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 401–500 of 3,993
Jung, M. J., & Lee, K. (2010) · Industrial and Corporate Change · doi:10.1093/icc/dtp054 · Cited by 139
Newburry, W. E., Gardberg, N. A., & Belkin, L. Y. (2006) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400218 · Cited by 140
Bounded entrepreneurship and internationalisation of indigenous Chinese private-owned firms
Liu, X., Xiao, W., & Huang, X. (2008) · International Business Review · doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2008.02.014 · Cited by 139
Bicultural Competence and its Impact on Team Effectiveness
Hong, H. (2010) · International Journal of Cross Cultural Management · doi:10.1177/1470595809359582 · Cited by 146
Cross-border private equity syndication: Institutional context and learning
Meuleman, M. L. C. J., & Wright, M. (2009) · Journal of Business Venturing · doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.06.003 · Cited by 131
MNC strategy and social adaptation in emerging markets
Zhao, M., Park, S. H., & Zhou, N. (2014) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/jibs.2014.8 · Cited by 142
A microfoundations approach to studying innovation in multinational subsidiaries
Nuruzzaman, N., Gaur, A. S., & Sambharya, R. B. (2017) · Global Strategy Journal · doi:10.1002/gsj.1202 · Cited by 138
Small firm internationalisation unveiled through phenomenography
Lamb, P., Sandberg, J., & Liesch, P. W. (2011) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/jibs.2011.8 · Cited by 136
Transaction Cost Theory and International Business
Hennart, J. (2010) · Journal of Retailing · doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2010.07.009 · Cited by 141
Developing a corporate knowledge management strategy
Oluikpe, P. I. (2012) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/13673271211276164 · Cited by 138
Habib, A. M. (2023) · Environment Development and Sustainability · doi:10.1007/s10668-023-03809-6 · Cited by 139
“In addition, the theory of evolution emphasizes the importance of evolving a manager’s ability to enhance a firm’s strategies to attain best practices (Barnett & Burgelman, 2007; Guerras-Martín et al., 2014; Habib, 2023; Kogut & Zander, 1993).”
International franchising: Capabilities and development
Fladmoe-Lindquist, K. (1996) · Journal of Business Venturing · doi:10.1016/0883-9026(96)00056-0 · Cited by 138
International diversification and firm performance in Mexican firms: A curvilinear relationship?
Thomas, D. E. (2005) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2005.08.008 · Cited by 132
Knowledge protection strategies of multinational firms—A cross-country comparison
de Faria, P., & Sofka, W. (2010) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2010.03.005 · Cited by 138
The (COVID-19) pandemic and the new world (dis)order
Hitt, M. A., Holmes, R. M., & Arrègle, J.-L. (2021) · Journal of World Business · doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2021.101210 · Cited by 143
Accelerated internationalisation: evidence from a late investor country
Barber, J. P., & Escribá‐Esteve, A. (2006) · International Marketing Review · doi:10.1108/02651330610670442 · Cited by 142
Niosi, J. E., & Tschang, F. T. (2009) · Industrial and Corporate Change · doi:10.1093/icc/dtp005 · Cited by 132
Assessing Product-Market Diversification of U.S. Firms
Qian, G. (1997) · Management International Review · Cited by 133
Organizational values and knowledge sharing in multinational corporations: The Danisco case
Michailova, S., & Minbaeva, D. (2010) · International Business Review · doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2010.11.006 · Cited by 133
Country characteristics and foreign direct investment in China: A panel data analysis
Liu, X., Song, H., Wei, Y., et al. (1997) · Review of World Economics · doi:10.1007/bf02707466 · Cited by 134
The evolutionary view of the MNE and the future of internalization theory
Verbeke, A. C. (2003) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400062 · Cited by 132
Dynamic capability and IJV performance: The effect of exploitation and exploration capabilities
Wu, Z., & Chen, R. B. (2010) · Asia Pacific Journal of Management · doi:10.1007/s10490-010-9235-3 · Cited by 140
The Enjoyment of Knowledge Sharing: Impact of Altruism on Tacit Knowledge-Sharing Behavior
Obrenovic, B., Du, J.-G., Tsoy, D., Obrenović, S., Khan, M. A. S., & Anwar, F. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01496 · Cited by 128
MAULA, M. V. J., Autio, E., & Murray, G. C. (2005) · International studies in entrepreneurship · doi:10.1007/0-387-24850-1_5 · Cited by 132
Efficiency Motives and Normative Forces: Combining Transactions Costs and Institutional Logic
Martinez, R. J., & Dacin, M. T. (1999) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639902500104 · Cited by 172
Network resource combinations in the international venturing of small biotech firms
Tolstoy, D., & Agndal, H. (2009) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2009.06.004 · Cited by 137
Knowledge Sharing Through Expatriate Relationships: A Social Capital Perspective
Mäkelä, K. (2007) · International Studies of Management and Organization · doi:10.2753/imo0020-8825370305 · Cited by 132
MNC Strategy, Knowledge Transfer Context and Knowledge Flow in MNEs
Gaur, A. S., Ma, H., & Ge, B. (2019) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/jkm-08-2018-0476 · Cited by 135
Twenty-five years (1992–2016) of the International Business Review: A bibliometric overview
Rialp, A., Merigó, J. M., Cancino, C. A., & Urbano, D. (2019) · International Business Review · doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2019.101587 · Cited by 142
Multinational Enterprises and Public Policy
Rugman, A., & Verbeke, A. (1998) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490028 · Cited by 195
Wang, C., & Yan, H. (2011) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/13673271111174339 · Cited by 132
Llusar, J. C. B., & Segarra‐Ciprés, M. (2006) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/13673270610679390 · Cited by 138
Oetzel, J. M., & Oh, C. H. (2013) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2013.0860 · Cited by 129
Minbaeva, D. (2008) · International Business Review · doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2008.08.001 · Cited by 164
Saxenian, A. (2002) · Science Technology and Society · doi:10.1177/097172180200700106 · Cited by 129
Multiculturalism within individuals: A review, critique, and agenda for future research
Vora, D. E., Martin, L., Fitzsimmons, S. R., Pekerti, A., Lakshman, C., & Raheem, S. (2018) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/s41267-018-0191-3 · Cited by 135
Globalfocusing: From Domestic Conglomerates to Global Specialists*
Meyer, K. E. (2006) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00631.x · Cited by 129
Abdi, M., & Aulakh, P. S. (2014) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206314541152 · Cited by 162
Lewin, A. Y., & Volberda, H. (2011) · International Business Review · doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2011.02.008 · Cited by 123
The evolution of networks of innovators within and across borders: Evidence from patent data
Morescalchi, A., Fabio Pammolli, A., Penner, O., Petersen, A. M., & Riccaboni, M. (2014) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2014.10.015 · Cited by 125
Microfoundations of firm internationalization: The owner CEO effect
Chittoor, R., Aulakh, P. S., & Ray, S. (2017) · Global Strategy Journal · doi:10.1002/gsj.1193 · Cited by 128
Gaffney, N. T., Karst, R. V., & Clampit, J. A. (2015) · International Business Review · doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2015.05.005 · Cited by 129
Stratman, J. K. (2007) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2007.02.006 · Cited by 126
Martín, X. (2014) · Global Strategy Journal · doi:10.1111/j.2042-5805.2013.01072.x · Cited by 130
Contextualizing international strategy by emerging market firms: A composition-based approach
Luo, Y., & Bu, J. (2017) · Journal of World Business · doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2017.01.007 · Cited by 128
Balachandran, S., & Hernández, E. (2018) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2017.1165 · Cited by 120
Industry 4.0: a review and analysis of contingency and performance effects
Szász, L., Demeter, K., Rácz, B.-G., & Losonci, D. I. (2020) · Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management · doi:10.1108/jmtm-10-2019-0371 · Cited by 127
Gabrielsson, P., Gabrielsson, M., & Seppälä, T. (2012) · Journal of International Marketing · doi:10.1509/jim.11.0068 · Cited by 127
The firm as an epistemic community: the knowledge-based view revisited
Håkanson, L. (2010) · Industrial and Corporate Change · doi:10.1093/icc/dtq052 · Cited by 129
External knowledge sourcing in biotechnology through acquisition versus alliance: A KBV approach
Carayannopoulos, S., & Auster, E. R. (2010) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2009.12.005 · Cited by 128
Retail Multinationals and Globalization:
Rugman, A. M., & Girod, S. J. G. (2003) · European Management Journal · doi:10.1016/s0263-2373(02)00150-0 · Cited by 140
Aulakh, P. S., Kotabe, M. “., & Teegen, H. J. (2000) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/1556399 · Cited by 125
Organizational Economics of Capability and Heterogeneity
Argyres, N., Felin, T., Foss, N. J., & Zenger, T. R. (2012) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1120.0746 · Cited by 129
A CONTINGENT PERSPECTIVE OF OPEN INNOVATION IN NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
Bahemia, H., & Squire, B. C. (2010) · International Journal of Innovation Management · doi:10.1142/s1363919610002799 · Cited by 123
Language Fluency, Socialization and Inter-Unit Relationships in Chinese and Finnish Subsidiaries
Barner-Rаsmussen, W., & Björkman, I. (2007) · Management and Organization Review · doi:10.1111/j.1740-8784.2007.00060.x · Cited by 130
External technology integration in product and process development
Stock, G. N., & Tatikonda, M. V. (2004) · International Journal of Operations & Production Management · doi:10.1108/01443570410541975 · Cited by 124
Comparative Institutional Analysis and Institutional Complexity
Ahmadjian, C. L. (2015) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/joms.12178 · Cited by 122
Swan, K. S., Kotabe, M. “., & Allred, B. B. (2005) · Journal of Product Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/j.0737-6782.2005.00111.x · Cited by 123
The Key Literature on IB Activities: 1960–2000
Dunning, J. H. (2001) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/0199241821.003.0002 · Cited by 118
Hilmersson, M., & Jansson, H. (2012) · Journal of International Marketing · doi:10.1509/jim.12.0052 · Cited by 122
Multiculturalism from a cognitive perspective: Patterns and implications
Lücke, G., Kostova, T., & Roth, K. (2013) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/jibs.2013.53 · Cited by 122
Foreign expansion in service industries
Bouquet, C., Hébert, L., & Delios, A. (2002) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/s0148-2963(02)00282-5 · Cited by 124
Sartor, M. A., & Beamish, P. W. (2017) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/s41267-017-0115-7 · Cited by 120
Enriching Absorptive Capacity through Social Interaction
Hotho, J. J., Becker‐Ritterspach, F., & Saka‐Helmhout, A. (2011) · British Journal of Management · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.2011.00749.x · Cited by 121
Stephen Hymer's contribution to international business scholarship: an assessment and extension
Dunning, J. H., & Pitelis, C. N. (2007) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400328 · Cited by 121
The Firm as a Coordination System: Evidence from Software Services Offshoring
Srikanth, K., & Puranam, P. (2014) · Organ. Sci. · doi:10.1287/orsc.2013.0886 · Cited by 109
Learning about the institutional environment
Henisz, W. J., & Delios, A. (2004) · Advances in strategic management · doi:10.1016/s0742-3322(02)19011-5 · Cited by 121
Dynamic capabilities and innovation in MNC subsidiaries
Michailova, S., & Wu, Z. (2014) · Journal of World Business · doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2014.10.001 · Cited by 150
Keeping the Wheels Turning: The Dynamics of Managing Networks of Practice
Agterberg, M., van den Hooff, B., Huysman, M., & Soekijad, M. (2009) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00867.x · Cited by 124
Ownership structure and CEO compensation: Implications for the choice of foreign market entry modes
Musteen, M., Datta, D. K., & Herrmann, P. (2008) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/jibs.2008.63 · Cited by 119
What more can we learn from R&D alliances? A review and research agenda
Martínez‐Noya, A., & Narula, R. (2018) · BRQ Business Research Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.brq.2018.04.001 · Cited by 120
Virtual reality and its impact on B2B marketing: A value-in-use perspective
Boyd, D. E., & Köles, B. (2018) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.06.007 · Cited by 123
Toward a loose coupling view of digital globalization
Nambisan, S., & Luo, Y. (2021) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/s41267-021-00446-x · Cited by 127
Accelerating international expansion through global alliances: a typology of cooperative strategies
Canal, E. G., Duarte, C. L., Criado, J. R., et al. (2002) · Journal of World Business · doi:10.1016/s1090-9516(02)00069-x · Cited by 120
Borda, A. J., Geleilate, J.-M. G., Newburry, W. E., & Kundu, S. K. (2016) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.11.006 · Cited by 124
Knowledge management of emerging economy multinationals
Zhao, S., Liu, X., Andersson, U., & Shenkar, O. (2021) · Journal of World Business · doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2021.101255 · Cited by 117
The Impact of Knowledge Management on MNC Subsidiary Performance: The Role of Absorptive Capacity
Mahnke, V., Pedersen, T., & Venzin, M. (2005) · Gabler Verlag eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-322-91003-5_6 · Cited by 117
A global learning organization structure and market information processing
Hult, G. T. M., & Ferrell, O. C. (1997) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/s0148-2963(97)00006-4 · Cited by 119
How does regional institutional complexity affect MNE internationalization?
Arrègle, J.-L., Miller, T. L., Hitt, M. A., & Beamish, P. W. (2016) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/jibs.2016.20 · Cited by 122
Technology characteristics and reverse technology transfer
Håkanson, L. (2000) · Management International Review · Cited by 118
Post‐Acquisition Restructuring as Evolutionary Process*
Meyer, K. E., & Lieb-Dóczy, E. (2003) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/1467-6486.00347 · Cited by 115
Hecker, A. (2012) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840611433995 · Cited by 132
Rationality vs ignorance: The role of MNE headquarters in subsidiaries’ innovation processes
Ciabuschi, F., Forsgren, M., & Martín, Ó. M. (2011) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/jibs.2011.24 · Cited by 144
Internationalization Strategy of MNEs from Emerging Economies: The Case of Huawei
Sun, S. L. (2009) · Multinational Business Review · doi:10.1108/1525383x200900013 · Cited by 123
Bell, R. G., Moore, C. B., & Al-Shammari, H. A. (2008) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00221.x · Cited by 116
Theories of the multinational firm: A microfoundational perspective
Kano, L. L., & Verbeke, A. C. (2018) · Global Strategy Journal · doi:10.1002/gsj.1332 · Cited by 118
Bonache, J., & Zárraga‐Oberty, C. (2008) · The International Journal of Human Resource Management · doi:10.1080/09585190701763743 · Cited by 115
Cuervo-Cazurra, Á. (2010) · Journal of World Business · doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2010.10.003 · Cited by 127
The New MNE: ‘Orchestration’ Theory as Envelope of ‘Internalisation’ Theory
Pitelis, C. N., & Teece, D. J. (2018) · Management International Review · doi:10.1007/s11575-018-0346-2 · Cited by 127
Patala, S., Juntunen, J. K., Lundan, S. M., & Ritvala, T. A.-M. (2021) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/s41267-020-00387-x · Cited by 131
The time and frequency of unrelated diversification
Pinheiro, F. L., Hartmann, D., Boschma, R. A., et al. (2021) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2021.104323 · Cited by 116
Rose, R. C., Uli, J. A., Abdullah, H. B., & Ismail, A. I. (2009) · Universiti Putra Malaysia Institutional Repository (Universiti Putra Malaysia) · Cited by 115
The Impact of Local Demand on Innovation in a Global Industry
Fabrizio, K. R., & Thomas, L. G. (2011) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.942 · Cited by 113
Gonzalez‐Padron, T. L., Hult, G. T. M., & Calantone, R. J. (2007) · Industrial Marketing Management · doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2007.06.013 · Cited by 115
The application of learning theories to improve cross-cultural training programs in MNCs
Lenartowicz, T., Johnson, J. P., & Konopaske, R. (2013) · The International Journal of Human Resource Management · doi:10.1080/09585192.2013.860384 · Cited by 115
Foss, N. J. (2009) · European Management Review · doi:10.1057/emr.2009.2 · Cited by 130
Paths to foreign markets: Does distance to market affect firm internationalisation?
Ellis, P. D. (2007) · International Business Review · doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2007.06.001 · Cited by 113
The role of corporate reputation in developing relational capital
de Castro, G. M., Sáez, P. L., & López, J. E. N. (2004) · Journal of Intellectual Capital · doi:10.1108/14691930410567022 · Cited by 129
Rethinking the O in Dunning’s OLI/Eclectic Paradigm
Eden, L., & Dai, L. Y. (2010) · Multinational Business Review · doi:10.1108/1525383x201000008 · Cited by 114
Determinants of ERP implementation knowledge transfer
Xu, Q., & Ma, Q. (2008) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2008.08.004 · Cited by 112
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
