Achieving and Sustaining New Knowledge Development in High-Expectation Start-ups

Abstract

In markets characterized by strong competition, new knowledge and new knowledge development are generally recognized as the key means for an enterprise to gain competitive advantage. This knowledge-based competitive advantage is critical for all commercial ventures, but is especially so for high-expectation start-ups (technology-based ventures anticipating high growth rates). Even though the organizational processes of a start-up are still under development, the success of new knowledge development is affected by three critical factors – the structure of the enterprise, the organizational technology and the knowledge promoters. An analysis of these factors suggests that the role of the knowledge promoter is the key determinant of knowledge development success in the case of early-stage high-expectation start-ups.

Keywords

new knowledge development knowledge factors start-up knowledge transfer

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Andersson

Curley

Formica

(2009), Knowledge-Driven Entrepreneurship: The Key to Social and Economic Transformation, Springer, New York and Berlin.

Argote

Ingram

(2000), ‘Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms’, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol 82, No 1, pp 150–169.

Barney

(1991), ‘Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage’, Journal of Management, Vol 17, No 1, pp 99–120.

Barricelli

Russo

(2005), Think Micro First. La microimpresa di fronte alla sfida del terzo millennio, Franco Angeli, Milan.

Bogner

Bansal

(2007), ‘Knowledge management as the basis of sustained high performance’, Journal of Management Studies, Vol 44, No 1, pp 165–188.

Burgess

(2005), ‘What motivates employees to transfer knowledge outside their work unit?’, Journal of Business Communication, Vol 42, No 4, pp 324–348.

Cabrera

E.F.

(2002), ‘Knowledge-sharing dilemmas’, Organization Studies, Vol 23, No 5, pp 687–710.

Carayannis

E.G.

Formica

(2008), Knowledge Matters: Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Innovation Networks and Knowledge Clusters, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.

Carter

N.M.

Gartner

W.B.

Shaver

K.G.

Gatewood

E.J.

(2003), ‘The career reasons of nascent entrepreneurs’, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol 18, No 1, pp 13–39.

10.

Conner

K.R.

Prahalad

C.K.

(1996), ‘A resource-base theory of the firm: Knowledge versus opportunism’, Organization Science, Vol 7, No 5, pp 477–501.

11.

Cranefield

Yoong

(2007), ‘The role of the translator/interpreter in knowledge transfer environments’, Knowledge and Process Management, Vol 14, No 2, pp 95–103.

12.

Curley

Formica

(2008), ‘Laboratory experiments as a tool in the empirical economic analysis of high-expectation entrepreneurship’, Industry and Higher Education, Vol 22, No 6, pp 355–363.

13.

Del Giudice

(2008), L'Impresa Pensante, Giappichelli, Torino.

14.

Delmar

Davidsson

(2000), ‘Where do they come from? Prevalence and characteristics of nascent entrepreneurs’, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, Vol 12, No 1, pp 1–23.

15.

Dyer

J.H.

Nobeoka

(2000), ‘Creating and managing a high-performance knowledge-sharing network: The Toyota case’, Strategic Management Journal, Vol 21, No 3, pp 345–367.

16.

Grant

R.M.

(1996), ‘Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm’, Strategic Management Journal, Vol 17, Winter Special Issue, pp 109–122.

17.

Grant

R.M.

(1998), Contemporary Strategy Analysis, Blackwell, Malden, MA.

18.

Gurtner

Dorner

(2009), ‘From roles to skills – key persons in the innovation process’, International Journal of Technology Marketing, Vol 4, No 2–3, pp 185–198.

19.

Hauschildt

Schewe

(2000), ‘Gatekeeper and process promoter: Key persons in agile and innovative organizations’, International Journal of Agile Management, Vol 2, No 2, pp 96–103.

20.

Holden

N.J.

Von Kortzfleisch

H.F.O.

(2004), ‘Why cross-cultural knowledge transfer is a form of translation in more ways than you think’, Knowledge and Process Management, Vol 11, No 2, pp 127–136.

21.

Huysman

de Wit

(2003), ‘A critical evaluation of knowledge management practices’, in Ackerman

M.S.

Pipek

Wulf

, eds, Sharing Expertise: Beyond Knowledge Management, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

22.

Kogut

Zander

(1992), ‘Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities and the replication of technology’, Organization Science, Vol 3, No 3, pp 383–397.

23.

Lei

Hitt

M.A.

Bettis

(1996), ‘Dynamic core competences through meta-learning and strategic context’, Journal of Management, Vol 22, No 4, pp 549–569.

24.

Likert

(1961), New Patterns of Management, McGraw-Hill, New York.

25.

Matricano

(2009), ‘What's new in the launching of start-ups? Features and implications of laboratory experiments’, Industry and Higher Education, Vol 23, No 2, pp 133–137.

26.

Nahapiet

Goshal

(1998), ‘Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage’, Academy of Management Review, Vol 23, No 2, pp 242–266.

27.

Nonaka

(1991), ‘The knowledge creating company’, Harvard Business Review, November–December, pp 162–171.

28.

Nonaka

Takeuchi

(1995), The Knowledge Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

29.

Osterloh

Frey

B.J.

(2000), ‘Motivation, knowledge transfer, and organizational forms’, Organization Science, Vol 11, No 5, pp 538–550.

30.

Porter

(1985), Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, Free Press, New York.

31.

Sanchez

Mahoney

(1996), ‘Modularity, flexibility and knowledge management in product and organization design’, Strategic Management Journal, Vol 17, Winter Special Issue, pp 107–128.

32.

Schilling

M.A.

(2000), ‘Towards a general modular system theory and its application to interfirm product modularity’, Academy of Management Review, Vol 25, No 2, pp 312–334.

33.

Schilling

M.A.

(2002), ‘Technology success and failure in winner-take-all markets: Testing a model of technological lock-out’, Academy of Management Review, Vol 45, No 2, pp 387–398.

34.

Siggelkow

Levinthal

(2003), ‘Temporarily divide to conquer: Centralized, decentralized, and reintegrated organizational approaches to exploration and adaptation’, Organization Science, Vol 14, No 6, pp 650–659.

35.

Simon

H.A.

(1991), ‘Bounded rationality and organizational learning’, Organization Science, Vol 2, No 1, pp 125–134.

36.

Sorrentino

(2003), Le Nuove Imprese. Economia delle Nuove Iniziative Imprenditoriali, CEDAM, Padova.

37.

Spender

J.C.

(1996), ‘Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm’, Strategic Management Journal, Vol 17, Winter Special Issue, pp 45–62.

38.

Szulanski

(1996), ‘Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm’, Strategic Management Journal, Vol 17, Winter Special Issue, pp 27–43.

39.

Szulanski

(2000), ‘The process of knowledge transfer: A diachronic analysis of stickiness’, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol 82, No 1, pp 9–27.

40.

Teece

(1987), The Competitive Challenge: Strategies for Industrial Innovation and Renewal, Ballinger, Cambridge, MA.

41.

Von Zedtwitz

(2003), ‘A four-layer model for studying organizational structure’, Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, Seattle, WA, pp 4–6.

42.

Zenger

T.H.

Hesterly

W.S.

(1997), ‘The disaggregation of corporations: Selective intervention, high-powered incentive, and molecular units’, Organization Science, Vol 8, No 3, pp 209–223.