The authors' research introduces a culture-sensitive approach to the analysis of knowledge transfer in multinational organizations. This article investigates the knowledge itself, how knowledge is represented, and its flow within social structures. The analysis considers forms of knowledge transfer as cultural products, and their interaction with the populations involved. Sociocultural structures as well as specific cultural characteristics of the populations are analyzed in reference to knowledge transfer as well as the interaction between the relevant contexts. Data were collected in two multinational Israeli software development companies and their affiliates in India. The analyses included various qualitative analyses of 96 interviews, informal discussions, documents, including instant messaging chats and observations. The authors show, for example, how the influences of contemporary professional work norms as well as customary behavior from the national context combine to influence who talks to whom, what kind of information is transferred, and the extent to which people of disparate status and background are willing to share.
Ackoff, R.L. (1989). From data to wisdom. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 16, 3-9.
2.
Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 82(1), 150-169.
3.
Balsmeier, P., & Nagar, S. (2002). Implementing ERP in India-Issues and problems . Journal of Transnational Management Development, 7, 3-12.
4.
Barth, F. (2002). An anthropology of knowledge. Current Anthropology, 43(1), 1-11.
5.
Baskerville, R.F. (2003). Hofstede never studied culture. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28, 1-14.
6.
Baskerville-Morley, R. (2005). A research note: The unfinished business of culture . Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30, 389-391.
7.
Bhagat, R.S., Kedia, B., Harveston, P.A., & Triandis, H. (2002). Cultural variations in the cross-border transfer of organizational knowledge: An integrative framework. Academy of Management Review, 27, 204-221.
8.
Blum-Kulka, S., Danet, D., & Gherson, R. (1985). The language of requesting in Israeli society . In J. Forgas (Ed.), Language and social situations (pp. 113-139). New York: Springer-Verlag.
9.
Boland, R.J., Jr, Tenkasi, R.V., & Te'eni, D. (1994). Designing information technology to support distributed cognition. Organization Science, 5, 456-477.
10.
Bresman, H., Birkinshaw, J., & Nobel, R. (1999). Knowledge transfer in international acquisitions . Journal of International Business Studies, 30(3), 439-462.
11.
Brown, J.S., & Duguid, P. (1991). Organizational learning and communities of practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science, 2, 40-57.
12.
Buckley, P., Carter, M., Clegg, J., & Tan, H. (2005). Language and social knowledge in foreign-knowledge transfer to China. International Studies of Management and Organization, 35(1), 47-65.
13.
Carmeli, A. (2008). Top management team behavioral integration and the performance of service organizations. Group & Organization Management, 33, 712-735.
14.
Cohen, W.M., & Levinthal, D.A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administration Science Quarterly, 35, 128-152.
15.
Collins, H.M. (1990). Artificial experts: Social knowledge and intelligent machines. London: MIT Press.
16.
Davenport, T., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
17.
Davis, D.K. (2005). Indigenous knowledge and the desertification debate: Problematising expert knowledge in North Africa. Geoforum , 36, 509-524.
18.
De Long, D.W., & Fahey, L. (2000). Diagnosing cultural barriers to knowledge management . Academy of Management Executive, 14, 113-127.
19.
Dilley, R. (1999). Introduction: The problem of context. In R. Dilley (Ed.), The problem of context (pp. 1-46). New York: Berghan Books.
20.
Drucker, P.F. (1993). Post-capitalist society. New York: HarperCollins.
21.
Earley, C.P. (2006). Leading cultural research in the future: A matter of paradigms and taste. Journal of International Business Studies, 37, 922-931.
22.
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis. London: Longman.
23.
Foss, N., & Pedersen, T. (2002). Transferring knowledge in MNCs: The role of sources of subsidiary knowledge and organizational context. Journal of International Management, 8, 49-67.
24.
Fraser, J., & Lepofsky, J. (2004). The use of knowledge in neighborhood revitalization . Community Development Journal, 39, 4-12.
25.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. Selected essays . New York: Basic Books.
26.
Ghauri, P. (2004). Designing and conducting case studies in international business research. In R. Marschan-Piekkari & C. Welch (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for international business (pp. 109-124). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
27.
Grant, R. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 109-122.
28.
Gueorguieva, V. (2003). Les deux faces du sens commun [The two faces of common sense]. Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology , 40, 3.
29.
Gupta, A.K., & Govindarajan, V. (2000). Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 473-496.
30.
Hansen, M.T. (1999, March-April). The search transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organisational sub-units. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82-111.
31.
Helbig, H. (2006). Knowledge representation and the semantics of natural language. Berlin: Springer .
32.
Hickson, D.J., & Pugh, D.S. (1995). Management worldwide: The impact of societal culture on organizations around the Globe. London: Penguin.
33.
Hodson, R., & Parker, R.E. (1988). Work in high-technology settings: A review of the empirical literature. In R. Simpson & I. Simpson (Eds.), Research in the sociology of work (Vol. 4, pp. 1-29). London : JAI.
34.
Hoecklin, L. (1995). Managing cultural differences: Strategies for competitive advantage. New York: Addison-Wesley.
35.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
36.
Hofstede, G. (2003). What is culture? A reply to Baskerville. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28, 811-813.
37.
Hofstede, G. (2006). What did GLOBE really measure? Researchers' minds versus respondents' minds. Journal of International Business Studies, 37, 882-896.
38.
Katriel, T. (1986). Talking straight: "Dugri" speech in Israeli Sabra culture. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
39.
Kunda, G. (1992). Engineering culture, control and commitment in a high-tech corporation. Philadelphia: Temple University.
40.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
41.
Levinthal, D.A., & March, J.G. (1993). The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 95-112.
42.
Mar, B.W., Newell, W.T., & Saxberg, B.O. (1985). The nature of high technology: Editorial perspective . In B. W. Mar, W. T. Newell, & B. O. Saxberg (Eds.), Managing high technology: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 3-16). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
43.
Mehrotra, R.R. (1982). Indian English: A sociolinguistic profile. In J. Pride (Ed.), New Englishes (pp. 151-173). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
44.
Mehrotra, R.R. (1995). How to be polite in Indian English. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 116, 99-110.
45.
Meshulam, I. (1994). The impact of American management culture on Israeli firms. In A. Shenhar & A. Yarkoni (Eds.), Israeli management culture (pp. 213-24). Tel Aviv, Israel: Gome.
46.
Mudambi, R. (2002). Knowledge management in multinational firms. Journal of International Management, 8, 1-9.
47.
Nelson, R., & Winter, S. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.
48.
Orlikowski, W.J., & Gash, D.C. (1994). Technological frames: Making sense of information technology in organizations. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 12, 174-204.
49.
Phene, A., & Almeida, P. (2008). Innovation in multinational subsidiaries: The role of knowledge assimilation and subsidiary capabilities. Journal of International Business Studies, 39, 901-919.
50.
Polani, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. London : Routledge Kegan Paul.
51.
Prasad P. (2005). Crafting qualitative research: Working in the postpositivist traditions. New York: Sharpe.
52.
Randel, A.E. (2007). Motivations to maintain social ties with coworkers: The moderating role of turnover intentions on information exchange. Group & Organization Management, 32, 208-232.
53.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2003). Research methods for business students. London: Prentice Hall.
54.
Schein, E.H. (1997). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
55.
Scollon, R., & Scollon, S.W. (1995). Intercultural communication: A discourse approach . Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
56.
Scooners, D. (2003). Network of knowledge: How farmers and scientists understand soils and their fertility. A case study from Ethiopia. Oxford Development Studies, 31, 461-478.
57.
Shamir, B., & Melnik, Y. (2002). Boundary permeability as a cultural dimension, a study of cross cultural working relations between American and Israelis in high-tech organizations. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 2, 219-238.
58.
Simon, H.A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69, 99-118.
59.
Spender, J.C. (1996). Organizational knowledge, learning and memory: Three concepts in search of theory. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 9(1), 34-39.
60.
Spradley, J.P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
61.
Swan, J., Newell, S., Scarbrough, H., & Hislop, D. (1999). Knowledge management and innovation: Networks and networking. Journal of Knowledge Management, 3, 262-275.
62.
Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firms. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 27-43.
63.
Szulanski, G. (2003). Sticky knowledge: Barriers to knowing in the firm . London: Sage.
64.
Tyran, K.L., & Gibson, C.B. (2008). Is what you see, what you get? The relationship among surface and deep level heterogeneity characteristics, group efficacy, and team reputation. Group & Organization Management, 33, 77-106.
65.
Van Dijk, T.A. (1997). The study of discourse. In Van Dijk T. (Ed.), Discourse as Structure and Process (pp 1-34) . London: Sage, London.
66.
Van Maanen, J., & Barley, S.R. (1984). Occupational communities: Culture and control in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 287-365.
67.
Varner, I.I. (1988). A comparison of American and French business correspondence . Journal of Business Communication, 25, 55-65.
68.
Von Krogh, G., Ichijo, K., & Nonaka, I. (2000). Enabling knowledge creation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
69.
Yanow, D. (2004). Translating local knowledge at organizational peripheries. British Journal of Management, 15, 1-19.
70.
Yayavaram, S., & Ahuja, G. (2008). Decomposability in knowledge structures and its impact on the usefulness of inventions and knowledge-base malleability. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53(2), 333-362.
71.
Yin, R.K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
72.
Zaidman, N. (2001). Cultural codes and language strategies in business communication interactions between Israeli and Indian businesspeople. Management Communication Quarterly, 14, 408-441.
