thesis_Daniela Noethen_print final - Jacobs University

5. General Discussion
In the previous three chapters, the empirical work that has been done within the framework of
this dissertation has been presented, and the respective findings have been discussed. In this
last chapter, the goal is to discuss, at a broader level, how the results of the three papers relate
to each other as well as general limitations of this dissertational work, to critically examine to
what extent the objectives of the dissertation have been reached, and what we can derive for
future directions of research. I will conclude this chapter by discussing the relevance of this
dissertation for and contributions to the research field.
5.1. Recurrent Issues Across Papers
So far, the findings of the single papers have only been discussed separately. In the following,
I will abstract from the single papers and focus on recurrent and striking results of the
dissertation as a whole, such as important predictor variables (5.1.1.), distinctions to be taken
into account in knowledge transfer research (5.1.2.), and the necessity of multilevel research
(5.1.3.).
5.1.1. Important predictor variables: Age and intrinsic motivation
Two of the constructs investigated as predictors of knowledge transfer in the three papers
merit a short discussion: First, age as an influencing factor that is rather new in this context,
such that it has not been considered as a predictor in previous research, but is increasingly
important due to the changing age structure in organizations; and second, intrinsic motivation,
a potent influencing factor that strongly influenced knowledge transfer and seems to be one of
the few consistently found predictors.
First, the effect(s) of age: Clearly, one of the foci of this dissertation was the study of age
effects on knowledge transfer, owing to the framing within the context of knowledge loss and
174