The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Knowledge Networks: Explaining Effective Knowledge Sharing in Multiunit Companies
Abstract
This paper introduces the concept of knowledge networks to explain why some business units are able to benefit from knowledge residing in other parts of the company while others are not. The core premise of this concept is that a proper understanding of effective interunit knowledge sharing in a multiunit firm requires a joint consideration of relatedness in knowledge content among business units and the network of lateral interunit relations that enables task units to access related knowledge. Results from a study of 120 new product development projects in 41 business units of a large multiunit electronics company showed that project teams obtained more existing knowledge from other units and completed their projects faster to the extent that they had short interunit network paths to units that possessed related knowledge. In contrast, neither network connections nor extent of related knowledge alone explained the amount of knowledge obtained and project completion time. The results also showed a contingent effect of having direct interunit relations in knowledge networks: While established direct relations mitigated problems of transferring noncodified knowledge, they were harmful when the knowledge to be transferred was codified, because they were less needed but still involved maintenance costs. These findings suggest that research on knowledge transfers and synergies in multiunit firms should pursue new perspectives that combine the concepts of network connections and relatedness in knowledge content.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Granovetter, M. S. (1973) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/225469 · Cited by 40,491
Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications
Wasserman, S. S., & Faust, K. (1994) · Cited by 17,962
Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815478 · Cited by 17,557
Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification
Freeman, L. C. (1978) · Social Networks · doi:10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7 · Cited by 17,062
Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics
Maddala, G. S. (1983) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511810176 · Cited by 13,240
Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness
Uzzi, B. (1997) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393808 · Cited by 9,670
Burt, R. S. (1992) · doi:10.4159/9780674029095 · Cited by 9,093
Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition
Lazega, E., & Burt, R. S. (1995) · Revue Française de Sociologie · doi:10.2307/3322456 · Cited by 7,853
Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm
Szulanski, G. (1996) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250171105 · Cited by 7,839
A Behavioral Theory of the Firm
Day, R. H., Cyert, R. M., March, J. G., Clarkson, Cohen, Feigenbaum, D., Greenberg, Moore, Soelberg, Starbuck, et al. (1964) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1913056 · Cited by 7,791
Cited by
Social Capital, Networks, and Knowledge Transfer
Inkpen, A. C., & Tsang, E. W. K. (2005) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2005.15281445 · Cited by 3,864
Jansen, J. J. P., Van Den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2006) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1060.0576 · Cited by 3,705
Network Structure and Knowledge Transfer: The Effects of Cohesion and Range
Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3556658 · Cited by 3,592
Van Wijk, R., Jansen, J. J. P., & Lyles, M. A. (2008) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00771.x · Cited by 1,335
Knowledge sharing, innovation and firm performance
Wang, Z., & Wang, N. (2012) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2012.02.017 · Cited by 1,123
Metadata
- Authors
- Hansen, M. T.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 2002-06
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 232-248
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W2127018996
- Cited by
- 1,540
- References
- 55
- FWCI
- 121.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Knowledge Networks: Explaining Effective Knowledge Sharing in Multiunit Companies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/orsc.13.3.232.2771
- The paper
- Hansen, M. T. (2002). Knowledge Networks: Explaining Effective Knowledge Sharing in Multiunit Companies. Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.13.3.232.2771
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.