The value of international assignees' knowledge of interpersonal networks: knowledge of people, networks and politics and knowledge flows in multinational enterprises.
| Verfasser | Boyle, Brendan |
| Posten | RESEARCH ARTICLE - Report - Abstract |
Abstract This paper explores the role of international assignments in sharing knowledge across multinational enterprises (MNEs) by examining how international assignees share knowledge of interpersonal networks and, in turn, the impact on knowledge flow in MNEs. We go beyond the extant membership of interpersonal networks metaphor by studying a category of intra-organisational knowledge that facilitates knowledge flows. In doing so, this paper contributes not only to our understanding of the significance of specific kinds of relationships in MNEs but, uniquely, to our understanding of the utility of knowledge of interpersonal networks as a category of intra-organisational knowledge; knowledge of people, networks and politics as well as respective idiosyncrasies and behaviours. The value of international assignees' knowledge of interpersonal networks is demonstrated with an explanation of how advantages related to time and access to knowledge facilitates a more efficient and effective flow of knowledge across the MNE.
Keywords International assignments * Multinational enterprises * Knowledge of interpersonal networks * Knowledge sharing
1 Introduction
The ability to mobilize knowledge across global units is a fundamental strategic imperative for multinational enterprises (MNEs) (Doz et al. 2001; Gupta and Govindarajan 2000; Foss 2006). This paper explores the role of international assignments in mobilizing knowledge across the MNE by investigating how assignees use knowledge of interpersonal networks to facilitate knowledge flow. Knowledge of interpersonal networks, which includes knowledge of people, politics, and behaviours in addition to being part of a network, focuses not only on relationships but also on the utility of knowledge, both of people and networks, as well as their respective idiosyncrasies (Nordhaug 1998). This conceptualization of what authors have labelled 'knowing-whom' (Defillippi and Arthur 1994) represents an amalgamation of insights from network theory (Burt 1992; Lin 1999) and Nordhaug's (1998) work-related competence typology, which emphasizes the utility of intra-organisational knowledge. Unlike previous studies, the concept of knowledge of interpersonal networks used in this paper combines a consideration of network membership benefits with a consideration of the utility of knowledge of networks more broadly for knowledge flow.
While it is recognised that assignments are a mechanism used to integrate MNEs through interpersonal communication across networks (Kostova and Roth 2003; Fang et al. 2010), how knowledge flow is enhanced is less understood, partially because researchers "eyes go shifty like a cornered ferret if you push past the network metaphor for details about how [network relationships or knowledge of them] matter" (Burt 1997, p. 351). Specifically, we still know little about the significance of network characteristics or knowledge of these characteristics for effective knowledge flow (Borgatti and Cross 2003). With a focus on 'knowledge sharing'--processes through which knowledge is mobilized--rather than the internalized transfer of practice (Makela and Brewster 2009), we ask the following question: How does the sharing of knowledge of interpersonal networks during international assignments impact the flow of knowledge in MNEs?
Analysis of interview data from 21 cases of international assignments across 13 MNEs reveals a number of important findings. The first, labelled time advantages, relates to how sharing knowledge of interpersonal networks impacts the efficiency with which individual knowledge flows between distant units. The second, labelled access advantages, relate to how sharing knowledge of interpersonal networks impacts the effectiveness with which individual knowledge flows between units. We provide insights into how knowledge of interpersonal networks creates access advantages by its impact on what knowledge is known to be available (transactive memories), motivations to share knowledge (motivational disposition) and an understanding of the nature of what will be shared (candid access).
In conclusion, we explicate how this study contributes to the critical endeavour of taking aggregate concepts like 'knowledge sharing processes' in international management research and providing them with a micro-foundation by exploring how they are used in human relations (Foss and Pedersen 2004). We reflect on how assumptions regarding the role of social networks in knowledge flows can be understood differently when studied as a category of intra-organisational knowledge and then discuss the managerial implications of our findings. We begin by explicating the importance and challenge of knowledge flow in MNEs and the role of social networks and international assignments.
2 Theoretical Framework: International Assignments, Network Theory and Knowledge Sharing
International business scholars have recognised since the 1970s that mobilising knowledge in MNEs is both a strategic imperative and a considerable challenge (Buckley and Casson 1976). The challenge lies in the fact that some knowledge is intangible or 'sticky' due to tacitness and social complexity and, therefore, sharing it across global units is problematic (Szulanski 1996; Von Hippel 1994; Reed and DeFillippi 1990). However, despite such difficulties, MNEs can share tacit and socially-embedded knowledge across global units through experience-based activities such as international assignments (Lubit 2001; Noorderhaven and Harzing 2009). The literature frequently advises that the flow of employees across units facilitates the sharing of tacit knowledge, despite a limited number of studies specifically focused on knowledge sharing (Riusala and Suutari 2004).
In more recent research, a growing focus on the role of assignments in MNE integration through the building of social networks has provided a greater emphasis on the organizational imperatives of the practice from a knowledge-sharing perspective (Kostova and Roth 2003; Makela and Brewster 2009; Fang et al. 2010). Kostova and Roth (2003), among others, have demonstrated that boundary-spanning relationships play a role in building networks across units, which facilitates interaction and MNE integration. They suggest that cross-unit interpersonal networks must be developed throughout the MNE by sending employees on assignments to build social capital (Kostova and Roth 2003). Consequently, as Taylor (2007) notes, the international management field has begun to focus on social capital development as a key emerging research issue. Thus, what do we know of the role of social capital or 'network advantage' (Burt et al. 2013) in knowledge sharing?
3 Social Network Theory
Burt et al. (2013) explain that social network theory builds on two fundamental understandings from social psychology: that people cluster into networked groups as a result of interaction opportunities, and communication is more frequent within groups as compared to between groups. From these foundations, network theorists explain the positive outcomes of network 'advantage' or social capital for individuals (Burt 1992, 2005; Coleman 1988; Lin 2002; Portes 1998) as the resources derived from the network relationships possessed (Nahapiet and Ghoshal 1998). The network theory explains that advantage occurs as a consequence of 'structural holes' in networks, which are the missing relations that inhibit information flow among people outside the network (Burt 1992). In light of this, many studies--particularly those that examine inter-organisational connections-- explain that 'advantage' occurs as a consequence of network membership and the possibility of brokering among networks (see Burt et al. 2013 for a review). However, as network theory is still very much a set of evolving ideas regarding the implications of network structure (Kilduff et al. 2006), important limitations in extant theory require further investigation. Two of these limitations are particularly relevant for this study and for the growing number of studies that utilise a social network lens in international management research.
The first limitation is that of the 'network metaphor' itself--in that network structures are not always obvious to people who are at the centre of these structures. Individuals are often mistaken regarding the scale of their network relationships and are most likely to become aware of networks and network qualities and use them to some advantage in response to situational stimuli (Smith et al. 2012). A second and related problem in extant theory is that much discussion and research on network advantage could be read as though achievement springs directly from membership, with little recognition of human agency, such that "work with formal models of network advantage often involves assuming agency away" (Burt et al. 2013, p. 536).
In their discussion of the new frontiers for network theory, Burt et al. (2013) explain that the lack of attention to agency in network models is an issue raised by numerous scholars (Baum and Rowley 2008; Emirbayer and Goodwin 1994; Kilduff and Brass 2010; Kilduff and Krackhardt 1994; Sasovova et al. 2010; Singh et al. 2010), with important implications for research. Advantage, via access to resources embedded in networks, does not simply result from access to diverse information; rather, it is a by-product of how efficiently and effectively information can be processed by some, relative to others (Singh et al. 2010). Moreover, as network advantage also results from the use of skills and knowledge developed in the process of decoding information (Burt et al. 2013), greater attention needs to be given to the human skill and knowledge used to leverage resources in networks. Burt et al. (2013) emphasize the importance of this emerging research frontier, explaining that people are attentive to the qualities of networks based on experience (or knowledge) and behave accordingly...
Um weiterzulesen
FORDERN SIE IHR PROBEABO ANCOPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
