×

Decisions of knowledge transfer in technology innovation alliance: a Stackelberg leader-followers model. (English) Zbl 1195.91017

Summary: The decision-making processes of knowledge transfer are regarded as the Stackelberg leader-followers games between the core firm and partners in the technology innovation alliance. Basically, a decision-making model of knowledge transfer is established to analyze the influences of knowledge transfer decisions of the core and partners. The analysis results point out that the precondition of the existence and development of alliances is that the core firm’s knowledge marginal revenues are large enough. Partners transfer their knowledge capital according to the proportion structure of their own marginal revenues. There is a positive correlation between the knowledge transfer decisions of core firm and its own marginal revenues, and a negative correlation between the knowledge transfer decisions of core firm and the sum of partners’ marginal revenues.

MSC:

91A65 Hierarchical games (including Stackelberg games)
90B30 Production models
91B38 Production theory, theory of the firm
PDFBibTeX XMLCite
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] Becerra M, Lunnan R, Huemer L (2008) Trustworthiness, risk, and the transfer of tacit and explicit knowledge between alliance partners. J Manag Stud 45(4):691–713 · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00766.x
[2] Bloodgood JM, Salisbury WD (2001) Understanding the influence of organizational change strategies on information technology and knowledge management strategies. Decis Support Syst 31(1):55–69 · doi:10.1016/S0167-9236(00)00119-6
[3] Chen CJ (2004) The effects of knowledge attribute, alliance characteristics, and absorptive capacity on knowledge transfer performance. R&D Manag 34(3):311–321 · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.2004.00341.x
[4] Ding X-H, Huang R-H (2010) Effects of knowledge spillover on inter-organizational resource sharing decision in collaborative knowledge creation. Eur J Oper Res 201(2):949–959 · Zbl 1175.90137 · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2009.04.008
[5] Gil AE, Passino KM (2006) Stability analysis of network-based cooperative resource allocation strategies. Automatica 42(2):245–250 · Zbl 1125.90319 · doi:10.1016/j.automatica.2005.09.015
[6] Gomez D, Gonzalez-Aranguena E, Manuel C, Owen G (2008) A value for generalized probabilistic communication situations. Eur J Oper Res 190(2):539–556 · Zbl 1146.91014 · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2007.06.040
[7] Grilliches Z (1979) Issues in assessing the contribution of research and development to productivity growth. Bell J Econ 10(1):92–116 · doi:10.2307/3003321
[8] Guiomar MH, Pierre C, Estelle M (2006) Deforestation and foreign transfers: a stackelberg differential game approach. Comput Oper Res 33(2):386–400 · Zbl 1116.91071 · doi:10.1016/j.cor.2004.06.011
[9] Jaffe AB (1989) Real effects of academic research. Am Econ Rev 79(5):957–970 · Zbl 0695.62164
[10] Jiang X, Li Y, Gao S (2008a) The stability of strategic alliances: characteristics, factors and stages. J Int Manag 14(2):173–189 · doi:10.1016/j.intman.2007.09.002
[11] Jiang Z, Hu L, Tian Y (2008b) Research on stability of industrial technology innovation strategic alliance based on knowledge transfer. Long Beach, pp 1509–1515
[12] Khamseh HM, Jolly DR (2008) Knowledge transfer in alliances: determinant factors. J Knowl Manag 12(1):37–50 · doi:10.1108/13673270810852377
[13] Lin MH (2004) Strategic airline alliances and endogenous stackelberg equilibria. Transp Res Part E Logistics Transp Rev 40(5):357–384 · doi:10.1016/j.tre.2003.09.001
[14] Lin WB (2007) Factors affecting the correlation between interactive mechanism of strategic alliance and technological knowledge transfer performance. J High Technol Manag Res 17(2):139–155 · doi:10.1016/j.hitech.2006.11.003
[15] Morasch K (2000) Strategic alliances as stackelberg cartels–concept and equilibrium alliance structure. Int J Indust Organ 18(2):257–282 · doi:10.1016/S0167-7187(98)00045-9
[16] Narteh B (2008) Knowledge transfer in developed-developing country interfirm collaborations: a conceptual framework. J Knowl Manag 12(1):78–91 · doi:10.1108/13673270810852403
[17] Nielsen BB (2005) The role of knowledge embeddedness in the creation of synergies in strategic alliances. J Bus Res 58(9):1194–1204 · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2004.05.001
[18] Rond P, Hussler C (2005) Innovation in regions: what does really matter? Res Policy 34(8):1150–1172 · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2005.03.011
[19] Samaddar S, Kadiyala SS (2006) An analysis of interorganizational resource sharing decisions in collaborative knowledge creation. Eur J Oper Res 170(1):192–210 · Zbl 1079.90564 · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2004.06.024
[20] Szulanski G (2000) The process of knowledge transfer: a diachronic analysis of stickiness. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 82(1):9–27 · doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2884
[21] Weber B, Weber C (2007) Corporate venture capital as a means of radical innovation: Relational fit, social capital, and knowledge transfer. J Eng Technol Manag 24(1–2):11–35 · doi:10.1016/j.jengtecman.2007.01.002
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.