Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Knowledge ...

The Not-Invented-Here Syndrome in Academia – How to
Measure and Manage it
David Grosse Kathoefer and Jens Leker
Institute for Business Administration at <strong>the</strong> Department <strong>of</strong> Chemistry and
Pharmacy, University <strong>of</strong> Muenster, Germany
grossekathoefer@uni-muenster.de
leker@uni-muenster.de
Abstract:Today’s society is <strong>of</strong>ten described as a “knowledge society”. Accordingly, knowledge transfer plays a
pivotal role for innovation and economic development. In this light, universities have <strong>of</strong>ten been <strong>the</strong> focus <strong>of</strong>
interest for research and practice in recent years. However, <strong>the</strong> perspective <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> knowledge recipient in this
process is very much neglected. Thus, this paper concentrates on <strong>the</strong> Not-Invented-Here syndrome in academia.
We develop a robust measurement model and test this construct and 8 potential antecedents in a structural
equation model. The sample consists <strong>of</strong> 477 German university pr<strong>of</strong>essors from <strong>the</strong> natural sciences. We figure
out that 4 <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> hypo<strong>the</strong>ses find support in <strong>the</strong> data. Especially, experience and a knowledge sharing-friendly
environment help to decrease a potential NIH infection <strong>of</strong> academic scientists. At <strong>the</strong> end <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> paper, practical
implications for industrial managers and university policy-makers are derived.
Keywords: Not-Invented-Here syndrome, knowledge transfer, academia, recipient, barrier
1. Introduction
In industrialized countries lacking natural resources, knowledge plays a pivotal role for economic
development. Accordingly, innovations are indispensable ingredients for growth <strong>of</strong> both, economy in
general and companies in particular (David and Foray, 2002). For this reason, today’s society is <strong>of</strong>ten
described as a “knowledge society” (Lytras and Sicilia, 2005).
In recent years, product-life cycles have become shorter and shorter (Wang and Benaroch, 2004). To
satisfy that demand <strong>of</strong> innovations, corporations are not only dependent on collaborations with o<strong>the</strong>r
companies but also with public research institutions like universities. Accordingly, <strong>the</strong> network
between industrial and academic research and development (R&D) has been streng<strong>the</strong>ned and
knotted more tightly (Baba, Shichijo and Sedita, 2009). To succeed in such collaborations,
bidirectional knowledge flows are necessary. Cockburn and Henderson (1998) argue that basic
science can also be influenced by product development, questioning <strong>the</strong> long accepted linear model
<strong>of</strong> R&D process. Thus, <strong>the</strong> importance <strong>of</strong> multidirectional knowledge transfer has increased
significantly.
So far, several papers have identified barriers <strong>of</strong> knowledge transfer (e.g. Husted and Michailova,
2002, Riege, 2005, Szulanski, 1996). In this context, most empirical studies have focused on <strong>the</strong>
sender’s perspective, evaluating <strong>the</strong> willingness to share knowledge (e.g. Bock et al., 2005,
Haeussler, 2011, Siemsen, Roth and Balasubramanian, 2008). However, <strong>the</strong> recipient’s side is still
very much neglected. In this context, one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> most important barriers is <strong>the</strong> so-called Not-Invented-
Here (NIH) Syndrome (Husted and Michailova, 2002, Szulanski, 1996). It describes a negative
attitude towards knowledge from external sources (Lichtenthaler and Ernst, 2006). Although this
phenomenon is well accepted in <strong>the</strong>ory and practice, only very few studies have actually empirically
analyzed it. Additionally, most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se studies have been conducted in an industry setting, whereas
<strong>the</strong> academic perspective is still a largely white spot on <strong>the</strong> research map (Grosse Kathoefer and
Leker, 2010). Fur<strong>the</strong>r, it seems as if <strong>the</strong> construct has been reified so far. This means that <strong>the</strong>
<strong>the</strong>oretical concept has been detached from its original context and important aspects and
requirements have been neglected, leading to a frequent use without scrutinizing its applicability. A
similar development has been identified for <strong>the</strong> concept <strong>of</strong> “absorptive capacity” (Lane, Koka and
Pathak, 2006). In <strong>the</strong> case <strong>of</strong> NIH, <strong>the</strong> numerous utilizations contradict reality as <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong>
operationalizations can still be counted on <strong>the</strong> fingers <strong>of</strong> one hand. Moreover, causal relationships
between antecedents, consequences and NIH have not been tested empirically, yet. Our recent paper
(2010) is one exception here as we made a first attempt to operationalize NIH and provide first
insights into potential influencing factors. Therefore, <strong>the</strong> paper at hand fur<strong>the</strong>r aims to address <strong>the</strong>
abovementioned shortcomings and investigates <strong>the</strong> NIH syndrome in an academic setting.
360