Journal of Korea Trade

Korea Trade Research Association (한국무역학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Impact of Knowledge Management and Dynamic Capacity on the Ambidextrous Innovation of Korean MNCs in the Chinese Market

  • Yu, Xin-Ran (School of Electronic Business, Nanyang Institute of Technology) ;
  • Kim, Tae-In (Department of International Trade, Kangwon National University)
  • Received : 2019.10.08
  • Accepted : 2020.01.25
  • Published : 2020.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose - With the increasing uncertainty of China's domestic political and economic environment in recent years, Korean MNC subsidiaries in the Chinese market face greater challenges and competition. Based on the insufficiency of existing research and the need for enterprise management practices, this paper uses the Chinese subsidiaries of Korean MNCs as an example to study and explore how knowledge management and dynamic capabilities affect ambidextrous innovation and the relationship between ambidextrous innovation and subsidiary performance. Design/methodology - From January to March 2019, this study collected 341 valid questionnaires using a survey company specializing in China for the members of the Chinese subsidiaries of Korean MNCs to verify the hypotheses. Using the collected data, the study model was verified using the Smart PLS 3.0 statistical package. Findings - Knowledge transfer and knowledge sharing have positive effects on dynamic capabilities and ambidextrous innovation, and dynamic capabilities have a positive impact on ambidextrous innovation. Ambidextrous innovation has been shown to have a significant effect on subsidiary performance. In addition, a partial mediating effect of dynamic capabilities on the relationship between knowledge management and ambidexterity innovation was found. Originality/value - In the academic context, this paper contributes theoretically to the relationship between knowledge management and ambidextrous innovation, as well as the mechanism of dynamic capability, and to verify the relationship between ambidextrous innovation and corporate performance. Against the background of MNC management, the results of this study provide further enlightenment for managers of subsidiaries.

Keywords

References

  1. Andriopoulos, C. and M. W. Lewis (2009), "Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation", Organization Science, 20(4), 696-717. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0406
  2. Bartol, K. M. and A. Srivastava (2002), "Encouraging Knowledge Sharing: The Role of Organizational Reward Systems", Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 9(1), 64-76. https://doi.org/10.1177/107179190200900105
  3. Benner, M. J. and M. L. Tushman (2003), "Exploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited", Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 238-256. https://doi.org/10.2307/30040711
  4. Birkinshaw, J. and C. B. Gibson (2004), "Building an Ambidextrous Organisation", Advanced Institute of Management Research Paper, 3, 47-55.
  5. Burgelman, R. A., M. A. Maidique and S. C. Wheelwright (1996), Strategic Management of Technology and Innovation (2nd ed.), Chicago, IL: IrwinPress.
  6. Cegarra-Navarro, J. G., P. Soto-Acosta and A. K. P. Wensley (2016), "Structured Knowledge Processes and Firm Performance: the Role of Organizational Agility", Journal of Business Research, 69(5), 1544-1549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.014
  7. Cepeda, G. and D. Vera (2007), "Dynamic Capabilities and Operational Capabilities: A Knowledge Management Perspective", Journal of Business Research, 60(5), 426-437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.01.013
  8. Chin, W. W. (1998), "The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling", Modern Methods for Business Research, 295(2), 295-336.
  9. Crossan, M. M., H. W. Lane and R. E. White (1999), "An Organizational Learning Framework: From Intuition to Institution", Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 522-537. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1999.2202135
  10. Del Giudice, M. and V. Maggioni (2014), "Managerial Practices and Operative Directions of Knowledge Management within Inter-firm Networks: A Global View", Journal of Knowledge Management, 18(5), 841-846. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-06-2014-0264
  11. Enkel, E. and O. Gassmann (2010), "Creative Imitation: Exploring The Case of Cross-industry Innovation", R&D Management, 40(3), 256-270. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2010.00591.x
  12. Export-Import Bank of Korea (2017), Foreign Direct Investment Statistics. Available from https://www.data.go.kr/dataset/3040164/fileData.do (accessed January 21, 2020)
  13. Fornell, C. and D. F. Larcker (1981), "Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error", Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
  14. Gibson, C. B. and J. Birkinshaw (2004), "The Antecedents, Consequences, and Mediating Role of Organizational Ambidexterity", Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209-226. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159573
  15. Grant, R. M. (1996), "Toward a Knowledge-based Theory of the Firm", Strategic Management Journal, 17(2), 109-122. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199602)17:2<109::AID-SMJ796>3.0.CO;2-P
  16. Gupta, A. K., K. G. Smith and C. E. Shalley (2006), "The Interplay Between Exploration and Exploitation", Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 693-706. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2006.22083026
  17. Hair, J. F., C. M. Ringle and M. Sarstedt (2011), "PLS-SEM: Indeed a Silver Bullet", Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139-152. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202
  18. Hair, J. F., G. T. M. Hult, C. Ringle and M. Sarstedt (2014), A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
  19. He, Z. L. and P. K. Wong (2004), "Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis", Organization Science, 15(4), 481-494. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0078
  20. Ho, Y. C., H. C. Fang and J. F. Lin (2011), "Technological and Design Capabilities: Is Ambidexterity Possible?", Management Decision, 49(2), 208-225. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741111109124
  21. Hoffmann, W. H. (2007), "Strategies for Managing a Portfolio of Alliances", Strategic Management Journal, 28(8), 827-856. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.607
  22. Huang, T. A., R. A. Stewart and L. Chen (2010), "Identifying Key Enablers to Improve Business Performance in Taiwanese Electronic Manufacturing Companies", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 30(2), 155-180. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443571011018699
  23. Jansen, J. J., M. P. Tempelaar, F. A. Bosch and H. W. Volberda (2009), "Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms", Organization Science, 20(4), 797-811. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0415
  24. Laursen, K. and A. Salter (2006), "Open for Innovation: The Role of Openness in Explaining Innovation Performance among UK Manufacturing Firms", Strategic Management Journal, 27(2), 131-150. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.507
  25. Lee, H. and B. Choi (2003), "Knowledge Management Enablers, Processes, and Organizational Performance: An Integrative View and Empirical Examination", Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(1), 179-228. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2003.11045756
  26. Lee, J. N. (2001), "The Impact of Knowledge Sharing, Organizational Capability and Partnership Quality on is Outsourcing Success", Information & Management, 38(5), 323-335. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(00)00074-4
  27. Levinthal, D. A. and J. G. March (1993), "The Myopia of Learning", Strategic Management Journal, 14(2), 95-112. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250141009
  28. Levitt, B. and J. G. March (1988), "Organizational Learning", Annual Review of Sociology, 14(1), 319-338. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.14.080188.001535
  29. Lubatkin, M. H., Z. Simsek, Y. Ling and J. F. Veiga (2006), "Ambidexterity and Performance in Small- to Medium-sized Firms: The Pivotal Role of Top Management Team Behavioral Integration", Journal of Management, 32(5), 646-672. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206306290712
  30. March, J. G. (1991), "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning", Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
  31. Menguc, B. and S. Auh (2008), "The Asymmetric Moderating Role of Market Orientation on The Ambidexterity-firm Performance Relationship for Prospectors and Defenders", Industrial Marketing Management, 37(4), 455-470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2007.05.002
  32. Nonaka, I. (1994), "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation", Organization Science, 5(1), 14-37. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.5.1.14
  33. Noorderhaven, N. and A. W. Harzing (2009), "Knowledge-Sharing and Social Interaction within MNEs", Journal of International Business Studies, 40(5), 719-741. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2008.106
  34. O'Reilly, C. A. and M. L. Tushman (2008), "Ambidexterity as a Dynamic Capability: Resolving the Innovator's Dilemma", Research In Organizational Behavior, 28, 185-206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2008.06.002
  35. Petter, S., D. W. Straub and A. Rai (2007), "Specifying Formative Constructs in Information Systems Research", MIS Quarterly, 31(4), 623-656. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148814
  36. Preacher, K. J. and A. F. Hayes (2008), "Asymptotic and Resampling Strategies for Assessing and Comparing Indirect Effects in Multiple Mediator Models", Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879-891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
  37. Raisch, S. and J. Birkinshaw (2008), "Organizational Ambidexterity: Antecedents, Outcomes, and Moderators", Journal of Management, 34(3), 375-409. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308316058
  38. Reiche, B. S., A. W. Harzing and M. Pudelko (2015), "Why and How Does Shared Language Affect Subsidiary Knowledge Inflows? A Social Identity Perspective", Journal of International Business Studies, 46(5), 528-551. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2015.3
  39. Ruggles, R. (1998), "The State of the Notion: Knowledge Management in Practice", California Management Review, 40(3), 80-89. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165944
  40. Santoro, G., A. Thrassou, S. Bresciani and M. Giudice (2019), "Do Knowledge Management and Dynamic Capabilities Affect Ambidextrous Entrepreneurial Intensity and Firms' Performance?", IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 1-9.
  41. Simonin, B. L. (1999), "Ambiguity and the Process of Knowledge Transfer in Strategic Alliances", Strategic Management Journal , 20(7), 595-623. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199907)20:7<595::AID-SMJ47>3.0.CO;2-5
  42. Soto-Acosta, P., S. Popa and D. Palacios-Marque (2017), "Social Web Knowledge Sharing and Innovation Performance in Knowledge-intensive Manufacturing SMEs", Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(2), 425-440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9498-z
  43. Soto-Acosta, P., S. Popa and I. Martinez-Conesa (2018), "Information Technology, Knowledge Management and Environmental Dynamism as Drivers of Innovation Ambidexterity: A Study in SMEs", Journal of Knowledge Management, 29(2), 3-20.
  44. Swan, J., S. Newell, H. Scarbrough and D. Hislop (1999), "Knowledge Management and Innovation: Networks and Networking", Journal of Knowledge Management, 3(4), 262-275. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673279910304014
  45. Teece, D. J. (2007), "Explicating Dynamic Capabilities: The Nature and Microfoundations of (Sustainable) Enterprise Performance", Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319-1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640
  46. Teece, D. J. (2012), "Dynamic Capabilities: Routines Versus Entrepreneurial Action", Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1395-1401. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2012.01080.x
  47. Teece, D. J., G. Pisan and A. Shuen (1997), "Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management", Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z
  48. Verkasolo, M. and P. Lappalainen (1998), "A Method of Measuring the Efficiency of the Knowledge Utilization Process", IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 45(4), 414-423. https://doi.org/10.1109/17.728585
  49. Wang, H. and J. Li (2008), "Untangling the Effects of over Exploration and Overexploitation on Organizational Performance: The Moderating Role of Environmental Dynamism", Journal of Management, 34(5), 925-951. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308321547
  50. Wu, L. Y. (2010), "Applicability of the Resource-based and Dynamic-capability Views under Environmental Volatility", Journal of Business Research, 63(1), 27-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.01.007

Cited by

  1. The Impact of the Exchange of Sustainable Technological HR Innovation Knowledge within Chaebols on the Performance of Global Subsidiaries vol.25, pp.4, 2021, https://doi.org/10.35611/jkt.2021.25.4.108