Measuring the Effects of Technology Suppliers’ Characteristics on Degree of Inter-Firm Technology Transfer based on Knowledge-Based View and Organizational Learning Perspective

Raduan Che Rose,Suzana Idayu Wati Osman,Sazali Abdul Wahab

doi:10.5539/ibr.v4n4p53

Abstract

The inter-firm technology transfers within collaborative joint ventures (JVs) have often involved close tradeoffs between the willingness of technology supplier to transfer a considerable amount of their technologies to technology recipient, degree of protection of the proprietary technology, knowledge and competencies as the source of the supplier’s competitive advantage, and motivation to transfer. While technology transfers through JVs, have been acknowledged by many studies as the most efficient formal mechanism in internalizing the partner’s technologies, knowledge and skills, the transfer process has frequently involved various facilitators, actors and complex relationship between partners which cause direct impact on degree of technology transfer. Based on the underlying knowledge-based view (KBV) and organizational learning (OL) perspectives, the main objective of this paper is to empirically examine the effects of two critical elements of technology supplier characteristics: partner protectiveness and transfer capacity on two dimensions of degree of technology transfer: degree of tacit and explicit knowledge. Using the quantitative analytical approach, the theoretical model and hypotheses in this study were tested based on empirical data gathered from 128 joint venture companies registered with the Registrar of Companies of Malaysia (ROC). Data obtained from the survey questionnaires were analyzed using the correlation coefficients and multiple linear regressions. The results revealed that partner protectiveness, as the critical element of technology recipient characteristics, had 1) a low significant effect on degree of tacit knowledge, and 2) no significant effect on degree of explicit knowledge. Nonetheless, transfer capacity showed strong significant effects on both degrees of tacit and explicit knowledge; where the effect on degree of explicit knowledge is slightly stronger than its effect on degree of tacit knowledge. The study has bridged the literature gaps in such that it offers empirical evidence on the effects of two generic technology supplier attributes: partner protectiveness and transfer capacity on degree of inter-firm technology transfer: degree of tacit and explicit knowledge in IJVs.

Highlights

It was found that there was no multicollinearity problem; where the T values were ranged between 0.801 - 0.834 and the VIF values were between 1.108 - 1.199. Both partner protectiveness (PPROTEC) and transfer capacity (TRANSCAP) were strongly correlated with degree of tacit knowledge (TCTDEG) (p < 0.01) and had negative and positive signs respectively; which are consistent with the theoretical arguments in the literature
The correlation between Partner protectiveness (PPROTEC) and TCTDEG was slightly higher than correlation between PPROTEC and EXPDEG suggesting that tacit knowledge is more likely to be protected by the transferring partner in IJVs as compared to explicit knowledge
H2 is supported indicating that the higher level of transfer capacity, which is directly reflected on the technology supplier’s ability and motivation to transfer, contributes to a higher degree of tacit and explicit that are transferred to the recipient partners in IJVs

Summary

Introduction

The inter-firm technology transfers (TT) in international joint ventures (IJVs) have often involved tradeoffs between the technology suppliers’ willingness to transfer a considerable amount of their technologies; which include both tacit and explicit knowledge, degree of protection of the proprietary technology, knowledge and competencies as the source of the supplier’s competitive advantage (Inkpen, 2000), degree of transparency (Hamel, 1991), and motivation to transfer (Szulanski, 1996). Previous studies have argued that the interplay between complex relationship and competition between IJVs partners (Hamel, 1991) and the tension between knowledge sharing and knowledge protection have caused a ‘learning paradox’ (Hau and Evangelista, 2007; Jordon and Lowe, 2004). This paradox exists because the inter-firm technology transfer in strategic alliances and IJVs is an organizational learning process (Huber, 1991). A stream of studies has identified numerous TSCHAR that have significant influence on KT such as motivation (Gupta and Govindarajan, 2000; Szulanski, 1996), partner protectiveness (Simonin, 1999a, 1999b, 2004; Szulanski, 1996, Inkpen, 1998a, 1998b, 2000), partner assistance (Lyles et al, 1999), partner transparency (Hamel, 1991), disseminative capacity (Minbaeva and Michailova, 2004), control (Lyles et al, 2003), prior experience (Subramaniam and Venkataraman, 2001), transferor’s commitment (Tsang et al, 2004), articulated objective or goal clarity (Lyles and Salk,1996; Inkpen 2000) and source transfer capacity (Szulanski, 1996; Martin and Solomon, 2003)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion