The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Knowledge Management Processes and International Joint Ventures
Abstract
The management and processing of organizational knowledge are increasingly being viewed as critical to organizational success. By exploring how firms access and exploit alliance-based knowledge, the authors provide evidence to support the argument that the firm is a dynamic system of processes involving different types of knowledge. Using data from a longitudinal study of North American-based joint ventures (JVs) between North American and Japanese firms, they address three related research questions: (1) what processes do JV partners use to gain access to alliance knowledge; (2) what types of knowledge are associated with the different processes and how should that knowledge be classified; and (3) what is the relationship between organizational levels, knowledge types, and the transfer of knowledge? Although many generalizations have been drawn about the merits of knowledge-based resources and the creation of knowledge, few efforts have been made to establish systematically how firms acquire and manage new knowledge. Moreover, prior alliance research has not addressed in detail the nature of alliance knowledge and how knowledge is managed in the alliance context. The authors examine the processes used by alliance partners to transfer knowledge from an alliance context to a partner context. They identify four key processes—technology sharing, alliance-parent interaction, personnel transfers, and strategic integration—that share a conceptual underpinning and represent a knowledge connection between parent and alliance. Each of the four processes is shown to provide an avenue for managers to gain exposure to knowledge and ideas outside their traditional organizational boundaries and to create a connection for individual managers to communicate their alliance experiences to others. Although all of the knowledge management processes are potentially effective, the different processes involve different types of knowledge and different organizational levels. The primary types of knowledge associated with each process are identified and then linked with the organizational level affected by the transfer process. From those linkages, several propositions about organizational knowledge transfer and management are developed. The results suggest that although a variety of knowledge management strategies can be viable, some strategies lead to more effective knowledge transfer than others.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“coordination and integration have occasionally been used interchangeably in the IOR literature (Inkpen & Dinur, 1998; for a discussion about these two concepts in the intraorganizational context, see Okhuysen & Bechky, 2009).”
From Collaboration, Coordination, and Cooperation Among Organizations: Establishing the Distinctive Meanings of These Terms Through a Systematic Literature Review (2020) · cites this paper as Inkpen & Dinur, 1998
Citations
Cites
Wagner, H. R., Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1968) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2575405 · Cited by 46,525
Case Study Research: Design and Methods
Chaiklin, H. (1991) · The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · doi:10.1097/00005053-199102000-00025 · Cited by 39,639
The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014 · Cited by 39,449
The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195092691.001.0001 · Cited by 18,010
A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation
Nonaka, I. (1994) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.5.1.14 · Cited by 17,809
The Knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation
Takeuchi, H. (1997) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(97)80234-x · Cited by 13,165
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
Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.40 · Cited by 8,742
Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures
Huber, G. P. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.88 · Cited by 8,072
Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy
Reid, L. A., & Polanyi, M. (1959) · British Journal of Educational Studies · doi:10.2307/3119338 · Cited by 7,880
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 54 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Bleeke J., 1995, Harvard Bus. Rev., 73, 97
- Gulati R., 1994, Sloan Management Rev., 35, 61
- Inkpen A. C., 1995, J. Internat. Management, 1, 165
- Katz R., 1988, Managing Professionals In Innovative Organizations, 442
- Mintzberg H., 1990, Perspectives of Strategic Management, 105
- Westney D. E., 1988, Cooperative Strategies in International Business, 339
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250961 · Cited by 10,176
Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective
Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A., & Segars, A. H. (2001) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2001.11045669 · Cited by 6,233
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
Self-citationGrounded Theory in Management Research
Locke, K. (2003) · SAGE Publications Ltd eBooks · doi:10.4135/9780857024428 · Cited by 2,250
Orchestrating Innovation Networks
Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2006.21318923 · Cited by 1,803
Metadata
- Authors
- Inkpen, A. C., & Dinur, A.
- Affiliations
- Thunderbird, The American Graduate School of International Management, Glendale, Arizona 85306
- Temple University (US)
- ORCID
- Inkpen, Andrew C.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 1998-08
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 454-468
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W2161132835
- Semantic Scholar
- d4291d2790ff47ace600ab0dac855cc1ec9cbb1d
- Cited by
- 993
- References
- 54
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 42 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 53 · 2013: 62 · 2012: 63
- FWCI
- 58.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Organization Science (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › International Business and FDI
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Knowledge Management and Sharing
- Keywords
- knowledge management, international joint ventures, knowledge transfer, knowledge resources, technology sharing, personnel transfer, strategic integration, levels of organization, knowledge classification
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