The determinants of knowledge transfer within collaborative new product development projects

Purpose – This paper explores the factors which determine the degree of knowledge transfer in inter-firm new product development projects. We test a theoretical model exploring how inter-firm knowledge transfer is enabled or hindered by a buyer’s learning intent, the degree of supplier protectiveness, inter-firm knowledge ambiguity, and absorptive capacity. Design/methodology/approach – A sample of 153 R&D intensive manufacturing firms in the UK automotive, aerospace, pharmaceutical, electrical, chemical, and general manufacturing industries were used to test the framework. Two-step structural equation modeling in AMOS 7.0 was used to analyse the data. Findings – Our results indicate that a buyer’s learning intent increases inter-firm knowledge transfer, but also acts as an incentive for suppliers to protect their knowledge. Such defensive measures increase the degree of inter-firm knowledge ambiguity, encouraging buyer firms to invest in absorptive capacity as a means to interpret supplier knowledge, but also increase the degree of knowledge transfer. Practical implications – Our paper illustrates the effects of focusing on acquisition, rather than accessing, supplier technological knowledge. We show that an overt learning strategy can be detrimental to knowledge transfer between buyer-supplier, as supplier’s react by restricting the flow of information. Organisations are encouraged to consider this dynamic when engaging in multi-organisational new product development projects. Originality/value – This paper examines the dynamics of knowledge transfer within inter-firm NPD projects, showing how transfer is influenced by the buyer firm’s learning intention, supplier’s response, characteristics of the relationship and knowledge to be transferred.

Research intensity and knowledge transfer activity in UK universities

As the innovation process has become more open and networked, Government policy in the UK has sought to promote both research excellence in the university sector and the translation of this into economic benefit through university–business engagement. However, this policy approach has tended to be applied uniformly with little account for organisational differences within the sector. In this paper we consider if differences between universities in their research performance is reflected in their knowledge transfer activity. Specifically, as universities develop a commercialization agenda are the strategic priorities for knowledge transfer, the organisational supports in place to facilitate knowledge transfer and the scale and scope of knowledge transfer activity different for high research intensive (HRI) and low research intensive (LRI) universities? The findings demonstrate that universities’ approach to knowledge transfer is shaped by institutional and organisational resources, in particular their ethos and research quality, rather than the capability to undertake knowledge transfer through a Technology Transfer Office (TTO). Strategic priorities for knowledge transfer are reflected in activity, in terms of the dominance of specific knowledge transfer channels, the partners with which universities engage and the geography of business engagement.

Knowledge Transfer in Quadruple Helix Ecosystems: An Absorptive Capacity Perspective

Increased understanding of knowledge transfer (KT) from universities to the wider regional knowledge ecosystem offers opportunities for increased regional innovation and commercialisation. The aim of this article is to improve the understanding of the KT phenomena in an open innovation context where multiple diverse quadruple helix stakeholders are interacting. An absorptive capacity-based conceptual framework is proposed, using a priori constructs which portrays the multidimensional process of KT between universities and its constituent stakeholders in pursuit of open innovation and commercialisation. Given the lack of overarching theory in the field, an exploratory, inductive theory building methodology was adopted using semi-structured interviews, document analysis and longitudinal observation data over a three-year period. The findings identify five factors, namely human centric factors, organisational factors, knowledge characteristics, power relationships and network characteristics, which mediate both the ability of stakeholders to engage in KT and the effectiveness of knowledge acquisition, assimilation, transformation and exploitation. This research has implications for policy makers and practitioners by identifying the need to implement interventions to overcome the barriers to KT effectiveness between regional quadruple helix stakeholders within an open innovation ecosystem.

Validating A knowledge transfer framework in health services

The study of knowledge transfer (KT) has been proceeding in parallel but independently in health services and in business, presenting an opportunity for synergy and sharing. This paper uses a survey of 32 empirical KT studies with their 96 uniquely named determinants of KT success to identify ten unique determinants for horizontal knowledge transfer success. These determinants, the outcome measure of Knowledge Use, and separate explicit and tacit transfer flows constitute the KT Framework, extending the work of previous KT framework authors. Our Framework was validated through a case study of the transfer of clinical practice guideline knowledge between the cardiac teams of selected Ontario hospitals, using a survey of senders and receivers developed from the KT literature. The study findings were: 8 of 10 determinants were supported by the Successful Transfer Hospitals; and 4 of 10 determinants were found to a higher degree in the Successful than non-Successful transfer hospitals. Taken together, the results show substantive support for the KT Framework determinants, indicating aggregate support of 9 of these determinants, but not the 10th - Knowledge Complexity. The transfer of tacit knowledge was found to be related to the transfer of the explicit knowledge and expressed as the transfer or recreation of resource profile and internal process tacit knowledge, where this tacit transfer did not require interactions between Sender and Receiver. This study provides managers with the building blocks to assess and improve the success rates of their knowledge transfers.