Framing and Interorganizational Knowledge Transfer: A Process Study of Collaborative Innovation in the Aircraft Industry

• Author: Erik M. Raaij,Hans Berends,Elco Burg
• Date: 01 May 2014
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12055
• Published date: 01 May 2014

Framing and Interorganizational Knowledge Transfer:

A Process Study of Collaborative Innovation in the

Aircraft Industry

Elco van Burg, Hans Berends and Erik M. van Raaij

VU University Amsterdam; VU University Amsterdam; RSM Erasmus University

ABSTRACT This article explains how and why organizational actors’ decisions about

interorganizational knowledge transfer might change over time. We find that organizational

actors’ framing of future innovation developments, as either an opportunity or a threat,

motivates them to engage or disengage in interorganizational knowledge transfer activities.

Shifts in framing lead organizational actors to leverage their relational context and knowledge

base in new ways, thereby emphasizing the role of agency in drawing upon these structures.

These findings are incorporated into a process model that explains discontinuous change in

interorganizational knowledge transfer.

Keywords: framing, innovation, interorganizational knowledge transfer, process

INTRODUCTION

When organizational actors share and trade knowledge in interorganizational collabo-

rations, they do so because of the benefits of knowledge transfer, such as enhanced

innovativeness (Powell et al., 1996; Van Wijk et al., 2008). But we also know that actors

prevent or reduce knowledge transfer to avoid spillovers of critical know-how (Khanna

et al., 1998; Norman, 2004). A theory of interorganizational knowledge transfer there-

fore needs to explain both decisions of organizations to initiate or intensify as well as

decisions to reduce or terminate knowledge transfer. However, currently we lack proper

understanding of how these decisions can change over time.

In this paper, we develop such an explanation of the dynamics of interorganizational

knowledge transfer over time. Most research into interorganizational knowledge transfer

uses cross-sectional methods to explain the amount of knowledge transfer in a given

partnership (Meier, 2011; Parmigiani and Rivera-Santos, 2011; Van Wijk et al., 2008).

Thus, existing explanations focus mainly on the characteristics of the organizational

Address for reprints: Elco van Burg, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, VU University

Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands ( j.c.van.burg@vu.nl).

bs_bs_banner

© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and Society for the Advancement of Management Studies

Journal of Management Studies 51:3 May 2014

doi: 10.1111/joms.12055

actors engaged in knowledge transfer (e.g., willingness to share, absorptive capacity), the

nature of their relationships (e.g., relationship quality, governance mechanisms), and the

knowledge involved (e.g., tacitness) (Easterby-Smith et al., 2008; Meier, 2011). Yet, these

cross-sectional studies have not traced or explained decisions of organizations to initiate,

intensify, reduce, or terminate knowledge transfer. Understanding such changes over

time is important, especially in the protracted and emergent journey of an innovation

process (Van de Ven et al., 1999), involving multitudinous decisions on knowledge

transfer. Therefore, we address the following research question: How and why do

organizational actors’ decisions about interorganizational knowledge transfer change over time?

To address this question, we undertook a longitudinal study of the development of a

new class of aircraft materials, fibre metal laminates (FML), whose development spanned

more than two decades of knowledge transfer interactions, involving more than 20

organizations. Using a process study (Langley, 1999; Van de Ven, 2007), we investigate

patterns in knowledge transfer over time. The analyses show that decisions to initiate,

intensify, reduce, or terminate knowledge transfer often depend on the framing of future

innovation developments, whether as opportunity or threat. Therefore, we invoke cog-

nitive framing theory to explain actions on the basis of the way managers and organi-

zations make sense of their environment (Dutton and Jackson, 1987; Kaplan, 2011).

In turn, our findings contribute to current theory on knowledge transfer and

cognitive framing in three ways. First, we explain how discontinuous changes in

interorganizational knowledge transfer (i.e., initiating, intensifying, reducing, or termi-

nating knowledge sharing) are shaped by the actors’ future-oriented framing of the

innovation. These frames are both long-term oriented and variable, such that changes in

their framing motivate actors to adjust their interorganizational knowledge transfer

activities. Second, the shifts in framing also lead organizational actors to leverage their

relational context and knowledge base in new ways, thus emphasizing the role of agency

instead of knowledge transfer solely determined by these antecedents. Accordingly, we

clarify the dynamics of interorganizational knowledge transfer by explaining why and

when organizational actors might decide to initiate, intensify, reduce, or terminate their

knowledge transfer interactions with existing and new partners. Third, our findings

extend cognitive framing theory by demonstrating the influence of not only threat and

opportunity frames on decision-making, but also that of unframing opportunities.

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Firms need interorganizational connections to gain access to complementary knowledge

resources. Both vertical (buyers and suppliers) and horizontal (competitors or other

partners) collaborations are valuable: customers can help define market needs (Von

Hippel, 1986), suppliers provide long-term access to specialized and complementary

assets (Lipparini et al., in press; Van Echtelt et al., 2008), and competitors offer oppor-

tunities to learn new skills and access to needed assets (Ahuja, 2000; Mowery et al., 1996).

We thus define interorganizational knowledge transfer broadly, as the process by which

organizations exchange knowledge, receive knowledge, and are influenced by the knowl-

edge of others (Easterby-Smith et al., 2008; Phelps et al., 2012; Van Wijk et al., 2008).

E. van Burg et al.350

© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and Society for the Advancement of Management Studies