Knowledge creation: revisiting the 'ba' humbug people and 'latent' knowledge in organizational learning

Knowledge management theory has struggled with the concept of `knowledge creation'. Since the seminal article of Nonaka in 1991, an industry has grown up seeking to capture the knowledge in the heads and hearts of individuals so as to leverage them for organizational learning and growth. But the process of Socialization, Externalization, Combination and Internalization (SECI) outlined by Nonaka and his colleagues has essentially dealt with knowledge transfer rather than knowledge creation. This paper attempts to fill the gap in the process - from Nonaka's own addition of the need for "ba" to Snowden's suggestion of that we consider "Cynefin" as a space for knowledge creation. Drawing upon a much older theoretical frame - work the Johari Window developed in group dynamics, this paper suggests an alternative concept - latent knowledge - and introduces a different model for the process of knowledge creation.

Co-production and co-creation using self-service technology: the application of service-dominant logic

Research on how customers engage in the co-creation processes envisaged by the Servicedominant logic paradigm is currently limited and even less work has been published on frameworks for organizations to manage the co-creation process. This conceptual paper examines a particular aspect of co-creation: co-production as a result of the application of self-service technology (SST). We propose a conceptual framework for co-production, which emphasizes the need to understand productivity from the point of view of the customer, and demonstrate how this can be applied in both consumer (b2c) and interorganizational(b2b) contexts. We conclude that service organizations might benefit from clearly identifying co-production with task-performance, and co-creation with the valueattributing aspects of the customer service experience. Both aspects generate a range of design and management challenges for suppliers particularly the need to understand the cocreation process 'outputs' desired by customers and the full costs of moving away from person to person interaction.

The significance of Marx's value for strategy theory: competitive advantage and the issue of tautology within the resource-based view of the firm

Marxian thinking following the TSSI (Temporal Single System Interpretation) of Marx is applied to refute the allegation of a tautology in the resource-based view of the firm--paired with providing an explanation of how and why resources create value--, where resources are synonymous with Marx's categories of constant and variable capital. Refuting the allegation naturally leads to the holy grail of resource-based thinking, i.e. the question of what, conceptually, constitutes a firm's competitive advantage within the industry context. The article achieves its objectives by tying the resource-based view into Marx's theory value.

The motives and performance of cross-border acquirers from emerging economies: Comparison between Chinese and Indian firms

During the recent decade, the world has witnessed the rapid growth of MNEs from emerging economies. Their increasing participation in cross-border mergers and acquisitions has raised great attention in the extant literature. This study evaluates the value creation from these cross-border transactions from two representative emerging countries, namely China and India, and determines factors that result in the different performance of these international acquisition activities. Cross-border acquisitions conducted by these countries’ companies indeed lead to significant shareholder wealth creation. Furthermore, Indian shareholders are more likely to benefit from deals in small cultural distance countries, while Chinese investors gain from the cross-border expansion of manufacturing companies. Location also affects the performance of cross-border acquisitions, with acquisitions into developed countries generating higher returns to shareholders. Our sample consists of 203 Indian and 63 Chinese cross-border deals over the period 2000–2010 and our results hold after controlling for various deal-level and firm-level characteristics.

Board attributes that increase firm risk - evidence from the UK

Purpose – The aim of the paper is to identify the board attributes that significantly increase firm risk. The study aims to find if board size, percentage of non-executive directors, women on the board, a powerful CEO, equity ownership amongst executive board directors and institutional investor ownership, are associated with firm risk. This is the first study that examines which board attributes increase firm risk using a UK based sample. Design/methodology/approach – This empirical study collected secondary data from Bloomberg and Morningstar databases. The data sample is an unbalanced panel of 260 companies’ secondary data on FTSE 350 index in the UK, from 2005 to 2010. The data was statistically analysed using STATA. Findings – The study establishes the board attributes that were significantly related to firm risk. The results show that a board which can increase firm risk is one that is small in size,has high equity ownership amongst executive board directors and has high institutional investor ownership. Research limitations/implications – The governance culture and regulatory system in the UK is different from other countries. Since the data is a UK based sample, the results can lack generalisability. Practical implications – The results are useful for investors who invest in large firms, to have the knowledge about the board attributes that can increase firm risk. Regulators can also use the results to strengthen regulatory guidelines. Originality/value – This study fills the gap in knowledge in UK governance literature on the board attributes that can increase firm risk.

Revisiting the relationship between marketing capabilities and firm performance: The moderating role of market orientation, marketing strategy and organisational power

This paper extends original insights of resource-advantage theory (Hunt & Morgan, 1995) to a specific analysis of the moderators of the capabilities-performance relationship such as market orientation, marketing strategy and organizational power. Using established measures and a representative sample of UK firms drawn from Verhoef and Leeflang’s data (2009), our study tests new hypotheses to explain how different types of marketing capabilities contribute to firm performance. The application of resource-advantage theory advances theorising on both marketing and organisational antecedents of firm performance and the causal mechanisms by which competitive advantage is generated.