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 1,801–1,900 of 3,993
A critical appraisal of the relational management paradigm in an international setting
Saleh, A., Ali, M. Y., Quazi, A. M., & Wickramasekera, R. (2015) · Management Decision · doi:10.1108/md-02-2014-0097 · Cited by 16
Lupton, N. C., & Beamish, P. W. (2014) · Knowledge Management Research & Practice · doi:10.1057/kmrp.2014.25 · Cited by 15
Giroud, A., Ha, Y. J., & Yamin, M. (2014) · Asian Business & Management · doi:10.1057/abm.2014.8 · Cited by 15
Evolutionary perspectives on the internationalisation of R&D in Japanese multinational corporations
Asakawa, K., & Westney, D. E. (2012) · Asian Business & Management · doi:10.1057/abm.2012.31 · Cited by 15
Exploring the Technology Transfer Mechanisms by the Multinational Corporations: A Literature Review
Wahab, S. A., Rose, R. C., & Osman, S. I. W. (2012) · Asian Social Science · doi:10.5539/ass.v8n3p142 · Cited by 15
Creating Knowledge Networks: Spanish Multinational Publishers in Mexico
Moya, M. F. (2012) · The Business History Review · doi:10.1017/s0007680512000049 · Cited by 15
How Relevant and Useful is the Concept of National Systems of Innovation?
Woojin, Y., & Eunjung, H. (2009) · Journal of technology management & innovation · doi:10.4067/s0718-27242009000300001 · Cited by 15
On the opportunism-independent theory of the firm
Love, J. H. (2005) · Cambridge Journal of Economics · doi:10.1093/cje/beh044 · Cited by 15
Mihi‐Ramírez, A., & Girdauskienė, L. (2014) · Engineering Economics · doi:10.5755/j01.ee.24.5.2689 · Cited by 15
Halkos, G., & Tzeremes, N. (2008) · Global Economic Review · doi:10.1080/12265080802480811 · Cited by 15
Hoxhaj, R., Marchal, L., & Šerić, A. (2015) · Journal of African Economies · doi:10.1093/jae/ejv022 · Cited by 15
Morschett, D., Swoboda, B. S., & Schramm‐Klein, H. (2008) · Journal of Business Economics · doi:10.1007/s11573-008-0031-1 · Cited by 16
Limitations of the network organization in MNCs
Wolf, J., & Egelhoff, W. G. (2010) · Progress in international business research · doi:10.1108/s1745-8862(2010)0000005011 · Cited by 15
The use of local raw materials in beer brewing: Heineken in Nigeria
Akinyoade, A., Ekumankama, O. O., & Uche, C. U. (2016) · Journal of the Institute of Brewing · doi:10.1002/jib.383 · Cited by 15
Ismail, M., Sobri, S. S., Zulkifly, N. A., Hamzah, S. R., & Yamato, E. (2016) · Organizations and Markets in Emerging Economies · doi:10.15388/omee.2016.7.2.14208 · Cited by 15
Mergers and acquisitions in Brazilian industry: a study of spillover effects
Bruhn, N. C. P., Calegário, C. L. L., Carvalho, F. D. M., Campos, R. S., & dos Santos, A. C. (2017) · International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management · doi:10.1108/ijppm-11-2014-0179 · Cited by 16
Pulling the Plug? Investigating Firm-Level Drivers of Innovation Project Termination
Vaculik, M., Lorenz, A., Roijakkers, N., et al. (2018) · IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · doi:10.1109/tem.2018.2798922 · Cited by 15
Imprinting and early exposure to developed international markets: The case of the new multinationals
Canal, E. G., Guillén, M. F., Pérez, P. F., & Puig, N. (2018) · BRQ Business Research Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.brq.2018.05.001 · Cited by 15
Stephen Herbert Hymer and/on the (theory of the) MNE and international business
Pitelis, C. N. (2006) · International Business Review · doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2005.11.002 · Cited by 15
O’Regan, P., O’Donnell, D., & Heffernan, M. (2001) · Journal of European Industrial Training · doi:10.1108/eum0000000005441 · Cited by 15
Value Creation and Home Region Internationalization of U.S. MNEs
Oh, C. H. (2010) · Multinational Business Review · doi:10.1108/1525383x201000018 · Cited by 15
Penrose and the growth of multinational firms
Kay, N. M. (2005) · Managerial and Decision Economics · doi:10.1002/mde.1213 · Cited by 15
Business History and Management Studies
Álvaro-Moya, A., & Donzé, P.-Y. (2016) · Journal of Evolutionary Studies in Business-JESB · doi:10.1344/jesb2016.1.j008 · Cited by 15
Entry Mode Choice in Emerging Markets: Greenfield, Acquisition, and Brownfield
Meyer, K. E., & Estrin, S. (1999) · Cited by 15
Glaister, K. W., & Ahammad, M. F. (2010) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1544934 · Cited by 15
Edelmann, J. (2011) · LUTPub (LUT University) · Cited by 15
Geographies of Knowledge Sourcing and the Complexity of Knowledge in Multilocational Firms
Frigon, A., & Rigby, D. L. (2024) · Economic Geography · doi:10.1080/00130095.2024.2376545 · Cited by 14
“…the international business and management fi elds offer a rich literature detailing how the structure of multinational enterprises (MNEs) has shifted to explore and exploit the uneven knowledge landscape across countries (Cantwell 1989; Kogut and Zander 1993; Cantwell and Mudambi 2005, 2011).”
InfluentialThe role of clusters in the global innovation strategy of MNEs
Gugler, P., Keller, M., & Tinguely, X. (2015) · Competitiveness Review An International Business Journal incorporating Journal of Global Competitiveness · doi:10.1108/cr-09-2014-0033 · Cited by 15
Debates around the nature of knowledge transfer: how well do we know about the construct?
Thomas, N. (2019) · VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems · doi:10.1108/vjikms-09-2018-0077 · Cited by 15
Ren, X., Xu, J., Hao, Y., & Wang, S. (2023) · Kybernetes · doi:10.1108/k-10-2022-1394 · Cited by 14
Kiessling, T. S., Harvey, M., & Heames, J. T. (2008) · Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies · doi:10.1177/1548051808316050 · Cited by 14
Entrepreneurship and Capabilities in a “Beginner” Oil Multinational: The Case of ENI
Pozzi, D. (2010) · The Business History Review · doi:10.1017/s0007680500002609 · Cited by 14
International coherence and MNE performance
Celo, S., & Chacar, A. S. (2015) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/jibs.2015.4 · Cited by 14
Knowledge Transfer Between Expatriates and Host Country Nationals: A Social Capital Perspective
Hsu, Y. (2012) · UWM Digital Commons (University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee) · Cited by 14
Kiggundu, M. Ν., & DeGhetto, K. (2015) · Africa Journal of Management · doi:10.1080/23322373.2015.1106717 · Cited by 14
Impacting practice through IB scholarship: Toy recalls and the product safety crisis
Bapuji, H., & Beamish, P. W. (2019) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/s41267-019-00247-3 · Cited by 14
Searching locally and globally: Applying Daniel Levinthal’s scholarship to international business
Pedersen, T., Larsen, M. M., & Dasí, À. (2020) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/s41267-020-00315-z · Cited by 15
Foreign interfirm networks and internationalization: Evidence from sub-Saharan Africa
Liu, L., Henley, J. S., & Mousavi, M. M. (2020) · Journal of International Management · doi:10.1016/j.intman.2020.100810 · Cited by 14
Ma, D., Fee, A., Grabowski, S., & Scerri, M. (2021) · Journal of International Management · doi:10.1016/j.intman.2021.100907 · Cited by 14
Offshoring and Improvisational Learning: Empirical Insights into Developing Global R&D Capabilities
Parida, V., Wincent, J., & Kohtamäki, M. (2013) · Industry and Innovation · doi:10.1080/13662716.2013.833373 · Cited by 14
Innovation outcomes of knowledge-seeking Chinese foreign direct investment
Wu, X., Lupton, N. C., & Du, Y. (2015) · Chinese Management Studies · doi:10.1108/cms-01-2015-0021 · Cited by 14
Resources, capabilities and export performance: multidimensional evidence of Chile
Rock, J., & Ahmed, S. A. (2014) · Academia Revista Latinoamericana de Administración · doi:10.1108/arla-08-2013-0108 · Cited by 14
On the political economy of the state, the public-private nexus and industrial policy
Glykou, I., & Pitelis, C. N. (2011) · Policy Studies · doi:10.1080/01442872.2011.571860 · Cited by 15
Integration-Responsiveness and Knowledge-Management Perspectives on the MNC
Kasper, H., Lehrer, M., Mühlbacher, J. I. 0.-0.-4.-5., et al. (2008) · Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies · doi:10.1177/1548051808326038 · Cited by 14
The evolution of internationalization: towards a new theory?
Moreira, A. C. (2009) · Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) · Cited by 14
Multinational Corporate Strategy and Organization: An Internal Market Perspective
Birkinshaw, J. (2000) · Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · doi:10.1057/9780230599161_3 · Cited by 14
Collective Global Leadership in Self-Managed Multicultural Teams: The Role of Team Goal Orientation
Paunova, M. M., & Lee, Y. (2016) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/s1535-120320160000009007 · Cited by 14
Agarwal, J., & Wu, T. Y. S. (2018) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-74129-1_9 · Cited by 15
Akpinar, M. (2020) · Competitiveness Review An International Business Journal incorporating Journal of Global Competitiveness · doi:10.1108/cr-12-2018-0082 · Cited by 10
Ferdows, K. (2014) · Journal of Globalization Competitiveness and Governability · doi:10.3232/gcg.2009.v3.n1.08 · Cited by 14
Corporate Performance Implications of Multinationality
Annavarjula, M., Beldona, S., & Sadrieh, F. (2006) · Journal of Transnational Management · doi:10.1300/j482v10n04_02 · Cited by 14
External Leveraging and Technological Upgrading Among East Asian Firms in the US
Hsu, J., Poon, J., & Yeung, H. W. (2007) · European Planning Studies · doi:10.1080/09654310701747993 · Cited by 14
Foss, N. J., dos Santos, J. K. F., & Doz, Y. L. (2011) · Advances in international management · doi:10.1108/s1571-5027(2011)0000024023 · Cited by 30
Triggers of the technological capability accumulation in MNCs' subsidiaries: the maquilas in Mexico
Dutrénit, G., & Vera‐Cruz, A. O. (2007) · International Journal of Technology and Globalisation · doi:10.1504/ijtg.2007.014339 · Cited by 14
Employment in Host Regions and Foreign Direct Investment
McDonald, F. B., Tüselmann, H., Heise, A., et al. (2003) · Environment and Planning C Government and Policy · doi:10.1068/c0231 · Cited by 14
International Business Research: Understanding Past Paths to Design Future Research Directions
Ferreira, M., Reis, N., de Almeida, M. D., & Serra, F. (2013) · Advances in international management · doi:10.1108/s1571-5027(2013)0000026017 · Cited by 13
Firm-specific factors and entry mode choice
Andreu, R., Claver, E., & Quer, D. (2016) · Tourism Economics · doi:10.5367/te.2016.0557 · Cited by 14
Cross-Regional R&D Collaboration and Local Knowledge Spillover
Zhao, M., & Islam, M. (2017) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/s0742-332220170000036010 · Cited by 14
US firms' entry into the European telecommunications market
Wymbs, C. (2002) · The Journal of High Technology Management Research · doi:10.1016/s1047-8310(01)00050-5 · Cited by 14
Economic Organization in the Knowledge Economy
Foss, N. J. (2005) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/0199240647.003.0006 · Cited by 14
Dunlap, D. R., Kotabe, M. “., & Mudambi, R. (2010) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1554123 · Cited by 14
Schotter, A. P. J., Maznevski, M. L., Stahl, G. K., & Doz, Y. (2025) · Journal of World Business · doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2025.101647 · Cited by 16
Zhang, B., Li, Z., Li, X., & Liu, Z. (2021) · Chinese Management Studies · doi:10.1108/cms-06-2020-0249 · Cited by 13
Le déploiement d’innovations inter-filiales au sein d’une multinationale1
Mahmoud‐Jouini, S. B., & Charue‐Duboc, F. (2014) · Management international · doi:10.7202/1027864ar · Cited by 16
Designing global leadership development programmes that promote social capital and knowledge sharing
Stensaker, I. G., & Gooderham, P. N. (2015) · European J of International Management · doi:10.1504/ejim.2015.070229 · Cited by 14
Rankings, schools, and final reflections on ideas and taste
Kogut, B. (2008) · European Management Review · doi:10.1057/emr.2008.30 · Cited by 13
Self-citationNew Trends in Foreign Market Entry Mode Choices: The Case of Italian Mid-Sized Companies
Matarazzo, M., & Resciniti, R. (2014) · Journal of International Business and Economics · doi:10.15640/jibe.v2n4a4 · Cited by 13
Balachandran, S., & Hernández, E. (2019) · Strategy Science · doi:10.1287/stsc.2019.0082 · Cited by 13
Lorenzen, M. (2019) · Management and Organization Review · doi:10.1017/mor.2018.53 · Cited by 12
“Extant research has shown that MNE subsidiaries develop capabilities by leveraging the knowledge residing in the parent company (Argote and Ingram, 2000; Kogut and Zander, 1993) and transferring personnel (Grant, 1996).”
BackgroundThe hows and whys of foreign operation mode combinations: The role of knowledge processes
O’Higgins, C., Andreeva, T., & Goya, N. A. (2021) · Journal of World Business · doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2021.101303 · Cited by 15
Multinational Corporations, Value Chains and Knowledge Spillovers in the Global Aircraft Industry
Niosi, J. E., & Zhegu, M. (2010) · International journal of institutions and economies/Institutions and economies · Cited by 12
Chi, T., & Zhao, Z. (2014) · Global Strategy Journal · doi:10.1002/gsj.1083 · Cited by 13
Berbel-Pineda, J. M., & Ramírez‐Hurtado, J. M. (2011) · Journal of Business Economics and Management · doi:10.3846/16111699.2011.573270 · Cited by 13
Offshore supplier relations: knowledge integration among small businesses
Jørgensen, C. (2010) · Strategic Outsourcing An International Journal · doi:10.1108/17538291011093794 · Cited by 13
Voets, H. J. L., & Biggiero, L. (2000) · International Review of Sociology · doi:10.1080/713673987 · Cited by 13
Chung, J. Y., Youn, Y., & Cho, D. (2012) · International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology · doi:10.1080/13504509.2012.658098 · Cited by 13
The inward‐outward dynamics in the internationalisation of Baltic banks
Roolaht, T., & Varblane, U. (2009) · Baltic Journal of Management · doi:10.1108/17465260910958827 · Cited by 13
Arm's length and captive transactions: Patent-based view of control in internationalization
Yang, D. (2011) · International Business Review · doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2011.07.004 · Cited by 13
Chinese multinational corporations’ responses to host country trade unions: An eclectic approach
Zhu, J. S. (2015) · Journal of Industrial Relations · doi:10.1177/0022185614564375 · Cited by 13
Borini, F. M., Costa, S., Bezerra, M. A., & Oliveira, M. D. M. (2014) · International Journal of Business and Emerging Markets · doi:10.1504/ijbem.2014.060490 · Cited by 13
Alliance portfolios and firms’ business strategy: a content analysis approach
Veiga, P. M., & Franco, M. (2015) · Management Research Review · doi:10.1108/mrr-04-2014-0093 · Cited by 13
Learning performance and business performance of knowledge management organizations
Noh, M., Kim, H., & Jang, H. (2014) · Information Development · doi:10.1177/0266666914564629 · Cited by 13
Exploring the role of managerial intentionality in international business
Hutzschenreuter, T., Han, U., & Kleindienst, I. R. (2010) · Advances in international management · doi:10.1108/s1571-5027(2010)00000230012 · Cited by 14
Prerequisite for lateral knowledge flow in manufacturing networks
Scherrer, M., & Deflorin, P. (2017) · Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management · doi:10.1108/jmtm-10-2015-0090 · Cited by 14
How China’s manufacturers achieve technological catch-up
Li, W., Wu, W., Liu, Y., et al. (2017) · Chinese Management Studies · doi:10.1108/cms-12-2016-0256 · Cited by 13
Effectiveness of cross-border knowledge transfer in Malaysian MSC status corporations
Pook, A. S. Y., Chong, C. W., & Yuen, Y. Y. (2017) · Knowledge Management & E-Learning An International Journal · doi:10.34105/j.kmel.2017.09.006 · Cited by 13
Huh, T., & Kim, H. (2018) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su10041263 · Cited by 13
The evolution of vertical boundaries in new high technology ventures
Hashai, N., & Zander, I. (2018) · Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal · doi:10.1002/sej.1292 · Cited by 13
Functional centrality and innovation intensity: Employee-level analysis of the Telenor group
Castellacci, F., Gulbrandsen, M., Hildrum, J., Martinkenaite, I., & Simensen, E. O. (2018) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2018.06.004 · Cited by 14
Performance of business group affiliated firms in emerging markets
Purkayastha, A. (2018) · International Journal of Emerging Markets · doi:10.1108/ijoem-09-2016-0243 · Cited by 13
Why corporate groups care about company standards
Blind, K., & Müller, J.-A. (2020) · International Journal of Production Research · doi:10.1080/00207543.2020.1735658 · Cited by 13
“As the codification of company-specific competencies and inherent organisational know-how requires a clear understanding of the processes, company standards foster learning and innovation (Bartlett and Ghoshal 2002; Kogut and Zander 1993; Großmann 2015).”
BackgroundSport and International Management : Exploring research synergy
Szymanski, M., Wolfe, R. A., Danis, W. M., Lee, F., & Uy, M. A. (2020) · Thunderbird International Business Review · doi:10.1002/tie.22139 · Cited by 19
Bae, Y., Lee, K., & Roh, T. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12208396 · Cited by 13
Autio, E. (2018) · JIBS special collections · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-74228-1_3 · Cited by 13
Entering the last frontier: expansion by US multinationals to Africa
Owhoso, V., Gleason, K. C., Mathur, I., et al. (2002) · International Business Review · doi:10.1016/s0969-5931(02)00017-3 · Cited by 13
Complementarities in organizational innovation practices: evidence from French industrial firms*
Mothe, C., Nguyen-Thi, T. U., & Nguyen‐Van, P. (2014) · Economics of Innovation and New Technology · doi:10.1080/10438599.2014.949416 · Cited by 13
The Theory of the Firm, the Theory of Competition and the Transnational Corporation
Kapler, J. K. (2007) · Competition & Change · doi:10.1179/102452907x239484 · Cited by 12
Cerruti, C., & Delbufalo, E. (2009) · International Journal of Globalisation and Small Business · doi:10.1504/ijgsb.2009.032261 · Cited by 13
Six Sigma implementation in Ireland: the role of multinational firms
van der Wiele, T., van Iwaarden, J., & Power, D. (2010) · International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management · doi:10.1108/02656711011084837 · Cited by 13
Knowledge Governance and Value Creation
Mahnke, V., & Pedersen, T. (2004) · Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · doi:10.1057/9780230523876_1 · Cited by 13
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
