Advertisement

Organising Innovative Knowledge Transfer through Corporate Board Interlocks

  • Hendrik Leendert Aalbers
  • Bastiaan Klaasse
Chapter

Abstract

Drawing on knowledge management and social network literature we examine the relation between corporate board interlocks and a board’s commitment to innovation. Based on a sample of Dutch and German publicly listed ‘high-tech’ companies, empirical results indicate that intra-industry interlocks are supportive of arranging for innovative knowledge exchange. Intra-industry interlocks connect the board to nonlocal but related knowledge in the form of companies residing in alternative pockets of their respective industry, increasing a board’s internal knowledge diversity. Following absorptive capacity theory, this type of upper-echelon relational embeddedness improves the board’s ability to recognise and pursue innovation opportunities, in this case showcased by corporate research and development expenditure. In contrast, no effect was found for interlocks with companies residing outside the focal industry. These findings add to the knowledge-based theory of the firm which states that the innovativeness of a firm depends on both its current knowledge base and the means by which such knowledge is enriched by knowledge domains that come from outside the boundaries of the firm. The findings emphasise the relevance of upper-echelon relational embeddedness to the ability to reap the benefits of innovative knowledge exchange through investment in innovation.

Keywords

Knowledge management Innovation Networks Corporate board interlocks 

References

  1. Aalbers, H. L. (2011). The role of contracts and trust in R&D alliances in the Dutch biotech sector. Innovation, 12(3), 311–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aalbers, H. L., & Dolfsma, W. A. (2015). Innovation networks: Managing the networked organization. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Aalbers, H. L., Dolfsma, W., & Koppius, O. (2013). Individual positioning in innovation networks: On the role of individual motivation. Research Policy, 42(3), 624–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aalbers, H. L., Dolfsma, W., & Koppius, O. (2014). Rich ties and innovative knowledge transfer within a firm. British Journal of Management, 23(1), 96–109.Google Scholar
  5. Aalbers, H. L., Whelan, E., Parise, S., & Vialle, C. (2016). The perils of democratic decision making. Ivey Business Journal, 41(1), 1–5.Google Scholar
  6. Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 425–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barker, V. L., III, & Mueller, G. C. (2002). CEO characteristics and firm R&D spending. Management Science, 48(6), 782–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2011). The mechanisms of collaboration in inventive teams: Composition, social networks, and geography. Research Policy, 40, 81–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carnabuci, G., & Operti, E. (2013). Where do firms’ recombinant capabilities come from? Intraorganisational networks, knowledge and firms’ Ability to innovate through technological recombination. Strategic Management Journal, 34, 1519–1613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cegarra-Ciprés, M., Roca-Puig, V., & Bou-Llusar, J. C. (2014). External knowledge acquisition and innovation output: an analysis of the moderating effect of internal knowledge transfer. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 12(2), 203–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chen, H., Ho, M. H., & Hsu, W. (2013). Does board social capital influence chief executive officers’ investment decisions in research and development? R&D Management, 43(4), 381–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Coleman, J. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, s95–s120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cramton, C. D., & Hinds, P. J. (2004). Subgroup dynamics in internationally distributed teams: Ethnocentrism or cross-national learning? Research in Organizational Behavior, 26, 231–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Crossan, M., & Apaydin, M. (2010). A multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovation: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Management Studies, 47(6), 1154–1191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dezso, C. L., & Ross, D. G. (2012). Does female representation in management improve firm performance? A panal data investigation. Strategic Management Journal, 33, 1072–1089.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Eurostat. (2008). NACE Rev. 2: Statistical classification of economic activities in the European Community. European Commission. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  18. Filatotchev, I., & Toms, S. (2003). Corporate governance, strategy and survival in a declining industry: A study of UK cotton textile companies. Journal of Management Studies, 40(4), 895–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Foss, N. J., Lyngsie, J., & Zahra, S. A. (2013). The role of external knowledge sources and organisational design in the process of opportunity exploitation. Strategic Management Journal, 34, 1453–1471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Garriga, H., Von Krogh, G., & Spaeth, S. (2013). How constraints and knowledge impact open innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 34, 1134–1144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Geletkanycz, M. A., & Hambrick, D. C. (1997). The external ties of top executives: Implications for strategic choice and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(4), 654–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Goodstein, J., Gautam, K., & Boeker, W. (1994). The effects of board size and diversity on strategic change. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 241–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Granovetter, M. (1983). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. Sociological Theory, 1, 201–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Grigoriou, K., & Rothaermel, F. T. (2017). Organizing for knowledge generation: Internal knowledge networks and the contingent effect of external knowledge sourcing. Strategic Management Journal, 38(2), 395–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). New York: Pearson.Google Scholar
  27. Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organisation as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9, 193–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Haynes, K. T., & Hillman, A. (2010). The effect of board capital and CEO power on strategic change. Strategic Management Journal, 31, 1145–1163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Heemskerk, E. M. (2007). Decline of the corporate community: Network dynamics of the Dutch business elite. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Howard, M., Withers, M., & Tihanyi, L. (2016). Knowledge dependence and the formation of director interlocks. Academy of Management Journal, 60(5), 1986–2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Inkinen, H. (2016). Review of empirical research on knowledge management practices and firm performance. Journal of Knowledge Management, 20(2), 230–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Johnson, S. G., Schnatterly, K., & Hill, A. D. (2013). Board composition beyond independence: Social capital, human capital, and demographics. Journal of Management, 39(1), 232–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kesidou, E., & Snijders, C. (2012). External knowledge and innovation performance in clusters: Empirical evidence from the Uruguay software cluster. Industry and Innovation, 19(5), 437–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kijkuit, B., & Van den Ende, J. (2007). The organizational life of an idea: Integrating social network, creativity and decision-making perspectives. Journal of Management Studies, 44(6), 860–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lamb, N. H., & Roundy, P. (2016). The “ties that bind” board interlocks research: A systematic review. Management Research Review, 39(11), 1516–1542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Larrañeta, B., Zahra, S. A., & González, J. L. (2012). Enriching strategic variety in new ventures through external knowledge. Journal of Business Venturing, 27, 401–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Laursen, K., Masciarelli, F., & Prencipe, A. (2012). Regions matter: How localized social capital affects innovation and external knowledge acquisition. Organization Science, 23(1), 177–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lee, M. R., & Chen, T. T. (2012). Revealing research themes and trends in knowledge management: From 1995 to 2010. Knowledge-Based Systems, 28, 47–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Leiponen, A. (2012). The benefits of R&D and breadth in innovation strategies: A comparison of Finnish service and manufacturing firms. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(5), 1255–1281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lin, B. W. (2011). Knowledge diversity as a moderator: Inter-firm relationships, R&D investment and absorptive capacity. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 23(3), 331–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McCarthy, K., & Aalbers, H. L. (2016). Technological acquisitions: The impact of geography on post-acquisition innovative performance. Research Policy, 45(9), 1818–1832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Midavaine, J., Dolfsma, W., & Aalbers, R. (2016). Board diversity and R&D investment. Management Decision, 54(3), 558–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Millar, C. C., Lockett, M., & Mahon, J. F. (2016). Knowledge intensive organisations: On the frontiers of knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge Management, 20(5), 845–857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Miller, T., & Triana, M. (2009). Demographic diversity in the boardroom: Mediators of the board diversity–firm performance relationship. Journal of Management Studies, 46(5), 755–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. OECD & Eurostat. (2005). The measurement of scientific and technological activities: Proposed guidelines for collecting and interpreting technological innovation data: Oslo manual (3rd ed.). Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  46. Parra-Requena, G., Ruiz-Ortega, M. J., García-Villaverde, P. M., & Rodrigo-Alarcón, J. (2015). The mediating role of knowledge acquisition on the relationship between external social capital and innovativeness. European Management Review, 12, 149–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Paulus, P. (2000). Groups, teams, and creativity: The creative potential of idea-generating groups. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 49, 237–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pfeffer, J. (1972). Size and composition of corporate boards of directors: The organisation and its environment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 218–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Phelps, C., Heidl, R., & Wadhwa, A. (2012). Knowledge, networks, and knowledge networks: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 1115–1166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Quintane, E., Casselman, R. M., Reiche, S., & Nylund, P. A. (2011). Innovation as a knowledge based outcome. Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(6), 928–947. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673271111179299 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 240–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ritter, T., & Gemünden, H. G. (2003). Network competence: Its impact on innovation success and its antecedents. Journal of Business Research, 56(9), 745–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ruigrok, w., Peck, S. I., & Keller, H. (2006). Board characteristics and involvement in strategic decision making: Evidence from Swiss companies. Journal of Management Studies, 43(5), 1201–1226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Stuart, T. E. (2000). Interorganisational alliances and the performance if firms: A study of growth and innovations rates in high-technology industry. Strategic Management Journal, 212, 791–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tsai, w. (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.Google Scholar
  56. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Van Wijk, R., Jansen, J. J., & Lyles, M. A. (2008). Inter- and Intra-Organizational knowledge transfer: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its antecedents and consequences. Journal of Management Studies, 45(4), 830–853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Venkitachalam, K., & Busch, P. (2012). Tacit knowledge: Review and possible research directions. Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(2), 357–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Westphal, J. D., & Bednar, M. K. (2005). Pluralistic ignorance in corporate boards and firms’ strategic persistence in response to low firm performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50, 262–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Westphal, J. D., & Milton, L. P. (2000). How experience and network ties affect the influence of demographic minorities on corporate boards. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(2), 366–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Whelan, E., Parise, S., Van der Valk, J., & Aalbers, H. L. (2011). Creating employee networks that deliver open innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 53(1), 37–44.Google Scholar
  63. Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 293–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wu, J. (2014). The effects of external knowledge search and CEO tenure on product innovation: Evidence from Chinese firms. Industrial and Corporate Change, 23(1), 65–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Ye, J., Hao, B., & Patel, P. C. (2016). Orchestrating heterogeneous knowledge: The effects of internal and external knowledge heterogeneity on innovation performance. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 63(2), 165–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Yoo, J. W., & Reed, R. (2015). The effects of top management team external ties and board composition on the strategic choice of late movers. Long Range Planning, 48, 23–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Zheng, W. (2010). A social capital perspective of innovation from individuals to nations: Where is empirical literature directing us? International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(2), 151–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hendrik Leendert Aalbers
    • 1
  • Bastiaan Klaasse
    • 2
  1. 1.Department for Business AdministrationRadboud UniversityNijmegenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Centre for Organization Restructuring, Nijmegen School of ManagementRadboud UniversityNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations