A Review on the Technology Transfer Models ... - EuroJournals

More documents

Recommendations

Info

European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 10, Number 4 (2009) 5. Organization Learning Related Models 5.1. Argyris and Schon’s Model Argyris and Schon (1978) develop a three-fold typology of organizational learning: 1) single-loop, 2) double-loop, and 3) triple-loop (deutero) learning. Single-loop learning is described as “the errordetection-and-correction process; where errors are detected and corrected to allow an organization to change its methods and rules to improve what is being done within existing programs or policies”. As a result, the organization achieves its current objective more efficiently. In addition to the errordetection-and-correction, double-loop learning involves “change of the value of an organization’s theory-in-use”. This form of learning occurs when errors are detected and corrected in ways that involves the changes in an organization’s underlying norms, policies and objective. Triple-loop or deutero learning is “learning how to learn”; where the organizational members’ cognitive changes as a result of reflecting and inquiring into their previous learning experiences. Triple-loop learning is also a process how to execute single and double-loop learning (Argyris and Schon, 1978). 5.2. Mills and Friesen’s Model This model describes the ways how organizations learn and focuses on the sources of knowledge. The model explains that an organization learns through individuals in the organization. These individuals are hired because of their specific competencies or knowledge which may be gained through on the job training or formal training. Learning is an individual phenomenon, which benefits the organization entirely through the individuals (Mills and Friesen, 1992). OL should involve systemizing knowledge into its practices, processes, and procedures that are the reutilization of knowledge. When individuals do not use knowledge or resign, the knowledge will still remain with the organization which constitutes OL. If an organization acquires or merges with other organization, OL occurs when the acquiring organization absorbs the acquired organization practices and procedures, or adds to its personnel the knowledge embodied in the acquired organization’s processes and personnel (Mills and Friesen, 1992). 5.3. Nevis, DiBella and Gould’s Model Nevis et al. (1995) propose a three-stage model of OL: 1) knowledge acquisition, 2) knowledge sharing, and 3) knowledge utilization. Knowledge acquisition refers to the development or creation of skills, insights, and relationship. Knowledge sharing relates to the dissemination of knowledge that has been learned. Knowledge utilization is the integration of learning to make it widely available; where it can be generalized to new environments. OL may occur in a planned or informal ways. Knowledge and skill acquisition occur not only through acquisition but also through knowledge sharing and utilization (Nevis et al., 1995). 5.4. Nonaka’s Knowledge Spiral Model Nonaka (1994) proposes a model describing how organizational knowledge is created through different channels of interaction between tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge. Nonaka (1994) suggests four modes how knowledge is created through: 1) socialization process (tacit to tacit knowledge creation), 2) externalization process (tacit to explicit knowledge creation), 3) combination process (explicit to explicit knowledge creation), and 4) internalization process (explicit to tacit knowledge creation). 5.5. Kim’s Model Kim (1993) proposes an integrative model describing the link between individual learning and OL in which an organization learns through its individual members is affected either directly or indirectly by individual learning. This model describes OL as not only a collective individual learning but also involves the transfer mechanism between individual and OL; where individual learning becomes embedded in an organization’s memory and structure. In this sense, individual learning affects learning 559
European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 10, Number 4 (2009) at organizational level by its influence on the organization’s shared models. This model stresses that organization learns only through its members and learning does not depend on any specific members. However, individuals can learn without the organization. OL process is viewed from two perspectives: 1) the collective learning perspective, and 2) the cognitive-outcome perspective. The collective learning perspective describes how knowledge through individual learning becomes organization shared knowledge, and the cognitive outcome perspective indicates that knowledge acquired through individual learning can lead directly to individual action or indirectly to organizational action through knowledge sharing (Kim, 1993). 5.6. IJV Knowledge Management Model Building on Parkhe (1993) and Toyne (1989), Tiemessen et al. (1997) propose a model of OL and KT in IJVs based on input-process-output model. According to this model there are four critical elements involved in OL and knowledge transfer in IJV: Structure, Conditions, Process, and Outcomes. Tiemessen et al. (1997) propose three phases of inter-organizational learning in JV. The first phase is transfer process where two independent firms form a JV, both firms transfer and contribute resources in terms of their existing stock of competencies. Transfer is described as the movement/migration of knowledge between the parents firms, directly or indirectly, through activities such as buying technology, observing and imitating technology used by the other JV’s partner or modifying/changing the existing technologies based on the partner’s direction. Transfer means “to accept the partner’s knowledge, to integrate knowledge into one’s own systems or changing one’s own resources to imitate knowledge” (Tiemessen et al., 1997). The second phase is transformation process where through joint activities these competencies are then transformed and enhanced to reflect the combined pool of knowledge and skills as well as new knowledge and skills created from the alliance. Knowledge transformation is the extension of existing knowledge and the creation of new knowledge within the JV. Thus, transformation is defined as the integration, application and leveraging of contributed knowledge, and the creation of new knowledge as a result of IJV activities. The successful exploitation of an advantage internationally may require an adaptation of the technology, system, or management practices, or all of them to the local environment (Casson, 1993). Collaborating with local partners is crucial in ensuring appropriate and correct adaptation, and opportunities to improve own capabilities. Through adaptation process, resource integration and partnering knowledge are created (Tiemessen et al., 1997). The third phase is harvesting process where partners harvest knowledge and skills from IJV and bring back to the parent firms. Harvesting is described as “a process of retrieving knowledge that has already been created and tested from the IJV resources in which it resides, and internalizing it into the parent firm so it can be retrieved back and used in other applications”. Knowledge harvesting process is different from transfer and transformation process because the process is more difficult and not straightforward (Tiemessen et al., 1997). Knowledge harvesting by the parent firms is contingent upon the top management’s active role in JV and proper communication with the JV managers (Lyles, 1988). 6. Conclusion This review significantly contributes to the existing TT literature by reviewing the evolution and development of the previous TT models which include the traditional TT model, models developed after 1990s, other related theoretical foundations underlying TT models, and the current TT models which have strong influence of KBV and OL perspectives. This review could help shape the direction of both future theoretical and empirical studies on inter-firm technology transfer specifically 1) on how KBV and OL perspectives could play significant role in explaining the complex relationships between the supplier and recipient in inter-firm technology transfer 2) the tradeoffs that involve between properties of technology, protecting proprietary technologies, competitiveness of the supplier, 560
Page 1 and 2: European Journal of Social Sciences
Page 9: European Journal of Social Sciences
Page 15: European Journal of Social Sciences

A Review on the Technology Transfer Models ... - EuroJournals

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?