou, M., Pearce, R. D., & Sinani, E. (2011) · Journal of World Business · doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2011.08.003 · Cited by 20
Upgrading through Innovation in a Small Network Economy: Insights from Taiwan's IT industry
Ernst, D. (2007) · doi:10.1109/acstip.2007.4472893 · Cited by 21
Si, Y., & Liefner, I. (2013) · Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie · doi:10.1111/tesg.12064 · Cited by 21
R&D and knowledge: a theoretical assessment of the internationalisation strategies
Dias, R. T., & Bresciani, S. (2006) · International Journal of Technology Policy and Management · doi:10.1504/ijtpm.2006.010070 · Cited by 21
Effects of positive incentive and negative incentive in knowledge transfer: carrot and stick
Ding, X., He, Y., Wu, J., & Chen, C. (2016) · Chinese Management Studies · doi:10.1108/cms-01-2016-0006 · Cited by 21
Testing IB theories with meta-analytic structural equation modeling
Tang, R. W., & Cheung, M. W. ‐. (2016) · Review of International Business and Strategy · doi:10.1108/ribs-04-2016-0022 · Cited by 21
Phillips, M. A., Harrington, T., & Srai, J. (2017) · Technology Innovation Management Review · doi:10.22215/timreview/1105 · Cited by 20
Host country R&D determinants of MNE entry strategy: A study of ownership in the automobile industry
Williams, C., & Vrabie, A. (2018) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2017.12.001 · Cited by 22
The boundaries of the firm in global strategy
Cuervo-Cazurra, Á., Mudambi, R., & Pedersen, T. (2018) · Global Strategy Journal · doi:10.1002/gsj.1208 · Cited by 21
Accessing diverse knowledge for problem solving in the MNC: A network mobilization perspective
Parker, A., Tippmann, E., & Kratochvil, R. (2018) · Global Strategy Journal · doi:10.1002/gsj.1311 · Cited by 21
Does size still matter? How micro firms and SMEs vary in network learning
Corredoira, R. A., & McDermott, G. A. (2018) · Industry and Innovation · doi:10.1080/13662716.2018.1531748 · Cited by 21
“(Uzzi 1996, Camu ff o and Grandinetti 2011, Locke 1995) Moreover, the advanced fi rms and R&D organizations that can provide access to diverse, pioneering knowledge may be unable or unwilling to nurture and transform a broad base of fi rms with backward capabilities and technologies (Baum & Oliver 1991, Kogut and Zander…”
BackgroundGüttel, W. H., Konlechner, S. W., Müller, B., et al. (2012) · Schmalenbach Business Review · doi:10.1007/bf03396840 · Cited by 21
Information Costs and Internationalization Performance
Fisch, J. H. (2012) · Global Strategy Journal · doi:10.1111/j.2042-5805.2012.01043.x · Cited by 22
Brannen, M. Y., & Voisey, C. J. (2012) · Global Strategy Journal · doi:10.1002/gsj.1022 · Cited by 21
Qin, C., Ramburuth, P., & Wang, Y. (2011) · Organizations and Markets in Emerging Economies · doi:10.15388/omee.2011.2.2.14279 · Cited by 21
The role of legitimacy for the survival of new firms
Brown, R. S. (2012) · Journal of Management & Organization · doi:10.5172/jmo.2012.18.3.412 · Cited by 21
The Internet Era and the International Expansion Process: The Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity
Rhee, J. H. (2005) · Management International Review · Cited by 21
Vahlne, J., & Johanson, J. (2014) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/s1064-485720140000016006 · Cited by 21
Collaborative orientation to advance value co-creation in buyer–seller relationships
Gupta, S., Polonsky, M. J., & Lazaravic, V. (2017) · Journal of Strategic Marketing · doi:10.1080/0965254x.2017.1384747 · Cited by 21
Determinants of Causal Ambiguity and Difficulty of Knowledge Transfer within the Firm
Uygur, U. (2013) · Journal of Management & Organization · doi:10.1017/jmo.2014.12 · Cited by 26
Social capital and cross-selling within financial holding companies in an emerging economy
Chuang, C.-M., & Lin, C. (2007) · Asia Pacific Journal of Management · doi:10.1007/s10490-007-9056-1 · Cited by 21
Knowledge and the Multinational Enterprise
Grant, R. M., Almeida, P., & Song, J. (2000) · Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · doi:10.1057/9780230596740_6 · Cited by 20
Foss, N. J., & Pedersen, T. (2003) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 21
Small Firm Innovation Performance and Employee InvolvementPreprint
Andries, P., & Dirk Czarnitzki, A. (2012) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2109277 · Cited by 21
Advancing theory on knowledge governance in universities: a case study of a higher education merger
Safavi, M., & Håkanson, L. (2016) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2016.1180675 · Cited by 29
Regionalization of R&D activities: (Dis)economies of interdependence and inventive performance
Kim, M., Lampert, C. M., & Roy, R. (2020) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/s41267-020-00314-0 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Kogut, B., & Zander, U.
- Affiliations
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- Stockholm School of Economics (SE)
- Venue
- Journal of International Business Studies
- Published
- 1993-12
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 625-645
- ISSN
- 0047-2506 (ISSN-L)
- 1478-6990
- OpenAlex
- W3152457815
- Cited by
- 3,967
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2026: 83 · 2025: 89 · 2024: 80 · 2023: 100 · 2022: 102 · 2021: 107 · 2020: 111 · 2019: 139 · 2018: 157 · 2017: 166 · 2016: 164 · 2015: 196 · 2014: 222 · 2013: 220 · 2012: 214
- FWCI
- 43.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- public-domain
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Journal of International Business Studies (publishedVersion, public-domain)
- 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 › Management Information Systems › Outsourcing and Supply Chain Management
- Keywords
- multinational corporations, evolutionary theory of the firm, tacit knowledge, knowledge transfer, wholly owned subsidiaries, firm specialization, internal knowledge transfer, technology transfer
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
