Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Knowledge-sharing and social interaction within MNEs

  • Article
  • Published:
Journal of International Business Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Social interaction between managers from different units of a multinational enterprise (MNE) has been shown to be an important factor stimulating intra-MNE knowledge-sharing. Face-to-face social interactions form a communication channel particularly conducive to the transfer of tacit, non-codified knowledge. But intensive social interaction also provides opportunities for social construction of knowledge in a learning dialogue. The first explanation (sender–receiver) makes us expect social interaction to moderate positively the effects of the factors giving rise to knowledge flows in the first place, such as differences in capabilities between MNE subsidiaries. The second perspective (social learning) also grants an independent effect to social interaction as a main factor stimulating intra-MNE knowledge flows. We formulate hypotheses based on both perspectives, and test these on data from 169 MNE subsidiaries. Our findings show a considerable main effect of social interaction on all intra-MNE knowledge flows, confirming the expectations based on the social learning model. Interaction effects, based on the predictions of the sender–receiver model, are only partly confirmed. These findings suggest that future research should devote more attention to the social constitution of MNE knowledge.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This possibility was pointed out to us by an anonymous reviewer.

  2. We were not able to balance the sample frame completely, as the Netherlands has no MNEs in the motor vehicles and parts industry and few MNEs in the electronics industry, and Germany has few MNEs in either the electronics or food and beverages industry.

  3. As the alpha reliability of this construct is rather low, we also performed the analysis with the three separate items instead of the multi-item scale (see the Robustness Analysis section).

References

  • Adenfelt, M., & Lagerström, K. 2006. Knowledge development and sharing in multinational corporations: The case of a centre of excellence and a transnational team. International Business Review, 15 (4): 381–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adler, N., & Hashai, N. 2007. Knowledge flows and the modelling of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (4): 639–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. 1991. Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almeida, P., Song, J., & Grant, R. 2002. Are firms superior to markets and alliances? An empirical investigation of cross-border knowledge building. Organization Science, 13 (2): 147–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambos, T. C., Ambos, B., & Schlegelmilch, B. B. 2006. Learning from foreign subsidiaries: An empirical investigation of headquarters' benefit from reverse knowledge transfers. International Business Review, 15 (3): 294–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. 1983. The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argote, L., & Ingram, P. 2000. Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82 (1): 150–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barner-Rasmussen, W., & Björkman, I. 2005. Surmounting inter-unit barriers: Factors associated with inter-unit communication intensity in the multinational corporation. International Studies of Management & Organization, 35 (1): 28–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. 1987. Managing across borders: New organizational responses. Sloan Management Review, 28 (1): 43–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. 1990. Managing innovation in the transnational corporation. In C. A. Bartlett, Y. Doz, & G. Hedlund (Eds), Managing the global firm: 215–255. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker-Ritterspach, F. A. A. 2006. The social constitution of knowledge integration in MNEs: A theoretical framework. Journal of International Management, 12 (3): 358–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bélanger, J., Berggren, C., Björkman, T., & Köhler, C. (Eds) 1999. Being local worldwide: ABB and the challenge of global management. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., & Hood, N. 1998. Multinational corporate evolution and subsidiary development. Basingstoke/New York: St Martin's Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., Hood, N., & Jonsson, S. 1998. Building firm-specific advantages in multinational corporations: The role of subsidiary initiative. Strategic Management Journal, 19 (3): 221–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Björkman, I., Barner-Rasmussen, W., & Li, L. 2004. Managing knowledge transfer in MNCs: The impact of headquarters control mechanisms. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (5): 443–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanton, H., & Jaccard, J. 2006. Tests of multiplicative models in psychology: A case study using the unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychological Review, 113 (4): 155–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bresman, H., Birkinshaw, J., & Nobel, R. 1999. Knowledge transfer in international acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies, 30 (3): 439–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. 1991. Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science, 2 (1): 40–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. 1998. Organizing knowledge. California Management Review, 40 (3): 90–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. 2000. The social life of information. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. 2001. Knowledge and organization: A social-practice perspective. Organization Science, 12 (2): 198–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, P. J., & Carter, M. J. 1996. The economics of business process design: Motivation, information and coordination within the firm. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 3 (1): 5–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M. 1998. Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlile, P. R. 2004. Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organization Science, 15 (5): 555–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cortina, J. M. 1993. What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78 (1): 98–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. 1986. Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32 (5): 554–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. 1998. What do we talk about when we talk about knowledge? Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dhanaraj, C., Lyles, M., Steensma, H. K., & Tihanyi, L. 2004. Managing tacit and explicit knowledge transfer in IJVs: The role of relational embeddedness and the impact on performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (5): 428–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopoulos, A., & Siguaw, J. A. 2006. Formative versus reflective indicators in organizational measure development: A comparison and empirical illustration. British Journal of Management, 17 (4): 263–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterby-Smith, M., & Araujo, L. J. 1999. Organizational learning: Current debates and opportunities. In M. Easterby-Smith, J. Burgoyne, & L. Araujo (Eds), Organizational learning and the learning organization: 1–22. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easterby-Smith, M., Crossan, M., & Nicolini, D. 2000. Organizational learning: Debates past, present and future. Journal of Management Studies, 37 (6): 783–796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egelhoff, W. G. 1993. Information-processing theory and the multinational corporation. In S. Ghoshal & D. E. Westney (Eds), Organization theory and the multinational corporation: 182–210. New York: St Martin's Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Egelhoff, W. G., Gorman, L., & McGormick, S. 2003. Causes of knowledge flows in MNCs. Paper presented at the 29th EIBA Conference, Copenhagen.

  • Elkjaer, B. 2003. Social learning theory: Learning as participation in social process. In M. Easterby-Smith & M. A. Lyles (Eds), The Blackwell handbook of organizational learning and knowledge management: 38–53. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farjoun, M. 1998. The independent and joint effects of the skill and physical bases of relatedness in diversification. Strategic Management Journal, 19 (7): 611–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fichman, M., & Cummings, J. 2003. Multiple imputation for missing data: Making the most of what you know. Organizational Research Methods, 6 (3): 282–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fineman, S. 2003. Emotionalizing organizational learning. In M. Easterby-Smith & M. A. Lyles (Eds), The Blackwell handbook of organizational learning and knowledge management: 557–574. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forsgren, M. 1997. The advantage paradox of the multinational corporation. In I. Björkman & M. Forsgren (Eds), The nature of the international firm: 69–85. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foss, N. J., & Pedersen, T. 2002. Transferring knowledge in MNCs: The role of sources of subsidiary knowledge and organizational context. Journal of International Management, 8 (1): 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foss, N. J., & Pedersen, T. 2004. Organizing knowledge processes in the multinational corporation: An introduction. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (5): 340–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, S. 2000. Communities of practice, Foucault and actor–network theory. Journal of Management Studies, 37 (6):853–867.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frost, T. S., Birkinshaw, J. M., & Ensign, P. C. 2002. Centers of excellence in multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 23 (11): 997–1018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, J. 1973. Designing complex organizations. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galunic, C., & Rodan, S. 1998. Resource recombinations in the firm: Knowledge structures and the potential for Schumpeterian innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 19 (12): 1193–1201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gates, S. R., & Egelhoff, W. G. 1986. Centralization in headquarters–subsidiary relationships. Journal of International Business Studies, 17 (2): 71–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C. A. 1988. Creation, adoption, and diffusion of innovations by subsidiaries of multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 19 (3): 365–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C. A. 1990. The multinational corporation as an interorganizational network. Academy of Management Review, 15 (4): 603–625.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S., & Nohria, N. 1989. Internal differentiation within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 10 (4): 323–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S., & Nohria, N. 1993. Horses for courses: Organizational forms for multinational corporations. Sloan Management Review, 34 (2): 23–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S., Korine, H., & Szulanski, G. 1994. Inter-unit communication in multinational corporations. Management Science, 40 (1): 96–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gooderham, P. N., & Ulset, S. 2002. “Beyond the M-form”: Towards a critical test of the new form. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 9 (1): 117–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. M. 1996. Towards a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17 (Special Issue): 109–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. 1991. Knowledge flows and the structure of control within multinational corporations. Academy of Management Review, 16 (4): 768–792.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. 1994. Organizing for knowledge flows within MNCs. International Business Review, 3 (4): 443–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. 2000. Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 21 (4): 473–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. 1998. Multivariate data analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Håkanson, L., & Nobel, R. 2001. Organizational characteristics and reverse technology transfer. Management International Review, 41 (4): 395–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, M. T. 2002. Knowledge networks: Explaining effective knowledge sharing in multiunit companies. Organization Science, 13 (3): 232–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, M. T., Mors, M. L., & Løvas, B. 2005. Knowledge sharing in organizations: Multiple networks, multiple phases. Academy of Management Journal, 48 (5): 776–793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, L., & Anderson, J. 1996. Transfer of declarative knowledge in complex information-processing domains. Human-Computer Interaction, 11 (1): 69–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harzing, A. W. K. 1997. Response rates in international mail surveys: Results of a 22-country study. International Business Review, 6 (6): 641–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harzing, A. W. K. 1999. Managing the multinationals: An international study of control mechanisms. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harzing, A. W. K., & Noorderhaven, N. G. 2006. Knowledge flows in MNCs: An empirical test and extension of Gupta & Govindarajan's typology of subsidiary roles. International Business Review, 15 (3): 195–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harzing, A. W. K., & Sorge, A. M. 2003. The relative impact of country-of-origin and universal contingencies on internationalization strategies and corporate control in multinational enterprises: World-wide and European perspectives. Organization Studies, 24 (2): 187–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedlund, G. 1986. The hypermodern MNC: A heterarchy? Human Resource Management, 25 (1): 9–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holm, U., & Pedersen, T. (Eds) 2000. The emergence and impact of MNC centres of excellence. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonsson, A., & Kalling, T. 2007. Challenges to knowledge sharing across national and intra-organizational boundaries: Case studies of IKEA and SCA Packaging. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 5 (3): 161–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiesler, S., & Cummings, J. 2002. What do we know about proximity and distance in work groups? A legacy of research. In P. Hinds & S. Kiesler (Eds), Distributed work: 37–80. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkman, B. L., Rosen, B., Tesluk, P. E., & Gibson, C. B. 2004. The impact of team empowerment on virtual team performance: The moderating role of face-to-face interaction. Academy of Management Journal, 47 (2): 175–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 1993. Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 24 (4): 625–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 1996. What do firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning. Organization Science, 7 (5): 502–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kraut, R., Fussel, S., Brennan, S., & Siegel, J. 2002. Understanding effects of proximity on collaboration: Implications for technologies to support remote collaborative work. In P. Hinds & S. Kiesler (Eds), Distributed work: 137–162. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. 1993. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P., & Lorsch, J. 1967. Organizations and environments: Managing differentiation and integration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. 2001. Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86 (1): 114–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maznevski, M., & Chudoba, K. M. 2000. Bridging space over time: Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organization Science, 11 (5): 473–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCann, P., & Mudambi, R. 2005. Analytical differences in the economics of geography: The case of the multinational firm. Environment and Planning A, 37 (10): 1857–1876.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McEvily, S. K., & Chakravarthy, B. 2002. The persistence of knowledge-based advantage: An empirical test for product performance and technological knowledge. Strategic Management Journal, 23 (4): 285–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minbaeva, D., Pedersen, T., Bjorkman, I., Fey, C., & Park, H. 2003. MNC knowledge transfer, subsidiary absorptive capacity and HRM. Journal of International Business Studies, 34 (6): 586–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monteiro, L. F., Arvidsson, N., & Birkinshaw, J. 2008. Knowledge flows within multinational corporations: Explaining subsidiary isolation and its performance implications. Organization Science, 19 (1): 90–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudambi, R. 2002. Knowledge management in multinational firms. Journal of International Management, 8 (1): 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudambi, R., & Navarra, P. 2004. Is knowledge power? Knowledge flows, subsidiary power and rent-seeking within MNCs. Journal of International Business Studies, 35 (5): 385–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nadler, J., Thompson, L., & Van Boven, L. 2003. Learning negotiation skills: Four models of knowledge creation and transfer. Management Science, 49 (4): 529–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nohria, N., & Ghoshal, S. 1994. Differentiated fit and shared values: Alternatives for managing headquarters–subsidiary relations. Strategic Management Journal, 15 (6): 491–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nohria, N., & Ghoshal, S. 1997. The differentiated network: Organizing multinational corporations for value creation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. 1995. The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese firms create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noorderhaven, N. G., & Harzing, A. W. K. 2003. The “country-of-origin effect” in multinational corporations: Sources, mechanisms and moderating conditions. Management International Review, 43 (Special issue 2): 47–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otterbeck, L. (Ed.) 1981. The management of headquarters subsidiary relationships in multinational corporations. Aldershot: Gower.

    Google Scholar 

  • Persson, M. 2006. The impact of operational structure, lateral integrative mechanisms and control mechanisms on intra-MNE knowledge transfer. International Business Review, 15 (5): 547–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plaskoff, J. 2003. Intersubjectivity and community building: Learning to learn organizationally. In M. Easterby-Smith & M. A. Lyles (Eds), The Blackwell handbook of organizational learning and knowledge management: 161–184. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. 1986. Self-reports in organisational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12 (4): 531–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. 2003. Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48 (2): 240–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice, R. E. 1993. Media appropriateness: Using social presence theory to compare traditional and new organizational media. Human Communication Research, 19 (4): 451–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, P. 1994. Missing data: A conceptual review for applied psychologists. Personnel Psychology, 47 (3): 537–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A., & Verbeke, A. 2001. Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises. Strategic Management Journal, 22 (3): 237–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, M. 2003. Pathways of relevance: Exploring inflows of knowledge into subunits of multinational corporations. Organization Science, 14 (4): 440–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. 1976. The social psychology of telecommunications. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Subramaniam, M. 2006. Integrating cross-border knowledge for transnational new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23 (6): 541–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subramaniam, M., & Venkatraman, N. 2001. Determinants of transnational new product development capability: Testing the influence of transferring and deploying tacit overseas knowledge. Strategic Management Journal, 22 (4): 359–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szulanski, G. 1996. Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17 (Special issue): 27–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szulanski, G. 2000. The process of knowledge transfer: A diachronic analysis of stickiness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82 (1): 9–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, W. 2001. Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (5): 996–1004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. 1998. Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal, 41 (4): 464–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsoukas, H. 2003. Do we really understand tacit knowledge? In M. Easterby-Smith & M. A. Lyles (Eds), The Blackwell handbook of organizational learning and knowledge management: 410–427. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Urry, J. 2003. Social networks, travel and talk. British Journal of Sociology, 54 (2): 155–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Baalen, P., Bloemhof-Ruwaard, J., & Van Heck, E. 2005. Knowledge sharing in an emerging network of practice: The role of a knowledge portal. European Management Journal, 23 (3): 300–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zander, U. 1991. Exploiting a technological edge: Voluntary and involuntary dissemination of technology. Stockholm: Institute of International Business.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the three anonymous JIBS reviewers and JIBS Departmental Editor Yadong Luo for their helpful feedback.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Innovation Research, Tilburg University, Tilburg, the Netherlands

    Niels Noorderhaven

  2. Department of Management, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia

    Anne-Wil Harzing

Authors
  1. Niels Noorderhaven
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anne-Wil Harzing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Niels Noorderhaven.

Additional information

Accepted by Yadong Luo, Departmental Editor, 10 April 2008. This paper has been with the authors for three revisions.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Noorderhaven, N., Harzing, AW. Knowledge-sharing and social interaction within MNEs. J Int Bus Stud 40, 719–741 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2008.106

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2008.106

Keywords

Search

Navigation