1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Commerce
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 集團內子公司地主國知識產生與移轉之研究
Host-Country-Specific Knowledge: Generating and Transferring Among Member Firms in Business Groups
作者 范慧宜
Fan,hui yi
貢獻者 于卓民<br>司徒達賢
Yu,chwo ming Joseph<br>Seetoo,dah hsian
范慧宜
Fan,hui yi
關鍵詞 特定地主國知識
集團企業
知識產生與移轉
海外集團總部
Host-Country-Specific Knowledge
Business Group
Knowledge Generate and Transfer
Overseas Headquarters
日期 2009
上傳時間 3-Sep-2013 14:37:41 (UTC+8)
摘要 本研究透過三個台灣大型MNCs(集團企業)的深度訪談，期望了解集團成員入如何產生與移轉特定地主國知識的議題。台灣MNCs(集團企業)在國際化時，地主國環境不同於母國，使得台灣MNCs(集團企業)海外成員不足以利用其擁有的經驗與知識去因應環境差異所產生的挑戰與問題，而需要產生新的解決辦法。台灣MNCs(集團企業)海外成員所在地之經營環境與母國環境有差異時，其處理方式有二：規劃性(定期會議處理各階段所面臨之問題)及隨機性(臨時會議對於臨時狀況進行處理)；另外，在地主國發生的突發事件亦會產生地主國知識。當集團海外成員所面臨之經營環境與母國環境差異越大者，所產生特定地主國知識的量會越多。
透過每次在該地主國設廠及執行每一次新產品發展流程的經驗過程中各階段中因為與地主國環境介面互動而產生特定地主國知識，所以台灣MNCs(集團企業)是以漸進方式累積集團成員在特定地主國面對問題解決問題的方法。當遇到問題越多時，台灣MNCs(集團企業)海外子公司特定地主國知識累積速度越快；但每種特定地主國問題的解決方法是需要各階段多方人員不斷地溝通才能產生的，所以當內外部溝通成本越高時，會減緩海外成員累積特定地主國知識累積速度；為了加快累積特定地主國知識，台灣MNCs(集團企業)大量借助資訊科技及人員面對面溝通，期望加速溝通效率以因應快速變動的環境。
在同一地主國，透過三個台灣大型MNCs(集團企業)的深度訪談發現，台灣MNCs(集團企業)在特定地主國知識移轉機制路徑有三，且在探究過程中發現海外總部(OHQs)的存在，所以進一步探討，在特定地主國中，集團成員間移轉地主國知識時，海外總部(OHQs)所扮演的角色及其存在的價值；在取得這個知識的過程中，有哪些因素會影響移轉機制中正式化機制與非正式化機制使用比例？知識移轉時，正式化機制與非正式化機制之間是一個連續帶的概念，而影響集團成員間知識移轉機制選用時，正式化與非正式化機制搭配比例的影響因素包含：知識特性、子公司自主性、知識情境鑲嵌性、經營模式(產品相似性、技術差距性)以及地理距離。
台灣MNCs(集團企業)在知識移轉制度建立初期，較仰賴非正式化機制，隨著制度建立完備程度增加，正式化機制使用的比重提高，但是非正式化機制對於知識移轉機制的效力仍然存在於中高階主管層級，對於基層主管及員工而言，則會完全仰賴正式化機制，以確保自身工作上的權責釐清。台灣MNCs(集團企業)進行國際擴張時，海外成員初期國際化知識是從MNCs總部遺傳而來。台灣MNCs(集團企業)海外成員間特定地主國知識移轉路徑有三：1)透過集團總部(HQs)移轉、2)子公司間移轉及3)透過集團海外總部(OHQs)。本研究認為當台灣MNCs(集團企業)總部在特定地主國設立集團海外總部(OHQs)後，集團海外總部(OHQs)在特定地主國知識移轉上會取代集團企業總部的角色(意即地主國知識移轉時，路徑三會取代路徑一)。
台灣MNCs(集團企業)國際策略在大陸拓展的廣度(各個集團成員(產品不同)赴大陸投資)及深度(負責新產品發展流程階段越多)增加，使總部須處理的專業知識涵蓋範圍廣且處理資料量大，對於位於台灣的MNCs(集團企業)總部而言，處理資訊成本是很高的；再者，集團在大陸據點越多，對於總部監督成本上亦是很大的負擔，所以在大陸設立海外總部(OHQs)，以與集團總部進行某種程度的分工；同時，當世界各地子公司均需將地主國知識回傳至台灣MNCs(集團企業)總部時，台灣MNCs(集團企業)總部即將面臨很複雜的處理及整合成本，所以海外總部(OHQs)有存在的必要。台灣MNCs(集團企業)設置的海外總部(OHQs)所進行的交流、整理及儲存的資訊較複雜和多元化，其設立目的包含：降低監督成本、降低整合成本、降低協調成本、降低知識移轉過程中由於資訊不對稱所產生的無效率情形。集團海外總部(OHQs)亦促進地主國集團成員間知識快速流通，且將知識從母國或其它地主國之集團成員處引入，也就是大量的知識流入與流出的主要樞紐。當集團型態是屬於聯邦分權式時，集團海外總部(OHQs)的設立是有困難的。集團海外總部(OHQs)可能設立在主要市場地理居中位置、交通便捷之處或離知識最接近的地方，以降低「集團」海外成員開會時的交通成本。
集團海外總部(OHQs)是在集團總部(HQs)監控下創造出其在特定地主國知識移轉扮演的角色獨特性及存在必要性，為避免集團海外總部(OHQs)憑藉結構洞角色壟斷所有特定地主國知識，進而取代集團總部(HQs)，集團總部(HQs)透過其與集團海外成員間稽核性連結及其對集團海外總部(OHQs)的正式控制(包含所有權控制及組織層級控制)來防堵集團海外總部(OHQs)坐大，以有效管理集團海外總部(OHQs)。
正式機制與非正式機制間是一個連續帶的概念。然而，在移轉過程中，哪些因素會影響到正式與非正式機制搭配的比例呢？ 當海外成員自主性高時，採用正式化機制強迫集團海外成員間進行知識分享，亦搭配非正式化機制的社會互動，來緩和彼此間因競爭所產生不願意分享的情形；當知識的情境鑲嵌性程度越高，越需要使用非正式機制來縮小正式機制中知識再利用的可能性；當產品相似性很高，知識來源者與接收者若能搭配少部分(短時間、次數少)的人員互動，便能加快知識再利用的速度；當技術越接近時，知識需求方較可準確地預估需求單上的要項，雙方技術差距越大，越需要仰賴非正式關係使知識來源者願意「多」花時間來教導知識接收者；當集團成員地理距離愈遠時，透過正式化機制，如海外總部(OHQs)進行地主國資料蒐集以避免資訊不對稱造成的知識移轉障礙，以克服因為地理距離所產生的知識移轉障礙。
Knowledge about host countries and international environment is needed when firms enter international markets. A firm encounters more challenges when it enters a new market with no knowledge. After entry, it then can gain valuable experiential knowledge about the host country (i.e., host-country-specific knowledge) and this knowledge is helpful for further operation in the country and internationalization (Yu, 1990). A firm can gain hands-on knowledge by operating in a host market and then it can filter the information gained into forms it needs for internationalization later on.
The purpose of the study addresses host-country-specific-knowledge generating and accumulating by overseas member firms in business groups by identifying factors that affect how business groups from an emerging economy transfer host-country-specific knowledge among their group members. We have found that formal and informal mechanisms were helpful in facilitating the transferring of host-country-specific knowledge. In the literature, it is often assumed that knowledge can be easily and automatically transferred within business groups. Our study confirms that business groups do transfer knowledge among subsidiaries purposely and has also demonstrated that some mechanisms are needed to realize this intent.
While the business group’s network provides a platform for facilitating flows of host-country-specific knowledge, the mere existence of such a network does not automatically result in knowledge transfer. From managerial viewpoint, both formal and informal mechanisms should be in place to promote and encourage host-country-specific knowledge transfer. Gaining a good understanding of the mechanisms contributing to knowledge transfer is strategically important for knowledge management. Regarding the use of mechanisms, our results indicate that the buildup of internationalization knowledge can go along with a firm’s development in foreign markets and also can allow for accumulation of various types of knowledge. The more significant the difference between the contexts encountered by foreign subsidiaries and headquarters is, the more the quantity of knowledge the former will create regarding the host country. When foreign subsidiaries encounter similar problems within a tight time frame in a host country, the accumulation of knowledge about the host country will be faster.
In the early stages, setting up knowledge transferring system relies more on informal mechanisms. The more mature the system is, the higher the proportion of formal mechanisms is used. However, although informal mechanisms are effective for chief executive officers and senior vice presidents, primary executives and operators rely solely on formal mechanisms in order to clarify responsibilities. With more important strategic position of the host country, the headquarters will establish overseas headquarters in order to quickly respond to the market requirements. In a specific host country, overseas headquarters, established by the HQs, may substitute for the headquarters in transferring host country-specific knowledge among member firms via formal mechanisms. When a business group belongs to federal decentralization, external market mechanisms will be adopted to transfer knowledge among its member firms. The overseas headquarters hardly governs transferring knowledge among overseas member firms and the headquarters. When the overseas headquarters is established, the headquarters adopts auditing connection to prevent the host country from monopolizing host-country-specific knowledge.
A headquarters can successfully implement multiple formal and informal mechanisms for knowledge transfer. With respect to knowledge transfer, the higher the level of subsidiary autonomy, the greater the necessity the headquarters rely on formal mechanisms to transfer host-country-specific knowledge among member firms. Encouraging sharing within a business group through some managerial mechanisms can wear down the negative influence caused by opportunism and information asymmetry on the part of the subsidiary and the inter-member competition for the transfer of host-country-specific knowledge. Overseas headquarters accumulates a vast experience and are capable of absorbing, transferring and applying knowledge adequately. They can transcend the geographical limitations and establish good cooperation relations between knowledge originator (the subsidiaries in the host country) and knowledge receiver (other sister firms and the headquarters), warranting the success of the knowledge transfer. Provided that knowledge is tacit, information technology is necessity in transferring knowledge initially documented while social interaction is needed in transferring the rest knowledge embedded in persons. Finally, product and technology similarity are factors affecting how headquarters rely on formal mechanisms in transferring knowledge among member firms.
參考文獻 Almeida, P., J. Song and R. Grant (2002). Are firms superior to alliances and markets? An empirical test of cross-border knowledge building. Organization Science, 13(2), 147-161.
Andersson, U. and M. Forsgren (1996). Subsidiary embeddedness and control in the multinational corporation. International Business Review, 5(5), 487-508.
Andersson, U., and M. Forsgren (2000). In Search of Centre of Excellence: Network Embeddedness and Subsidiary Roles In Multinational Corporations. Management International Review, 40(4), 329-350.
Andersson, U., M. Forsgren and U. Holm (2002). The strategic impact of external networks: Subsidiary performance and competence development in the multinational corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 23(11), 979-997.
Appleyard, M. M. (1996). How does knowledge flow? Interfirm patterns in the semiconductor industry. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue), 137-154.
Argote, L. and P. Ingram (2000). Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 150-169.
Argote, L., B. McEvily and R. Reagan (2003). Managing knowledge in organizations: an integrative framework and review of emerging themes. Management Science, 49(4), 571-582.
Athanassiou, N. and D. Nigh (2000). Internationalization, tacit knowledge and the top management teams of MNCs. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(3), 471-487.
Baranson, J. (1970). Technology Transfer though International Firms. American Economic Association, 60(2), 435-440.
Barkema, H. G., J. H. Bell and J. M. Pennings (1996). Foreign entry, culture barriers and learning. Strategic Management Journal, 17(2), 151-166.
Bartlett, C. A. and S. Ghoshal (1986). Tap Your Subsidiaries for Global Reach. Harvard Business Review, 64(6), 87-94.
Bartlett, C. A. and S. Ghoshal (1989). Managing across borders：The transnational solution. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Bartlett, C. A. and S. Ghoshal (1998). Transnational Management. NY: McGraw-Hill.
Bartlett, C. A., Y. L. Doz and G.. Hedlund (1990). Managing the global firm. London; New York: Routledge, 256-278.
Baughn, C. C., J. G.. Denekamp, J. H. Stevens and R. N. Osborn (1997). Protecting intellectual capital in international alliances. Journal of World Business, 32(2), 103-117.
Becerra-Fernandez, I. and R. Sabherwal (2001). Organizational Knowledge Management: A Contigency Perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems Summer, 18(1), 23-55.
Birkinshaw, J. M. and N. Hood (1998). Multinational subsidiary evolution: Capability and charter change in foreign-owned subsidiary companies. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 773-795.
Birkinshaw, J. M. and A. J. Morrison (1995). Configurations of strategy and structure in subsidiaries of multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 26(4), 729-754.
Birkinshaw, J. M., N. Hood and S. Jonsson (1998). Building firm-specific advantages in multinational corporations: the role of subsidiary initiative. Strategic Management Journal , 19(3), 221-242.
Birkinshaw, J. M. (1996). How subsidiary mandates are gained and lost. Journal of International Business Studies, 27(3), 467-496.
Birkinshaw, J. M. (1997). Entrepreneurship in multinational corporations: the characteristics of subsidiary initiatives. Strategic Management Journal, 18(3), 207-229.
Birkinshaw, J. M. (1998). Corporate entrepreneurship in network organizations: how subsidiary initiate drives internal market efficiency. European Management Journal, 16(3), 355-364.
Breman, H., J. Birkinshaw and R. Nobel (1999). Knowledge transfer in international acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(3), 439-462.
Brooking, A. (1999). Corporate Memory-strategies for knowledge Management. London: Intellectual Thomson Bussiness Press.
Brooks, H. (1966). Multimethod Research Synthesis of Stiles. London : Stage Publication.
Brown, J. and P. Duguid (1998). Organizing knowledge. California Management Review, 40(3), 90-111.
Buckley, P. J. and M. J. Carter (1999). Managing cross-border complementary knowledge. International Studies of Management & Organization, 29(1), 80-104.
Burgelman, R. A. (1983). A Model of the Interaction of Strategic Behavior, Corporate Context, and the Concept of Strategy. Academy of Management Review, 8(1), 61-71.
Burgelman, R. A. (1983). A Process Model of Internal Corporate Venturing in the Diversified Major Firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(2), 223-244.
Calantone, R. J., K. Chan and A. S. Cui (2006). Decomposing product innovativeness and its effects on new product success. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(5), 408-421.
Cantwell, J. and R. Mudambi (2005). MNE competence-creating subsidiary mandate. Strategic Management Journal, 25(12), 1109–1128.
Carpenter, M. A., W. Sanders and H. Gregersen (2001). Bundling human capital with organizational context: The impact of international assignment experience on multinational firm performance and CEO pay. Academy of Management Journal. 44(3), 493-512.
Chakravarthy, B. S. and H. V. Perlmutter (1985). Strategic planning for a global business. Columbia Journal of World Business, 2(20), 3-10.
Clark, K. B. and S. C. Wheelwright (1992). Organising and leading heavyweight development teams. California Management Review, 34(3), 9-28.
Cohen W. M. and D. A. Levinthal (1990). Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128-152.
Cohendet, P., F. Kern, B. Mehmanpazir and F. Munier (1999). Knowledge coordination, competence creation and integrated networks in globalized firms. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 23(2), 225-241.
Cooper, R. G. and E. J. Kleinschrnidt (1986). An Investigation into the New Product Process : Steps, Deficiencies and Impact. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 3(2), 71-85.
Cooper, R. G. and E. J. Kleinschrnidt (1988). Resource Allocation in the New Product Process, Industrial Marketing Management, 17(3), 249-262.
Davenport, T. H. and L. Prusak (1998). Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Delios, A. and W. J. Henisz (2000). Japanese Firms` Investment Strategies in Emerging Economies, Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 305-323.
Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Devadas, R. and L. Argote (1995). Collective learning and forgetting: The effects of turnover and group structure. Paper presented at Midwestern Academy of Management Meetings, Chicago (1995, May).
Dixon, N. (2000). Common knowledge: How companies thrive by sharing what they know. Harvard Business School Press.
Doz, Y. L. and C. K. Prahalad (1981). Headquarter influence and strategic control in multinational companies. Sloan Management Review, 23(1), 15-29.
Doz, Y. L. and C. K. Prahalad (1993). Managing DMNCs：A search for a new paradigm. in S. Ghoshal and D.E. Westney (eds.), Organization theory and the multinational cooperation. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 24-50.
Doz, Y. L. and C. K. Prahalad (1994). Managing DMNCs: A search for a new paradigm. Fundamental issues in strategy. Harvard Business School Press.
Dunning, J. H. (1988). The Eclectic Paradigm of International Production: A Restatement and Some Possible Extensions. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(1), 1- 31.
Dutton, J. M. and W. H. Starbuck (1979). Diffusion of an intellectual technology. In: Krippendorff, K. (Ed.), Communication and Control in Society. Gordon & Breach Science, New York, 489-511.
Edvinsson, L. and P. H. Sullivan (1996). Developing a Model for Managing Intellectual Capital. European Management Journal, 14(4), 356-364.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Case study theory research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1991). Better Stories and Better Constructs: The case for rigor and comparative logic. Academy of Management, 16(3), 620-627.
Fan H. Y. and C. J. Yu (2009). Host Country-Specific Knowledge Sharing between Member Firms in Business Groups. Proceedings of the Academy of International Business 2009 Annual meeting, 27-30 June 2009, San Diego, California.
Forsgren, M. (1989). Managing The Internationalization Process: The Swedish Case. London: Routledge.
Forsgren, M. (1990). Managing the international multi-centre firm: case studies from Sweden. European Management Review, 8(2), 261-267.
Foss, N. J. and T. Pedersen (2002). Transferring knowledge in MNCs: The role of sources of subsidiary knowledge and organizational context. Journal of International Management, 8(1), 49-67.
Foss, N. J. (2007). The Emerging Knowledge Governance Approach: Challenges and Characteristics. Organization, 14(1), 29-52.
Frost, T. S. (2001). The geographic sources of foreign subsidiaries` innovations. Strategic Management Journal, 22(2), 101-123.
Gersick, C. and J. R. Hackman (1990). Habitual routines in task-performing groups. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 47(1), 65-97.
Ghoshal, S. and C. A. Bartlett (1988). Creation, adoption and diffusion of innovations by subsidiaries of multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3), 365-388.
Ghoshal, S. and C. A. Bartlett (1990). The multinational corporation as an international network. Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 603-625.
Ghoshal, S. and N. Nohria (1989). Internal differentiation within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 10(4), 323-338.
Ghoshal, S. and N. Nohria (1993). Horses for courses: Organizational forms for multinational corporations. Sloan Management Review, 34(2), 23-35.
Gilbert, M. and M. Cordey-Hayes (1996). Understanding the Process of Knowledge Transfer to Achieve Successful Technological Innovation. Technovation, 16(6), 301-312.
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddednes. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 481-510.
Grant, R. M. (1995). Contemporary Strategy Analysis: Concepts, Techniques, Applications. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Blackwell Ltd.
Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue), 109-122.
Gulati, R. (1998). Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal, 19(4), 293-317.
Gulati, R. (1999). Network location and learning: the influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal, 20(5), 397-420.
Gulati, R., N. Nohria and A. Zaheer (2000). Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 20(5), 199-201.
Gupta, A. K. and V. Govindarajan (1991). Knowledge flows and the structure of control within multinational corporations. Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 768-792.
Gupta, A. K. and V. Govindarajan (1994). Organizing for knowledge flows within MNCs. International Business Reviews, 3(4), 443-457.
Gupta, A. K. and V. Govindarajan (2000). Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 21(4), 473–496.
Gupta, A. K. and V. Govindarajan (2001). Converting global presence into global competitive advantage. Academy of Management Executive, 15(2), 45-57.
Hagstrom, R. G. (1994). The Warren Buffett way. New York: John Wiley.
Hakanson, L. and R. Nobel (1998). Technology characteristics and reverse technology transfer. Proceedings of the Academy of International Business 1998 Annual meeting, 27-30 June 1998, Vienna, Austria.
Hakanson, L. and R. Nobel (2001). Organizational characteristics and reverse technology transfer. Management International Review, 41(4), 395-420.
Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization submits. Administrative Science, 44(4), 82-111.
Hayami , Y. and V. W. Ruttan (1971). Agricultural development: an international perspective. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Hedberg, B. (1981). How organizations learn and unlearn. In: Nystrom, P.C., Starbucks, W.H.(Eds.), Handbook of Organizational Design. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Hedlund, G. (1986). The hypermodern MNC- A hierarchy?. Human Resource Management, 25(1), 9-35.
Hedlund, G. (1994). A model of Knowledge Management and the N-Form Corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 15(Summer Special Issue), 73-90.
Hedlund, G. and J. Ridderstrale (1992). Toward the N-Form Corporation: Exploitation and creation in the MNC. Paper presented at the conference: Prespectives on International Business: Theory, Resarch and Institutiional Arrangements`, Collumbia,SC.
Hendriks, P. (1999). Why share knowledge? The influence of ICT on motivation for knowledge sharing. Knowledge and Process Management, 6(2), 91-100.
Herriot, R. and W. Firestone (1983). Multisite qualitative policy research: optimizing description and generalizability. Educational Researcher, 12(2), 14-19.
Hidding, G. J. and S. M. Catterall (1998). Anatomy of a learning organization: turning knowledge into capital at Anderson. Knowledge and Process Management, 5(1), 3-13.
Howells, J. (1996). Tacit Knowledge, Innovation and Technology Transfer. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 8(2), 91-106.
Inkpen, A.C. and A. Dinur (1998). Knowledge Management Processes and International Joint Ventures. Organization Science, 9(4), 454-468.
Jarillo, J.C. and J. I. Martinez (1990). Different roles for subsidiaries:The case of multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 11(7), 501-512.
Jensen, R.J. and G. Szulanski (2004). Stickiness and the Adaptation of Organizational Practices in Cross-Border Knowledge Transfers. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(6), 508-523.
Johanson, J. and J. E. Vahlne (1977). The Internationalization Process of the Firm - A Model of Knowledge Development and Increasing Foreign Market Commitments. Journal of International Business Studies, 8(1), 23-32.
Kacker, M. P. (1988). International flow of retailing know-how: bridging the technology gap in distribution. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 41-67.
Karamanos, A. (2003). Complexity, identity and the value of knowledge-intensive exchanges. Journal of Management Studies, 40(7), 1871-1890.
Karlsen, J. T. and P. Gottschalk (2004). Factors affecting knowledge transfer in IT projects. Engineering Management Journal, 16(1), 3-11.
Katz, R. and T. J. Allen (1982). Investigating the not invented here (NIH) syndrome: a look at the performance, tenure, and communication patterns of 50 R&D project groups. R&D Management, 12(1), 7-19.
Khanna, T. and K. Palepu (1997). Why focused strategies may be wrong for emerging markets. Harvard Business Review, 75(4), 41-51.
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1998). Evaluating training programs The four levels. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Kogut, B. (1985). Designing global strategies: Profiting from operational flexibility. Sloan Management Review, 27(1), 27-38.
Kogut, B. and U. Zander (1992). Knowledge of the firm: combinative capabilities and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3(2), 383-397.
Kogut, B. and U. Zander (1993). Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 24(4), 625-645.
Kostova, T. (1999). Transnational transfer of strategic organizational practices: A contextual perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 308-324.
Lahti, R. K. and M. M. Beyerlein (2000). Knowledge transfer and management consulting: A look at the firm. Business Horizons, 43(1), 65-74.
Lall, S. (1983). The New Multinationals: The Spread of Third World Enterprises. Chichester: Wiley.
Lam, A. (1997). Embedded firms, embedded knowledge: problems of collaboration and knowledge transfer in global cooperative ventures. Organization Studies, 18(6), 973-996.
Lam, A. (2000). Tacit Knowledge, Organizational Learning and Societal Institutions: An Integrated Framework. Organizational Studies, 21(3), 487-513.
Lane, P. J. and M. Lubatkin (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), 461-477.
Leonard-Barton, D. (1995). Well-spirits of Knowledge-Building and Sources of Innovation. M. A.: Harvard Business School Press.
Leonard-Barton, D. and I. Deschamps (1988). Managerial Influence In The Implementation of New Technology. Management Science, 34(10), 1252-1265.
Leonard-Barton, D. and S. Spensiper (1998). The Role of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation. California Management Review, 40(3), 121-131.
Leonidas, C. L., C. S. Katsikeas and S. Samiee(2002). Marketing Strategy Determinants of Export Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Business Research, 55(1), 51-67.
Lindkvist, L. (2004). Governing project-based firms: Promoting market-like processes within hierarchies. Journal of Management and Governance, 8(1), 3-25.
Lindkvist, L. (2005). Knowledge Communities and Knowledge Collectivities: A Typology of Knowledge Work in Groups. Journal of Management Studies, 42(6), 1189-1210.
Louis, M. R. and R. I. Sutton (1991). Switching cognitive gears: from habits of mind to active thinking. Human Relations, 44, 55-76.
Luo, X. and C. Chung (2005). Keeping it all in the family: the role of particularistic relationships in business group performance during institutional transition. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 404–439.
Lyles, A. M. and E. J. Salk (1996). Knowledge acquisition from foreign parents in international joint ventures empirical examination in the Hungarian context. Journal of International Business Studies, 27(5), 877-903.
Machlup, F. (1962). The Production and Distribution of Knowledge in the United States. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Major, E. and M. Cordey-Hayes (2000). Knowledge Translation: A New Perspective on Knowledge Transfer. Foresight, 2(4), 412-423.
Malnight, T. W. (1995). Globalization of an ethnocentric firm: An evolutionary perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 16(2), 119-141.
Malnight, T. W. (1996). The transition from decentralized to network-based MNC structures: an evolutionary perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 27(1), 43-65.
Mansfield, E. (1982). Technology Transfer, Productivity and Economic Policy. W. W. Norton and Company Inc.
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87.
Matusik, S. F. and C. W. Hill (1998). The Utilization of Contingent Work, Knowledge Creation, and Competitive Advantage. The Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 680-697.
Maula, M. (2000). Three parallel knowledge processes. Knowledge and Process Management, 7(5), 55-59.
McEvily, B. and A. Zaheer (1999). Bridging ties: A source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 20(12), 1133 - 1156.
Meyer, J. W. and B. Rowan (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structures as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.
Miles, M. B. (1982). A mini-cross-site analysis. American Behavioral Scientist, 26(1), 121-132.
Miles, M. B. and A. M. Huberman (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage:London & Thousand Oaks, California.
Miller, K.D., M. Zhao and R. J. Calantone (2006). Adding interpersonal learning and tacit knowledge to March`s exploration-exploitation model. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 709-722.
Morey, D. (2001). High-speed Knowledge Management: Integrating Operations Theory and Knowledge Management for Rapid Results. Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(4), 322-328.
Mowery, D. C., J. E. Oxley and B. S. Silverman (1996). Strategic Alliances and Inerfirm Knowledge Transfer. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue), 77-91.
Nelson, R. R. (1993). National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nobel, R. and J. Birkinshaw (1998). Innovation in multinational corporations: control and communication patterns in international R&D operations. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), 479-496.
Noda, T. and J. T. Bower (1996). Strategy Making As Uterated Process of Resource Allocation. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 159-192.
Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 9(1), 14-38.
Nonaka, I., R. Toyama and A. Nagata (2000). A firm as a knowledge-creating entity: a new perspective on the theory of the firm. Industrial and Corporate Change, 9(1), 1-20.
Nonaka, I. and H. Takeuchi (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company. New York: Oxford University.
Nystrom, P. C. and W. H. Starbuck (1984). To avoid organizational crises, unlearn. Organizational Dynamics, 12(4), 53-65.
O’Dell, C. and C. J. Grayson (1998). If only we knew what we know. New York: The Free Press.
O’Reilly, C. A. and J. A. Chatman (1996). Culture as social control: corporations, cults, and commitment. Research in Organizational Behavior, 18, 157-200.
Okhuysen, G. A. and K. M. Eisenhardt (2002). Integrating knowledge in groups: How formal interventions enable flexibility. Organization Science, 13(4), 370-386.
Olk, P. (1997). The effect of partner differences on the performance of R&D consortia. In P. Beamish and J. Killing, editors, Cooperative strategies, American perspectives. The New Lexington Press, San Francisco.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. London: Sage.
Pisano, G. (1990). The R&D boundaries of the firm: an empirical analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 153-176.
Polanyi, M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension. Anchor Book. Garden City. N. Y.
Polyani, M. (1962). Personal Science. Chicago University Press, Chicago.
Porter, M. E. (1986). Competitive in Global Industries. Harvard Business School Press.
Porter, M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York : Free Press.
Prahalad, C. K. and Y. L. Doz (1987). The multinational mission- balancing local demandsand global vision. New York: Free Press.
Prahalad, C. K. (1993). The Role of Core Competence in the Corporation. Research Technology Management, 36(6), 40-71.
Ralph K., R. Laura, R. Margy and T. Warren (1998). The Data Warehouse Lifecycle Toolkit: Expert Methods for Designing, Developing, and Deploying Data Warehouses. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York: Free Press.
Reed, R. and R. J. DeFillippi (1990). Casual Ambiguity, Barriers to Imitation and Sustainable Competitive Advantage. Academy of Management Review, 15(1), 88-102.
Rosenzweig, P. M. and J. V. Singh (1991). Organizational environments and the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 16 (2), 340-361.
Roth, K. and A. J. Morrison (1990). An empirical analysis of the integration-responsiveness framework in global industries. Journal of International Business Studies, 21(4), 541-564.
Roth, K. and A. J. Morrison (1992). Implementing global strategy: Characteristics of global subsidiary mandate. Journal of International Business Studies, 23(4), 715-735.
Roth, K. and D. Nigh (1992). The effectiveness of headquarters-subsidiary relationships: The role of coordination, control, and conflict. Journal of Business Research, 25(4), 277-301.
Rugman, A. and A. Verbeke (2001). Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises, Strategic Management Journal, 22(3), 237-250.
Rugman, A. and A. Verbeke (1992). Europe 1992 and competitive strategies for North American firms. Business Horizons, (34)6, 76-81.
Schlegelmilch, B. B. and T. C. Chini (2003). Knowledge transfer between marketing functions in multinational companies: a conceptual model. International Business Review, 12(2), 215-232.
Shariq, S. Z. (1999). How does knowledge transform as it is transferred? Speculations on the possibility of a cognitive theory of knowledge scopes. Journal of Knowledge Management, 3(4), 243-251.
Simon, K. (1960). Economic Growth of Small Nations in E. A. G. Robinson, ed., Economic Consequences of the Size of Nations. London, Macmillan.
Simonin, B. L. (1999). Transfer of marketing know-how in international strategic alliances: An empirical investigation of the role and antecedents of knowledge ambiguity. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(3), 463-490.
Simonin, B. L. (1999). Ambiguity And The Process Of Knowledge Transfer In Strategic Alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 20(7), 595-623.
Simsek, Z., M. H. Lubatkin and S. W. Floyd (2003). Interfirm networks and entrepreneurial behavior: A structural embeddedness perspective. Journal of Management, 29(3), 427-442.
Spender, J. C. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, Special Issue, 17(Winter), 45-62.
Strauss, A. L. and J. Corbin (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage.
Subramaniam, M. and N. Venkatraman (2001). Determinants of transnational new product development capability: Testing the influence of transferring and developing tacit overseas knowledge. Strategic Management Journal, 22(4), 359-387.
Sveiby, K. E. (1997). The New Organizational Wealth: Managing and Measuring Knowledge-based Assets. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(4), 27-43.
Szulanski, G. (2000). The Process of Knowledge Transfer: A Diachronic Analysis of Stickiness. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Process, 82(1), 9-27.
Szulanski, G., R. Cappetta and R. Jensen (2004). When and how trustworthiness mat-ters: Knowledge transfer and the moderating effect of causal ambiguity. Organization Science, 15(5), 600-613.
Taggart, J. H. (1997). An evaluation of the integration- responsiveness framework: MNC manufacturing subsidiaries in the UK. Management International Review, 37(4), 295-318.
Teece, D. J. (1977). Technology transfer by multinational corporations: the resource cost of transferring technological Know-how. Economic Journal, 87(2), 242–261.
Teece, D. J. (1998). Capturing value from knowledge assets: The new economy, markets for know-how, and intangible assets. California Management Review, 40(3), 55-79.
Truran, W. R. (1998). Pathways for knowledge: How companies learn through people. Engineering Management Journal, 10(4), 15-20.
Tsai, W. P. (2000). Social capital, strategic relatedness and the formation of intraorganizational linkages. Strategic Management Journal, 21(9), 925-939.
Tsai, W. P. (2001). Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 996-1004.
Tsang, W. K. (1999). The knowledge transfer and learning aspects of international HRM: an empirical study of Singapore MNCs. International Business Review, 8(5/6), 591-609.
Tsoukas, H. and E. Vladimirou (2001). What is organizational knowledge?. Journal of Management Studies, 38(7), 937-993.
Tsoukas, H. (1996). The Firm as a Distributed Knowledge System: A Constructionist Approach. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue), 11-25.
Tushman, M. L. (1977). A Political Approach to Organizations: A Review and Rationale. Academy of Management Review, 4, 206-216.
Uzzi, B. (1996). The Sources and Consequences of Embeddedness for the Economic Performance of Organizations: The Network Effect. American sociological Review, 61 (4), 674-698.
Verkasalo, M. and P. A. Lappalainen (1998). Method of Measuring the Efficiency of the Knowledge Utilization Process. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 45(4), 414-423.
Vernon, R. (1966). International Investment and International Trade in the Product Cycle. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 88, 190-207.
Welch, L. S. and R. Loustarinen (1988). Internationalization: Evolution of a concept. Journal of General Management, 14(2), 34-55.
Wells, L.T. (1983). Third World Multinationals: The Rise of Foreign Investment from Developing Countries. Cambridge, MA MIT Press.
Westney, D. E. (1994). Institutionalization theory and the multinational corporation. In S. Ghoshal and D. E. Westney(eds), Organization theory and the multinational corporation. St Martin’s Press, New York.
White, R. E. and T. A. Poynter (1984). Strategies for Foreign-owned Subsidiaries in Canada. Business Quarterly, 2, 59-69.
Wiig, K.M. (1997). Knowledge Management: An Introduction and Perspective. Journal of Knowledge Management, 1(1), 6-14.
Winter, S. G.. (1987). Knowledge and Competence as Strategic Assets. The Competitive Challenge-Strategies for Industrial Innovation and Renewal. MA: Ballinger.
Xufi M. and D. Andrew (2010). Host-Country headquarters and an MNE’s subsequent within-country diversifications. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(3), 517-525.
Yang, Q., R. Mudambi and K. Meyer (2008). Conventional and reverse knowledge flows in multinational corporations. Journal of Management, 34(5), 882-902.
Yin, R. K. (1984). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage Publications.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publishing.
Young, S., J. Hamill, C. Wheeler and J. R. Davies (1989). International Market Entry and Development: Strategies and Management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Young, S., C. H. Huang and M. McDermott (1996). Internationalization and competitive catch-processes:Case study evidence on Chinese multinational enterprises. Management International Review, 36, 295-314.
Zahra, S. A. and G. George (2002). Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203.
Zander, U. (1991). Exploiting a technological edge – voluntary and involuntary Dissemination of technology. Stockholm, Sweden: IIB.
Zander, U. and B. Kogut (1995). Knowledge and the speed of transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities: An empirical test. Organization Science, 6(1), 76-92.
鄭祥麟 (2005)，「策略聯盟所引發組織改變之研究」，國立政治大學企業管理學研究所未出版博士論文。
描述 博士
國立政治大學
企業管理研究所
95355503
98
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0095355503
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 于卓民<br>司徒達賢zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Yu,chwo ming Joseph<br>Seetoo,dah hsianen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 范慧宜zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Fan,hui yien_US
dc.creator (作者) 范慧宜zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Fan,hui yien_US
dc.date (日期) 2009en_US
dc.date.accessioned 3-Sep-2013 14:37:41 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 3-Sep-2013 14:37:41 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 3-Sep-2013 14:37:41 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0095355503en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/59767-
dc.description (描述) 博士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 企業管理研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 95355503zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 98zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本研究透過三個台灣大型MNCs(集團企業)的深度訪談，期望了解集團成員入如何產生與移轉特定地主國知識的議題。台灣MNCs(集團企業)在國際化時，地主國環境不同於母國，使得台灣MNCs(集團企業)海外成員不足以利用其擁有的經驗與知識去因應環境差異所產生的挑戰與問題，而需要產生新的解決辦法。台灣MNCs(集團企業)海外成員所在地之經營環境與母國環境有差異時，其處理方式有二：規劃性(定期會議處理各階段所面臨之問題)及隨機性(臨時會議對於臨時狀況進行處理)；另外，在地主國發生的突發事件亦會產生地主國知識。當集團海外成員所面臨之經營環境與母國環境差異越大者，所產生特定地主國知識的量會越多。
透過每次在該地主國設廠及執行每一次新產品發展流程的經驗過程中各階段中因為與地主國環境介面互動而產生特定地主國知識，所以台灣MNCs(集團企業)是以漸進方式累積集團成員在特定地主國面對問題解決問題的方法。當遇到問題越多時，台灣MNCs(集團企業)海外子公司特定地主國知識累積速度越快；但每種特定地主國問題的解決方法是需要各階段多方人員不斷地溝通才能產生的，所以當內外部溝通成本越高時，會減緩海外成員累積特定地主國知識累積速度；為了加快累積特定地主國知識，台灣MNCs(集團企業)大量借助資訊科技及人員面對面溝通，期望加速溝通效率以因應快速變動的環境。
在同一地主國，透過三個台灣大型MNCs(集團企業)的深度訪談發現，台灣MNCs(集團企業)在特定地主國知識移轉機制路徑有三，且在探究過程中發現海外總部(OHQs)的存在，所以進一步探討，在特定地主國中，集團成員間移轉地主國知識時，海外總部(OHQs)所扮演的角色及其存在的價值；在取得這個知識的過程中，有哪些因素會影響移轉機制中正式化機制與非正式化機制使用比例？知識移轉時，正式化機制與非正式化機制之間是一個連續帶的概念，而影響集團成員間知識移轉機制選用時，正式化與非正式化機制搭配比例的影響因素包含：知識特性、子公司自主性、知識情境鑲嵌性、經營模式(產品相似性、技術差距性)以及地理距離。
台灣MNCs(集團企業)在知識移轉制度建立初期，較仰賴非正式化機制，隨著制度建立完備程度增加，正式化機制使用的比重提高，但是非正式化機制對於知識移轉機制的效力仍然存在於中高階主管層級，對於基層主管及員工而言，則會完全仰賴正式化機制，以確保自身工作上的權責釐清。台灣MNCs(集團企業)進行國際擴張時，海外成員初期國際化知識是從MNCs總部遺傳而來。台灣MNCs(集團企業)海外成員間特定地主國知識移轉路徑有三：1)透過集團總部(HQs)移轉、2)子公司間移轉及3)透過集團海外總部(OHQs)。本研究認為當台灣MNCs(集團企業)總部在特定地主國設立集團海外總部(OHQs)後，集團海外總部(OHQs)在特定地主國知識移轉上會取代集團企業總部的角色(意即地主國知識移轉時，路徑三會取代路徑一)。
台灣MNCs(集團企業)國際策略在大陸拓展的廣度(各個集團成員(產品不同)赴大陸投資)及深度(負責新產品發展流程階段越多)增加，使總部須處理的專業知識涵蓋範圍廣且處理資料量大，對於位於台灣的MNCs(集團企業)總部而言，處理資訊成本是很高的；再者，集團在大陸據點越多，對於總部監督成本上亦是很大的負擔，所以在大陸設立海外總部(OHQs)，以與集團總部進行某種程度的分工；同時，當世界各地子公司均需將地主國知識回傳至台灣MNCs(集團企業)總部時，台灣MNCs(集團企業)總部即將面臨很複雜的處理及整合成本，所以海外總部(OHQs)有存在的必要。台灣MNCs(集團企業)設置的海外總部(OHQs)所進行的交流、整理及儲存的資訊較複雜和多元化，其設立目的包含：降低監督成本、降低整合成本、降低協調成本、降低知識移轉過程中由於資訊不對稱所產生的無效率情形。集團海外總部(OHQs)亦促進地主國集團成員間知識快速流通，且將知識從母國或其它地主國之集團成員處引入，也就是大量的知識流入與流出的主要樞紐。當集團型態是屬於聯邦分權式時，集團海外總部(OHQs)的設立是有困難的。集團海外總部(OHQs)可能設立在主要市場地理居中位置、交通便捷之處或離知識最接近的地方，以降低「集團」海外成員開會時的交通成本。
集團海外總部(OHQs)是在集團總部(HQs)監控下創造出其在特定地主國知識移轉扮演的角色獨特性及存在必要性，為避免集團海外總部(OHQs)憑藉結構洞角色壟斷所有特定地主國知識，進而取代集團總部(HQs)，集團總部(HQs)透過其與集團海外成員間稽核性連結及其對集團海外總部(OHQs)的正式控制(包含所有權控制及組織層級控制)來防堵集團海外總部(OHQs)坐大，以有效管理集團海外總部(OHQs)。
正式機制與非正式機制間是一個連續帶的概念。然而，在移轉過程中，哪些因素會影響到正式與非正式機制搭配的比例呢？ 當海外成員自主性高時，採用正式化機制強迫集團海外成員間進行知識分享，亦搭配非正式化機制的社會互動，來緩和彼此間因競爭所產生不願意分享的情形；當知識的情境鑲嵌性程度越高，越需要使用非正式機制來縮小正式機制中知識再利用的可能性；當產品相似性很高，知識來源者與接收者若能搭配少部分(短時間、次數少)的人員互動，便能加快知識再利用的速度；當技術越接近時，知識需求方較可準確地預估需求單上的要項，雙方技術差距越大，越需要仰賴非正式關係使知識來源者願意「多」花時間來教導知識接收者；當集團成員地理距離愈遠時，透過正式化機制，如海外總部(OHQs)進行地主國資料蒐集以避免資訊不對稱造成的知識移轉障礙，以克服因為地理距離所產生的知識移轉障礙。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) Knowledge about host countries and international environment is needed when firms enter international markets. A firm encounters more challenges when it enters a new market with no knowledge. After entry, it then can gain valuable experiential knowledge about the host country (i.e., host-country-specific knowledge) and this knowledge is helpful for further operation in the country and internationalization (Yu, 1990). A firm can gain hands-on knowledge by operating in a host market and then it can filter the information gained into forms it needs for internationalization later on.
The purpose of the study addresses host-country-specific-knowledge generating and accumulating by overseas member firms in business groups by identifying factors that affect how business groups from an emerging economy transfer host-country-specific knowledge among their group members. We have found that formal and informal mechanisms were helpful in facilitating the transferring of host-country-specific knowledge. In the literature, it is often assumed that knowledge can be easily and automatically transferred within business groups. Our study confirms that business groups do transfer knowledge among subsidiaries purposely and has also demonstrated that some mechanisms are needed to realize this intent.
While the business group’s network provides a platform for facilitating flows of host-country-specific knowledge, the mere existence of such a network does not automatically result in knowledge transfer. From managerial viewpoint, both formal and informal mechanisms should be in place to promote and encourage host-country-specific knowledge transfer. Gaining a good understanding of the mechanisms contributing to knowledge transfer is strategically important for knowledge management. Regarding the use of mechanisms, our results indicate that the buildup of internationalization knowledge can go along with a firm’s development in foreign markets and also can allow for accumulation of various types of knowledge. The more significant the difference between the contexts encountered by foreign subsidiaries and headquarters is, the more the quantity of knowledge the former will create regarding the host country. When foreign subsidiaries encounter similar problems within a tight time frame in a host country, the accumulation of knowledge about the host country will be faster.
In the early stages, setting up knowledge transferring system relies more on informal mechanisms. The more mature the system is, the higher the proportion of formal mechanisms is used. However, although informal mechanisms are effective for chief executive officers and senior vice presidents, primary executives and operators rely solely on formal mechanisms in order to clarify responsibilities. With more important strategic position of the host country, the headquarters will establish overseas headquarters in order to quickly respond to the market requirements. In a specific host country, overseas headquarters, established by the HQs, may substitute for the headquarters in transferring host country-specific knowledge among member firms via formal mechanisms. When a business group belongs to federal decentralization, external market mechanisms will be adopted to transfer knowledge among its member firms. The overseas headquarters hardly governs transferring knowledge among overseas member firms and the headquarters. When the overseas headquarters is established, the headquarters adopts auditing connection to prevent the host country from monopolizing host-country-specific knowledge.
A headquarters can successfully implement multiple formal and informal mechanisms for knowledge transfer. With respect to knowledge transfer, the higher the level of subsidiary autonomy, the greater the necessity the headquarters rely on formal mechanisms to transfer host-country-specific knowledge among member firms. Encouraging sharing within a business group through some managerial mechanisms can wear down the negative influence caused by opportunism and information asymmetry on the part of the subsidiary and the inter-member competition for the transfer of host-country-specific knowledge. Overseas headquarters accumulates a vast experience and are capable of absorbing, transferring and applying knowledge adequately. They can transcend the geographical limitations and establish good cooperation relations between knowledge originator (the subsidiaries in the host country) and knowledge receiver (other sister firms and the headquarters), warranting the success of the knowledge transfer. Provided that knowledge is tacit, information technology is necessity in transferring knowledge initially documented while social interaction is needed in transferring the rest knowledge embedded in persons. Finally, product and technology similarity are factors affecting how headquarters rely on formal mechanisms in transferring knowledge among member firms.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論…………………………………………………………………………………………………...1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究問題與研究目的 7
第二章 文獻探討 11
第一節 知識移轉影響因素 14
壹、知識本質 15
貳、移轉雙方特質 19
參、知識移轉兩造間關係 20
肆、知識移轉文獻缺口 23
第二節 集團策略對地主國知識產生與移轉之影響 25
壹、MNCs國際策略對地主國知識產生及移轉的影響 25
貳、MNCs海外成員策略性角色對地主國知識產生與移轉之影響 27
參、MNCs海外成員策略性角色文獻缺口 38
第三節 地主國環境對於特定地主國知識產生之影響 41
壹、地主國環境對地主國知識產生的重要性 42
貳、地主國環境對地主國知識產生的影響 43
參、地主國環境對特定地主國知識產生影響之文獻缺 45
第四節 MNCs知識移轉管理機制 46
壹、知識移轉模式 47
貳、影響知識移轉的因素 49
參、知識移轉途徑 52
肆、知識移轉管理機制文獻缺口 59
第五節 文獻總結 60
壹、知識移轉文獻缺口 60
貳、MNCs海外成員策略性角色文獻缺口 61
參、地主國環境對特定地主國知識產生影響之文獻缺口 61
肆、知識移轉管理機制文獻缺口 61
伍、文獻缺口小結 62
第三章 研究方法 65
第一節 研究方法與設計 67
第二節 個案選取及資料蒐集撰寫 70
壹、個案選取與抽樣 70
貳、資料蒐集原則與方式 72
參、個案研究的信度與效度 82
肆、資料分析方法 82
第三節 研究範圍與相關名詞定義說明 84
壹、研究範圍 84
貳、相關名詞定義說明 85
第四章 特定地主國知識產生與累積 91
第一節 新產品發展知識 92
壹、集團成員在新產品發展流程分工狀況 92
貳、新產品發展流程中各個參與的人員及互動過程 97
參、新產品發展流程中各階段產出與安排 103
肆、新產品發展流程中各階段可能遇到的風險及挑戰 107
伍、新產品發展流程中各階段Review重點、過去經驗導入及文件產出 109
第二節 新產品發展流程各階段地主國知識 …112
第三節 地主國知識產生與累積 …126
壹、集團個案成員間知識移轉的關係 126貳、集團個案成員特定地主國知識產生 135
第五章 特定地主國集團成員間國際化知識移轉路徑與管理機制 145
第一節 特定地主國知識移轉機制 146
壹、正式機制 146
貳、非正式機制 147
第二節 特定地主國知識移轉路徑 158
壹、特定地主國知識移轉路徑 158
貳、海外總部(OHQs)設立 162
第三節 影響地主國知識移轉中正式與非正式機制搭配比例之因素 189
壹、海外子公司自主性 189
貳、知識情境鑲嵌性 191
參、經營模式 194
肆、地理距離 197
伍、小結 200
第六章 結論與建議 205
第一節 研究結論 205
第二節 對理論的貢獻 222
第三節 實務意涵 226
第四節 研究限制和對未來的研究建議 234
參考文獻 240
附錄一 新產品發展流程圖

表 目 錄
表1-1 台灣廠商價值活動在國際化演進的區位分工 4
表2-1 Dixon(2000)最佳實務移轉型態 49
表3-1 Eisenhardt建議之個案研究建立理論的過程 69
表3-2 個案基本資料 71
表3-3 集團個案受訪對象說明 81
表3-4 世界前500大集團企業在中國大陸設立地主國總部概況 85
表3-5 知識移轉定義 89
表4-1 集團成員在新產品發展流程中分工狀況訪談搞摘要 93
表4-2A 個案集團與全球資訊大廠代工關係(電腦類) 95
表4-2B 個案集團與全球資訊大廠代工關係(晶片類) 96
表4-2C 個案集團與全球資訊大廠代工關係(手機類) 96
表4-3 新產品發展流程各階段參與人員及領導者 99
表4-4 新產品發展流程各階段參與人員訪談稿摘要 99
表4-5 新產品發展流程各部門間協調訪談稿摘要 101
表4-6 新產品開發流程各階段產出 103
表4-7 新產品發展流程各階段產出即安排協調狀況訪談稿摘要 105
表4-8 新產品發展流程各階段準則 107
表4-9 新產品發展流程各階段主要問題、困難及風險評估 108
表4-10 新產品發展流程各階段成員可能面臨之風險與挑戰之逐字稿摘要 109
表4-11 新產品發展流程各階段review重點、DFx/QIL及正式化文件產出 110
表4-12 四類型國際化知識訪談舉例 114
表4-13 特定地主國知識之逐字稿摘要 116
表4-14 SMT各站異常狀態 124
表4-15 SMT異常狀況排除解決情形 124
表4-16 個案集團成員間持股情況及受訪者所屬公司分類 128
表4-17 集團個案成員特定地主國知識產生與累積之逐字稿摘要 135
表4-18 特定地主國知識產生與累積之個案發現與命題對照表 143
表5-1 集團個案正式化機制逐字稿摘要 147
表5-2 集團個案非正式化機制逐字稿摘要 148
表5-3 個案集團所採取正式化與非正式化知識移轉機制 149
表5-4 MNEs所在中國設立的地主國總部(Host Country Headquarters)之策略性角色 169
表5-5 集團海外總部(OHQs)對特定地主國知識移轉之發現與命題對照表 173
表5-6 集團成員自主性對特定地主國知識移轉之發現與命題對照表 192
表5-7 知識情境鑲嵌性對特定地主國知識移轉之逐字稿摘要 192
表5-8 產品相似性對特定地主國知識移轉之逐字稿摘要 195
表5-9 產品相似性對特定地主國知識移轉之發現與命題對照表 196
表5-10 技術接近性對特定地主國知識移轉之逐字稿摘要 197
表5-11 技術接近性對特定地主國知識移轉之發現與命題對照表 198
表5-12 地理距離對特定地主國知識移轉之逐字稿摘要 198
表5-13 地理距離對特定地主國知識移轉之發現與命題對照表 200
表5-14 地主國知識移轉路徑中正式與非正式機制搭配比例
之影響因素之發現與命題對照表 201
表6-1 環境差異與其他變數間對於集團成員知識移轉路徑選擇 240


圖 目 錄
圖1-1 特定地主國子公司間地主國知識轉移三種路徑的管理機制 10
圖2-1 影響地主國知識移轉相關文獻 13
圖2-2 知識移轉影響因素 15
圖2-3 集團內知識移轉方向 29
圖2-4 Bartlett and Ghoshal(1989)子公司策略角色 32
圖2-5 MNCs內部整合程度與當地化程度區分的子公司策略角色 32
圖2-6 Gupta and Govindarajan子公司策略類型 33
圖2-7 Taggart(1997)子公司策略角色分類 34
圖2-8 Birkinshaw and Hood(1998)子公司角色的演進 36
圖2-9 研究缺口示意圖 64
圖3-1 本研究焦點示意圖 66
圖3-2 本研究個案選取原則 71
圖3-3 集團A關係企業結構圖 74
圖3-4 集團B關係企業結構圖 76
圖3-5 集團C關係企業結構圖 78
圖3-6 新產品發展流程 90
圖4-1 集團個案中台灣與大陸成員在新產品發展分工情況 92
圖4-2 生產作業流程圖 123
圖4-3 產線人員配置上人員編制 123
圖4-4 集團A個案成員間知識移轉關係圖 130
圖4-5 集團B個案成員間知識移轉關係圖 132
圖4-6 集團C個案成員間知識移轉關係圖 134
圖5-1 集團海外成員間地主國知識移轉早晚期路徑 161
圖5-2 中國大陸2006-2008年吸引全球外資金額 166
圖5-3 中國大陸2006-2008年吸引亞洲十國外資金額 167
圖5-4 中國大陸2006-2008年吸引全球外資件數 167
圖5-5 中國大陸2006-2008年吸引亞洲十國外資件數 167
圖5-6 焦點子公司國際化知識來源 174
圖5-7 集團子公司所產生知識匯回集團總部及海外集團總部的情況 175
圖5-8 集團A焦點子公司知識移轉路徑 180
圖5-9 集團B焦點子公司知識移轉路徑 185
圖5-10 集團C焦點子公司知識移轉路徑 189
圖6-1 研究結果 205
圖6-2 移轉特定地主國知識正式化機制與非正式化機制使用比例 238		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 3091559 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0095355503en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 特定地主國知識zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 集團企業zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 知識產生與移轉zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 海外集團總部zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Host-Country-Specific Knowledgeen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Business Groupen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Knowledge Generate and Transferen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Overseas Headquartersen_US
dc.title (題名) 集團內子公司地主國知識產生與移轉之研究zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Host-Country-Specific Knowledge: Generating and Transferring Among Member Firms in Business Groupsen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Almeida, P., J. Song and R. Grant (2002). Are firms superior to alliances and markets? An empirical test of cross-border knowledge building. Organization Science, 13(2), 147-161.
Andersson, U. and M. Forsgren (1996). Subsidiary embeddedness and control in the multinational corporation. International Business Review, 5(5), 487-508.
Andersson, U., and M. Forsgren (2000). In Search of Centre of Excellence: Network Embeddedness and Subsidiary Roles In Multinational Corporations. Management International Review, 40(4), 329-350.
Andersson, U., M. Forsgren and U. Holm (2002). The strategic impact of external networks: Subsidiary performance and competence development in the multinational corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 23(11), 979-997.
Appleyard, M. M. (1996). How does knowledge flow? Interfirm patterns in the semiconductor industry. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue), 137-154.
Argote, L. and P. Ingram (2000). Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 150-169.
Argote, L., B. McEvily and R. Reagan (2003). Managing knowledge in organizations: an integrative framework and review of emerging themes. Management Science, 49(4), 571-582.
Athanassiou, N. and D. Nigh (2000). Internationalization, tacit knowledge and the top management teams of MNCs. Journal of International Business Studies, 31(3), 471-487.
Baranson, J. (1970). Technology Transfer though International Firms. American Economic Association, 60(2), 435-440.
Barkema, H. G., J. H. Bell and J. M. Pennings (1996). Foreign entry, culture barriers and learning. Strategic Management Journal, 17(2), 151-166.
Bartlett, C. A. and S. Ghoshal (1986). Tap Your Subsidiaries for Global Reach. Harvard Business Review, 64(6), 87-94.
Bartlett, C. A. and S. Ghoshal (1989). Managing across borders：The transnational solution. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Bartlett, C. A. and S. Ghoshal (1998). Transnational Management. NY: McGraw-Hill.
Bartlett, C. A., Y. L. Doz and G.. Hedlund (1990). Managing the global firm. London; New York: Routledge, 256-278.
Baughn, C. C., J. G.. Denekamp, J. H. Stevens and R. N. Osborn (1997). Protecting intellectual capital in international alliances. Journal of World Business, 32(2), 103-117.
Becerra-Fernandez, I. and R. Sabherwal (2001). Organizational Knowledge Management: A Contigency Perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems Summer, 18(1), 23-55.
Birkinshaw, J. M. and N. Hood (1998). Multinational subsidiary evolution: Capability and charter change in foreign-owned subsidiary companies. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 773-795.
Birkinshaw, J. M. and A. J. Morrison (1995). Configurations of strategy and structure in subsidiaries of multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 26(4), 729-754.
Birkinshaw, J. M., N. Hood and S. Jonsson (1998). Building firm-specific advantages in multinational corporations: the role of subsidiary initiative. Strategic Management Journal , 19(3), 221-242.
Birkinshaw, J. M. (1996). How subsidiary mandates are gained and lost. Journal of International Business Studies, 27(3), 467-496.
Birkinshaw, J. M. (1997). Entrepreneurship in multinational corporations: the characteristics of subsidiary initiatives. Strategic Management Journal, 18(3), 207-229.
Birkinshaw, J. M. (1998). Corporate entrepreneurship in network organizations: how subsidiary initiate drives internal market efficiency. European Management Journal, 16(3), 355-364.
Breman, H., J. Birkinshaw and R. Nobel (1999). Knowledge transfer in international acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(3), 439-462.
Brooking, A. (1999). Corporate Memory-strategies for knowledge Management. London: Intellectual Thomson Bussiness Press.
Brooks, H. (1966). Multimethod Research Synthesis of Stiles. London : Stage Publication.
Brown, J. and P. Duguid (1998). Organizing knowledge. California Management Review, 40(3), 90-111.
Buckley, P. J. and M. J. Carter (1999). Managing cross-border complementary knowledge. International Studies of Management & Organization, 29(1), 80-104.
Burgelman, R. A. (1983). A Model of the Interaction of Strategic Behavior, Corporate Context, and the Concept of Strategy. Academy of Management Review, 8(1), 61-71.
Burgelman, R. A. (1983). A Process Model of Internal Corporate Venturing in the Diversified Major Firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(2), 223-244.
Calantone, R. J., K. Chan and A. S. Cui (2006). Decomposing product innovativeness and its effects on new product success. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(5), 408-421.
Cantwell, J. and R. Mudambi (2005). MNE competence-creating subsidiary mandate. Strategic Management Journal, 25(12), 1109–1128.
Carpenter, M. A., W. Sanders and H. Gregersen (2001). Bundling human capital with organizational context: The impact of international assignment experience on multinational firm performance and CEO pay. Academy of Management Journal. 44(3), 493-512.
Chakravarthy, B. S. and H. V. Perlmutter (1985). Strategic planning for a global business. Columbia Journal of World Business, 2(20), 3-10.
Clark, K. B. and S. C. Wheelwright (1992). Organising and leading heavyweight development teams. California Management Review, 34(3), 9-28.
Cohen W. M. and D. A. Levinthal (1990). Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128-152.
Cohendet, P., F. Kern, B. Mehmanpazir and F. Munier (1999). Knowledge coordination, competence creation and integrated networks in globalized firms. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 23(2), 225-241.
Cooper, R. G. and E. J. Kleinschrnidt (1986). An Investigation into the New Product Process : Steps, Deficiencies and Impact. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 3(2), 71-85.
Cooper, R. G. and E. J. Kleinschrnidt (1988). Resource Allocation in the New Product Process, Industrial Marketing Management, 17(3), 249-262.
Davenport, T. H. and L. Prusak (1998). Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Delios, A. and W. J. Henisz (2000). Japanese Firms` Investment Strategies in Emerging Economies, Academy of Management Journal, 43(3), 305-323.
Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Devadas, R. and L. Argote (1995). Collective learning and forgetting: The effects of turnover and group structure. Paper presented at Midwestern Academy of Management Meetings, Chicago (1995, May).
Dixon, N. (2000). Common knowledge: How companies thrive by sharing what they know. Harvard Business School Press.
Doz, Y. L. and C. K. Prahalad (1981). Headquarter influence and strategic control in multinational companies. Sloan Management Review, 23(1), 15-29.
Doz, Y. L. and C. K. Prahalad (1993). Managing DMNCs：A search for a new paradigm. in S. Ghoshal and D.E. Westney (eds.), Organization theory and the multinational cooperation. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 24-50.
Doz, Y. L. and C. K. Prahalad (1994). Managing DMNCs: A search for a new paradigm. Fundamental issues in strategy. Harvard Business School Press.
Dunning, J. H. (1988). The Eclectic Paradigm of International Production: A Restatement and Some Possible Extensions. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(1), 1- 31.
Dutton, J. M. and W. H. Starbuck (1979). Diffusion of an intellectual technology. In: Krippendorff, K. (Ed.), Communication and Control in Society. Gordon & Breach Science, New York, 489-511.
Edvinsson, L. and P. H. Sullivan (1996). Developing a Model for Managing Intellectual Capital. European Management Journal, 14(4), 356-364.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Case study theory research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1991). Better Stories and Better Constructs: The case for rigor and comparative logic. Academy of Management, 16(3), 620-627.
Fan H. Y. and C. J. Yu (2009). Host Country-Specific Knowledge Sharing between Member Firms in Business Groups. Proceedings of the Academy of International Business 2009 Annual meeting, 27-30 June 2009, San Diego, California.
Forsgren, M. (1989). Managing The Internationalization Process: The Swedish Case. London: Routledge.
Forsgren, M. (1990). Managing the international multi-centre firm: case studies from Sweden. European Management Review, 8(2), 261-267.
Foss, N. J. and T. Pedersen (2002). Transferring knowledge in MNCs: The role of sources of subsidiary knowledge and organizational context. Journal of International Management, 8(1), 49-67.
Foss, N. J. (2007). The Emerging Knowledge Governance Approach: Challenges and Characteristics. Organization, 14(1), 29-52.
Frost, T. S. (2001). The geographic sources of foreign subsidiaries` innovations. Strategic Management Journal, 22(2), 101-123.
Gersick, C. and J. R. Hackman (1990). Habitual routines in task-performing groups. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 47(1), 65-97.
Ghoshal, S. and C. A. Bartlett (1988). Creation, adoption and diffusion of innovations by subsidiaries of multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3), 365-388.
Ghoshal, S. and C. A. Bartlett (1990). The multinational corporation as an international network. Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 603-625.
Ghoshal, S. and N. Nohria (1989). Internal differentiation within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 10(4), 323-338.
Ghoshal, S. and N. Nohria (1993). Horses for courses: Organizational forms for multinational corporations. Sloan Management Review, 34(2), 23-35.
Gilbert, M. and M. Cordey-Hayes (1996). Understanding the Process of Knowledge Transfer to Achieve Successful Technological Innovation. Technovation, 16(6), 301-312.
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddednes. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 481-510.
Grant, R. M. (1995). Contemporary Strategy Analysis: Concepts, Techniques, Applications. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Blackwell Ltd.
Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue), 109-122.
Gulati, R. (1998). Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal, 19(4), 293-317.
Gulati, R. (1999). Network location and learning: the influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal, 20(5), 397-420.
Gulati, R., N. Nohria and A. Zaheer (2000). Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 20(5), 199-201.
Gupta, A. K. and V. Govindarajan (1991). Knowledge flows and the structure of control within multinational corporations. Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 768-792.
Gupta, A. K. and V. Govindarajan (1994). Organizing for knowledge flows within MNCs. International Business Reviews, 3(4), 443-457.
Gupta, A. K. and V. Govindarajan (2000). Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 21(4), 473–496.
Gupta, A. K. and V. Govindarajan (2001). Converting global presence into global competitive advantage. Academy of Management Executive, 15(2), 45-57.
Hagstrom, R. G. (1994). The Warren Buffett way. New York: John Wiley.
Hakanson, L. and R. Nobel (1998). Technology characteristics and reverse technology transfer. Proceedings of the Academy of International Business 1998 Annual meeting, 27-30 June 1998, Vienna, Austria.
Hakanson, L. and R. Nobel (2001). Organizational characteristics and reverse technology transfer. Management International Review, 41(4), 395-420.
Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization submits. Administrative Science, 44(4), 82-111.
Hayami , Y. and V. W. Ruttan (1971). Agricultural development: an international perspective. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Hedberg, B. (1981). How organizations learn and unlearn. In: Nystrom, P.C., Starbucks, W.H.(Eds.), Handbook of Organizational Design. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Hedlund, G. (1986). The hypermodern MNC- A hierarchy?. Human Resource Management, 25(1), 9-35.
Hedlund, G. (1994). A model of Knowledge Management and the N-Form Corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 15(Summer Special Issue), 73-90.
Hedlund, G. and J. Ridderstrale (1992). Toward the N-Form Corporation: Exploitation and creation in the MNC. Paper presented at the conference: Prespectives on International Business: Theory, Resarch and Institutiional Arrangements`, Collumbia,SC.
Hendriks, P. (1999). Why share knowledge? The influence of ICT on motivation for knowledge sharing. Knowledge and Process Management, 6(2), 91-100.
Herriot, R. and W. Firestone (1983). Multisite qualitative policy research: optimizing description and generalizability. Educational Researcher, 12(2), 14-19.
Hidding, G. J. and S. M. Catterall (1998). Anatomy of a learning organization: turning knowledge into capital at Anderson. Knowledge and Process Management, 5(1), 3-13.
Howells, J. (1996). Tacit Knowledge, Innovation and Technology Transfer. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 8(2), 91-106.
Inkpen, A.C. and A. Dinur (1998). Knowledge Management Processes and International Joint Ventures. Organization Science, 9(4), 454-468.
Jarillo, J.C. and J. I. Martinez (1990). Different roles for subsidiaries:The case of multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 11(7), 501-512.
Jensen, R.J. and G. Szulanski (2004). Stickiness and the Adaptation of Organizational Practices in Cross-Border Knowledge Transfers. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(6), 508-523.
Johanson, J. and J. E. Vahlne (1977). The Internationalization Process of the Firm - A Model of Knowledge Development and Increasing Foreign Market Commitments. Journal of International Business Studies, 8(1), 23-32.
Kacker, M. P. (1988). International flow of retailing know-how: bridging the technology gap in distribution. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 41-67.
Karamanos, A. (2003). Complexity, identity and the value of knowledge-intensive exchanges. Journal of Management Studies, 40(7), 1871-1890.
Karlsen, J. T. and P. Gottschalk (2004). Factors affecting knowledge transfer in IT projects. Engineering Management Journal, 16(1), 3-11.
Katz, R. and T. J. Allen (1982). Investigating the not invented here (NIH) syndrome: a look at the performance, tenure, and communication patterns of 50 R&D project groups. R&D Management, 12(1), 7-19.
Khanna, T. and K. Palepu (1997). Why focused strategies may be wrong for emerging markets. Harvard Business Review, 75(4), 41-51.
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1998). Evaluating training programs The four levels. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Kogut, B. (1985). Designing global strategies: Profiting from operational flexibility. Sloan Management Review, 27(1), 27-38.
Kogut, B. and U. Zander (1992). Knowledge of the firm: combinative capabilities and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3(2), 383-397.
Kogut, B. and U. Zander (1993). Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 24(4), 625-645.
Kostova, T. (1999). Transnational transfer of strategic organizational practices: A contextual perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 308-324.
Lahti, R. K. and M. M. Beyerlein (2000). Knowledge transfer and management consulting: A look at the firm. Business Horizons, 43(1), 65-74.
Lall, S. (1983). The New Multinationals: The Spread of Third World Enterprises. Chichester: Wiley.
Lam, A. (1997). Embedded firms, embedded knowledge: problems of collaboration and knowledge transfer in global cooperative ventures. Organization Studies, 18(6), 973-996.
Lam, A. (2000). Tacit Knowledge, Organizational Learning and Societal Institutions: An Integrated Framework. Organizational Studies, 21(3), 487-513.
Lane, P. J. and M. Lubatkin (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), 461-477.
Leonard-Barton, D. (1995). Well-spirits of Knowledge-Building and Sources of Innovation. M. A.: Harvard Business School Press.
Leonard-Barton, D. and I. Deschamps (1988). Managerial Influence In The Implementation of New Technology. Management Science, 34(10), 1252-1265.
Leonard-Barton, D. and S. Spensiper (1998). The Role of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation. California Management Review, 40(3), 121-131.
Leonidas, C. L., C. S. Katsikeas and S. Samiee(2002). Marketing Strategy Determinants of Export Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Business Research, 55(1), 51-67.
Lindkvist, L. (2004). Governing project-based firms: Promoting market-like processes within hierarchies. Journal of Management and Governance, 8(1), 3-25.
Lindkvist, L. (2005). Knowledge Communities and Knowledge Collectivities: A Typology of Knowledge Work in Groups. Journal of Management Studies, 42(6), 1189-1210.
Louis, M. R. and R. I. Sutton (1991). Switching cognitive gears: from habits of mind to active thinking. Human Relations, 44, 55-76.
Luo, X. and C. Chung (2005). Keeping it all in the family: the role of particularistic relationships in business group performance during institutional transition. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 404–439.
Lyles, A. M. and E. J. Salk (1996). Knowledge acquisition from foreign parents in international joint ventures empirical examination in the Hungarian context. Journal of International Business Studies, 27(5), 877-903.
Machlup, F. (1962). The Production and Distribution of Knowledge in the United States. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Major, E. and M. Cordey-Hayes (2000). Knowledge Translation: A New Perspective on Knowledge Transfer. Foresight, 2(4), 412-423.
Malnight, T. W. (1995). Globalization of an ethnocentric firm: An evolutionary perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 16(2), 119-141.
Malnight, T. W. (1996). The transition from decentralized to network-based MNC structures: an evolutionary perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 27(1), 43-65.
Mansfield, E. (1982). Technology Transfer, Productivity and Economic Policy. W. W. Norton and Company Inc.
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87.
Matusik, S. F. and C. W. Hill (1998). The Utilization of Contingent Work, Knowledge Creation, and Competitive Advantage. The Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 680-697.
Maula, M. (2000). Three parallel knowledge processes. Knowledge and Process Management, 7(5), 55-59.
McEvily, B. and A. Zaheer (1999). Bridging ties: A source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 20(12), 1133 - 1156.
Meyer, J. W. and B. Rowan (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structures as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.
Miles, M. B. (1982). A mini-cross-site analysis. American Behavioral Scientist, 26(1), 121-132.
Miles, M. B. and A. M. Huberman (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage:London & Thousand Oaks, California.
Miller, K.D., M. Zhao and R. J. Calantone (2006). Adding interpersonal learning and tacit knowledge to March`s exploration-exploitation model. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 709-722.
Morey, D. (2001). High-speed Knowledge Management: Integrating Operations Theory and Knowledge Management for Rapid Results. Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(4), 322-328.
Mowery, D. C., J. E. Oxley and B. S. Silverman (1996). Strategic Alliances and Inerfirm Knowledge Transfer. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue), 77-91.
Nelson, R. R. (1993). National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nobel, R. and J. Birkinshaw (1998). Innovation in multinational corporations: control and communication patterns in international R&D operations. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), 479-496.
Noda, T. and J. T. Bower (1996). Strategy Making As Uterated Process of Resource Allocation. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 159-192.
Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 9(1), 14-38.
Nonaka, I., R. Toyama and A. Nagata (2000). A firm as a knowledge-creating entity: a new perspective on the theory of the firm. Industrial and Corporate Change, 9(1), 1-20.
Nonaka, I. and H. Takeuchi (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company. New York: Oxford University.
Nystrom, P. C. and W. H. Starbuck (1984). To avoid organizational crises, unlearn. Organizational Dynamics, 12(4), 53-65.
O’Dell, C. and C. J. Grayson (1998). If only we knew what we know. New York: The Free Press.
O’Reilly, C. A. and J. A. Chatman (1996). Culture as social control: corporations, cults, and commitment. Research in Organizational Behavior, 18, 157-200.
Okhuysen, G. A. and K. M. Eisenhardt (2002). Integrating knowledge in groups: How formal interventions enable flexibility. Organization Science, 13(4), 370-386.
Olk, P. (1997). The effect of partner differences on the performance of R&D consortia. In P. Beamish and J. Killing, editors, Cooperative strategies, American perspectives. The New Lexington Press, San Francisco.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. London: Sage.
Pisano, G. (1990). The R&D boundaries of the firm: an empirical analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 153-176.
Polanyi, M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension. Anchor Book. Garden City. N. Y.
Polyani, M. (1962). Personal Science. Chicago University Press, Chicago.
Porter, M. E. (1986). Competitive in Global Industries. Harvard Business School Press.
Porter, M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York : Free Press.
Prahalad, C. K. and Y. L. Doz (1987). The multinational mission- balancing local demandsand global vision. New York: Free Press.
Prahalad, C. K. (1993). The Role of Core Competence in the Corporation. Research Technology Management, 36(6), 40-71.
Ralph K., R. Laura, R. Margy and T. Warren (1998). The Data Warehouse Lifecycle Toolkit: Expert Methods for Designing, Developing, and Deploying Data Warehouses. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York: Free Press.
Reed, R. and R. J. DeFillippi (1990). Casual Ambiguity, Barriers to Imitation and Sustainable Competitive Advantage. Academy of Management Review, 15(1), 88-102.
Rosenzweig, P. M. and J. V. Singh (1991). Organizational environments and the multinational enterprise. Academy of Management Review, 16 (2), 340-361.
Roth, K. and A. J. Morrison (1990). An empirical analysis of the integration-responsiveness framework in global industries. Journal of International Business Studies, 21(4), 541-564.
Roth, K. and A. J. Morrison (1992). Implementing global strategy: Characteristics of global subsidiary mandate. Journal of International Business Studies, 23(4), 715-735.
Roth, K. and D. Nigh (1992). The effectiveness of headquarters-subsidiary relationships: The role of coordination, control, and conflict. Journal of Business Research, 25(4), 277-301.
Rugman, A. and A. Verbeke (2001). Subsidiary-specific advantages in multinational enterprises, Strategic Management Journal, 22(3), 237-250.
Rugman, A. and A. Verbeke (1992). Europe 1992 and competitive strategies for North American firms. Business Horizons, (34)6, 76-81.
Schlegelmilch, B. B. and T. C. Chini (2003). Knowledge transfer between marketing functions in multinational companies: a conceptual model. International Business Review, 12(2), 215-232.
Shariq, S. Z. (1999). How does knowledge transform as it is transferred? Speculations on the possibility of a cognitive theory of knowledge scopes. Journal of Knowledge Management, 3(4), 243-251.
Simon, K. (1960). Economic Growth of Small Nations in E. A. G. Robinson, ed., Economic Consequences of the Size of Nations. London, Macmillan.
Simonin, B. L. (1999). Transfer of marketing know-how in international strategic alliances: An empirical investigation of the role and antecedents of knowledge ambiguity. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(3), 463-490.
Simonin, B. L. (1999). Ambiguity And The Process Of Knowledge Transfer In Strategic Alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 20(7), 595-623.
Simsek, Z., M. H. Lubatkin and S. W. Floyd (2003). Interfirm networks and entrepreneurial behavior: A structural embeddedness perspective. Journal of Management, 29(3), 427-442.
Spender, J. C. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, Special Issue, 17(Winter), 45-62.
Strauss, A. L. and J. Corbin (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage.
Subramaniam, M. and N. Venkatraman (2001). Determinants of transnational new product development capability: Testing the influence of transferring and developing tacit overseas knowledge. Strategic Management Journal, 22(4), 359-387.
Sveiby, K. E. (1997). The New Organizational Wealth: Managing and Measuring Knowledge-based Assets. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(4), 27-43.
Szulanski, G. (2000). The Process of Knowledge Transfer: A Diachronic Analysis of Stickiness. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Process, 82(1), 9-27.
Szulanski, G., R. Cappetta and R. Jensen (2004). When and how trustworthiness mat-ters: Knowledge transfer and the moderating effect of causal ambiguity. Organization Science, 15(5), 600-613.
Taggart, J. H. (1997). An evaluation of the integration- responsiveness framework: MNC manufacturing subsidiaries in the UK. Management International Review, 37(4), 295-318.
Teece, D. J. (1977). Technology transfer by multinational corporations: the resource cost of transferring technological Know-how. Economic Journal, 87(2), 242–261.
Teece, D. J. (1998). Capturing value from knowledge assets: The new economy, markets for know-how, and intangible assets. California Management Review, 40(3), 55-79.
Truran, W. R. (1998). Pathways for knowledge: How companies learn through people. Engineering Management Journal, 10(4), 15-20.
Tsai, W. P. (2000). Social capital, strategic relatedness and the formation of intraorganizational linkages. Strategic Management Journal, 21(9), 925-939.
Tsai, W. P. (2001). Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 996-1004.
Tsang, W. K. (1999). The knowledge transfer and learning aspects of international HRM: an empirical study of Singapore MNCs. International Business Review, 8(5/6), 591-609.
Tsoukas, H. and E. Vladimirou (2001). What is organizational knowledge?. Journal of Management Studies, 38(7), 937-993.
Tsoukas, H. (1996). The Firm as a Distributed Knowledge System: A Constructionist Approach. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter Special Issue), 11-25.
Tushman, M. L. (1977). A Political Approach to Organizations: A Review and Rationale. Academy of Management Review, 4, 206-216.
Uzzi, B. (1996). The Sources and Consequences of Embeddedness for the Economic Performance of Organizations: The Network Effect. American sociological Review, 61 (4), 674-698.
Verkasalo, M. and P. A. Lappalainen (1998). Method of Measuring the Efficiency of the Knowledge Utilization Process. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 45(4), 414-423.
Vernon, R. (1966). International Investment and International Trade in the Product Cycle. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 88, 190-207.
Welch, L. S. and R. Loustarinen (1988). Internationalization: Evolution of a concept. Journal of General Management, 14(2), 34-55.
Wells, L.T. (1983). Third World Multinationals: The Rise of Foreign Investment from Developing Countries. Cambridge, MA MIT Press.
Westney, D. E. (1994). Institutionalization theory and the multinational corporation. In S. Ghoshal and D. E. Westney(eds), Organization theory and the multinational corporation. St Martin’s Press, New York.
White, R. E. and T. A. Poynter (1984). Strategies for Foreign-owned Subsidiaries in Canada. Business Quarterly, 2, 59-69.
Wiig, K.M. (1997). Knowledge Management: An Introduction and Perspective. Journal of Knowledge Management, 1(1), 6-14.
Winter, S. G.. (1987). Knowledge and Competence as Strategic Assets. The Competitive Challenge-Strategies for Industrial Innovation and Renewal. MA: Ballinger.
Xufi M. and D. Andrew (2010). Host-Country headquarters and an MNE’s subsequent within-country diversifications. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(3), 517-525.
Yang, Q., R. Mudambi and K. Meyer (2008). Conventional and reverse knowledge flows in multinational corporations. Journal of Management, 34(5), 882-902.
Yin, R. K. (1984). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage Publications.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publishing.
Young, S., J. Hamill, C. Wheeler and J. R. Davies (1989). International Market Entry and Development: Strategies and Management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Young, S., C. H. Huang and M. McDermott (1996). Internationalization and competitive catch-processes:Case study evidence on Chinese multinational enterprises. Management International Review, 36, 295-314.
Zahra, S. A. and G. George (2002). Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203.
Zander, U. (1991). Exploiting a technological edge – voluntary and involuntary Dissemination of technology. Stockholm, Sweden: IIB.
Zander, U. and B. Kogut (1995). Knowledge and the speed of transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities: An empirical test. Organization Science, 6(1), 76-92.
鄭祥麟 (2005)，「策略聯盟所引發組織改變之研究」，國立政治大學企業管理學研究所未出版博士論文。		zh_TW