View/Open - Scholarly Commons Home

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Sarkar, R. E., Cavusgil, S. T., & Aulakh, P. S. (2001). The influence of complementarity, compatibility, and relationship capital on alliance performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29(4), 358-373. Seale, C., Gobo, G., Gubrium, J. F., & Silverman, D. (2007). Qualitative research practice: Concise paperback edition. London: Sage Publications. Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday. Shenkar, O., & Jiatao, L. (1999). Knowledge search in international cooperative ventures. Organizational Science, 10(2), 134-214. Sherwood, A. L., & Covin, J. G. (2008). Knowledge acquisition in university-industry alliances: An empirical investigation from a learning theory perspective. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(2), 162-179. Simonin, B. L. (1997). The importance of collaborative know-how: An empirical test of the learning organization. Academy of Management Journal, 40(5), 1150-1174. Simonin, B. L. (1999). Ambiguity and the process of knowledge transfer in strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 20(7), 595-623. Sloane, P. J. (1976). Restriction of competition in professional sports teams. Bulletin of Economic Research, 28(1), 3-22. Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue), 27-43. Szulanski, G. (2000). The process of knowledge transfer: A diachronic analysis of stickiness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 9-27. Teece, D., & Pisano, G. (1994). The dynamic capabilities of firms: An introduction. Industrial and Corporate Change, 3(3), 537-555. Thibault, L., & Harvey, J. (1997). Fostering interorganisational linkages in the Canadian sport delivery system. Journal of Sport Management, 11(1), 45-68 Todeva, E., & Knoke, D. (2005). Strategic alliances and models of collaboration. Management Decision, 43(1), 123-148. Tsang, E. W. K. (1999). A preliminary typology of learning in international strategic alliances. Journal of World Business, 34(3), 211-229. Tsang, E. W. K. (2002). Acquiring knowledge by foreign partners from international joint ventures in transition economy: Learning-by-doing and learning myopia. Strategic Management Journal, 23(9), 835-854. 118
Tsang, E. W. K., & Kwan, K.-M. (1999). Replication of theory development in organizational science: A critical realist perspective. The Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 759-780. Walter, J., Lechner, C., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2007). Knowledge transfer between and within alliance partners: Private versus collective benefits of social capital. Journal of Business Research, 60(7), 698-710. White, N. P. (1976). Plato: On knowledge and reality. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing. Wijk, R. V., Jansen, J. J. P., & Lyles, M. A. (2008). Inter- and intra-organizational knowledge transfer: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its antecedents and consequences. Journal of Management Studies, 45(4), 830-853. Wymer, W. W., & Samu, S. (2003). Dimensions of business and nonprofit collaborative relationships. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 11(1), 3-22. Yan, L. (2004). Role of organizational learning in strategic alliance. Retrieved April 20 2008, from http://www.globelicsacademy.net/pdf/YanLigang_paper.pdf Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage. 119
Page 1 and 2:
Determinants of Inter-Partner Learn
Page 3 and 4:
3.3 Data Sources...................
Page 5 and 6:
INDEX OF FIGURES Figure 1: Case Stu
Page 7 and 8:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to of
Page 9 and 10:
DEDICATION I would like to dedicate
Page 11 and 12:
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Backgrou
Page 13 and 14:
Harvey, 1997). However, the study o
Page 15 and 16:
take over management of the Knights
Page 17 and 18:
“to be New Zealand’s leading pa
Page 19 and 20:
transparency and receptivity to lea
Page 21 and 22:
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Int
Page 23 and 24:
To summarise this section, transfer
Page 25 and 26:
separated into internal and externa
Page 27 and 28:
least some form face-to-face contac
Page 29 and 30:
experiences with a view to improvin
Page 31 and 32:
are amongst the most important fact
Page 33 and 34:
Whether learning becomes self-susta
Page 35 and 36:
alliance. Organisations with a pref
Page 37 and 38:
uncontrolled access. Organisations
Page 39 and 40:
additional factor influencing recep
Page 41 and 42:
The rationale for this research was
Page 43 and 44:
the organisation and the relationsh
Page 45 and 46:
By keeping accounts of the research
Page 47 and 48:
number of questions where developed
Page 49 and 50:
interviews. Not only was there the
Page 51 and 52:
The next section focussed on the se
Page 53 and 54:
the opportunity to archive the data
Page 55 and 56:
3.4.4 Communication A major factor
Page 57 and 58:
three determinants of learning deve
Page 59 and 60:
the type of organisation but not th
Page 61 and 62:
CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS 4.1. Introductio
Page 63 and 64:
een one of the factors that had res
Page 65 and 66:
Interestingly NSO3 made this commen
Page 67 and 68:
some duplication, then, there’s c
Page 69 and 70:
[I]t’s mainly the management, but
Page 71 and 72:
Other participants supported this b
Page 73 and 74:
[the sport] in the country. And tha
Page 75 and 76:
communication, April 18, 2008). Thi
Page 77 and 78: [W]e’ll come back from the intern
Page 79 and 80: [PSF1], and [PSF2] and ... the owne
Page 81 and 82: When probed further as to why this
Page 83 and 84: In certain areas the NSO1 thought i
Page 85 and 86: However in an unusual move, likely
Page 87 and 88: Since I’ve come on board, and cer
Page 89 and 90: obviously doing it. So on that leve
Page 91 and 92: PSF6 also reiterated this, wanting
Page 93 and 94: with them, you never know what you
Page 95 and 96: the answer: I think as I said, we
Page 97 and 98: access....so, in return for univers
Page 99 and 100: important.....we’re opening up ou
Page 101 and 102: It was clear that there had been so
Page 103 and 104: When questioned about who was the t
Page 105 and 106: We have three full time coaches her
Page 107 and 108: wanting to know more, I guess, yes,
Page 109 and 110: CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION 5.1 Introducti
Page 111 and 112: Both organisations are collaboratin
Page 113 and 114: Hamel’s (1991) study that argued
Page 115 and 116: financial issues. However one parti
Page 117 and 118: 5.4 Receptivity of Organisations in
Page 119 and 120: 5.5 Future Research There are a num
Page 121 and 122: REFERENCES Alexander, T., Thibault,
Page 123 and 124: Contractor, F. J., & Lorange, P. (2
Page 125 and 126: Inkpen, A. C. (2002). Learning, kno
Page 127: New Zealand Companies Office. (2008
Page 131 and 132: Area Research Question Appendix 1:
Page 133 and 134: Appendix 2: AUTEC Ethical Approval
Page 135 and 136: Appendix 3: Participant Information
Page 137 and 138: How do I agree to participate in th
Page 139 and 140: Appendix 4: Participant Consent For
show all

View/Open - Scholarly Commons Home

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?