Internal networking and innovation ambidexterity: The mediating role of knowledge management processes in university research

Abstract This article focuses on public organizations to contribute to research on knowledge management processes, a field that until recently has focused primarily on private entities. Specifically, we analyse the mediating role of knowledge transfer and knowledge absorption in the relationship between the internal networking created in university research groups and innovation ambidexterity. Based on six hypotheses, the conceptual model is tested through a structural equations model with mediation effects. The data analysed come from 249 directors of Spanish public university research groups. The results show that the internal networking formed in university research groups has a positive and significant relationship to knowledge transfer and knowledge absorption, but we obtain different results for the relationship between knowledge transfer and knowledge absorption in the presence of innovation ambidexterity. Only knowledge absorption has a positive and significant influence on innovation ambidexterity. The most interesting results involve the mediating role of knowledge absorption in the relationship between internal networking and innovation ambidexterity. These results support the conclusion that directors of university research groups should promote development of knowledge absorption processes in order to stimulate innovation ambidexterity and thus to achieve ambidextrous innovative performance.

[1]  Andrew F. Hayes,et al.  Contemporary approaches to assessing mediation in communication research. , 2008 .

[2]  Ellen Enkel,et al.  Exploratory and exploitative innovation: To what extent do the dimensions of individual level absorptive capacity contribute? , 2017 .

[3]  Jeroen Kraaijenbrink,et al.  The team absorptive capacity triad: a configurational study of individual, enabling, and motivating factors , 2016, J. Knowl. Manag..

[4]  M. Fritsch,et al.  The impact of network structure on knowledge transfer: an application of social network analysis in the context of regional innovation networks , 2010 .

[5]  Stephen Roper,et al.  Absorptive Capacity and Ambidexterity in R&D: Linking Technology Alliance Diversity and Firm Innovation , 2016 .

[6]  Jaehoon Rhee,et al.  Drivers of innovativeness and performance for innovative SMEs in South Korea: Mediation of learning orientation , 2010 .

[7]  Rodney McAdam,et al.  A comparison of public and private sector perceptions and use of knowledge management , 2000 .

[8]  Ann Majchrzak,et al.  Transcending Knowledge Differences in Cross-Functional Teams , 2012, Organ. Sci..

[9]  Nieves L. Diaz-Diaz,et al.  Social capital and knowledge sharing in academic research teams , 2019 .

[10]  G. Coenders,et al.  Innovation activities, use of appropriation instruments and absorptive capacity: Evidence from Spanish firms , 2007 .

[11]  Raffaella Manzini,et al.  Innovation ambidexterity of open firms. The role of internal relational social capital , 2017, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[12]  Vesa Peltokorpi.  Transactive Memory System Coordination Mechanisms in Organizations , 2014 .

[13]  Kathleen M. Eisenhardt,et al.  DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES, WHAT ARE THEY? , 2000 .

[14]  Sebastian Heil,et al.  Preparing for distant collaboration: Antecedents to potential absorptive capacity in cross-industry innovation , 2014 .

[15]  R. P. Mohanty,et al.  Leading indicators of innovation as a competence for individuals: an empirical study , 2011 .

[16]  Marc Ringel,et al.  Knowledge management in international organisations , 2010, J. Knowl. Manag..

[17]  A. Narayanan.  A Review of Eight Software Packages for Structural Equation Modeling , 2012 .

[18]  Hsing-Er Lin,et al.  Investigating the Role of Leadership and Organizational Culture in Fostering Innovation Ambidexterity , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[19]  Ganesh D. Bhatt,et al.  Knowledge management in organizations: examining the interaction between technologies, techniques, and people , 2001, J. Knowl. Manag..

[20]  Jeffrey H. Dyer,et al.  Relation‐specific capabilities and barriers to knowledge transfers: creating advantage through network relationships , 2006 .

[21]  Oscar F. Bustinza,et al.  Explaining the Causes and Effects of Dynamic Capabilities Generation: A Multiple‐Indicator Multiple‐Cause Modelling Approach , 2013 .

[22]  F. Lissoni,et al.  Career progress in centralized academic systems: Social capital and institutions in France and Italy , 2012 .

[23]  B. Tabachnick,et al.  Using Multivariate Statistics , 1983 .

[24]  Rafael E. Landaeta,et al.  Exploring the relationships between emotional intelligence and the use of knowledge transfer methods in the project environment , 2009 .

[25]  Daniel Jiménez-Jiménez,et al.  An Integrative View of Knowledge Processes and a Learning Culture for Ambidexterity: Toward Improved Organizational Performance in the Banking Sector , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[26]  Adam Worrall,et al.  Author Team Diversity and the Impact of Scientific Publications , 2012 .

[27]  Paul Ihuoma Oluikpe,et al.  Developing a Corporate Knowledge Management Strategy , 2012, J. Knowl. Manag..

[28]  Indre Maurer,et al.  Connections count: How relational embeddedness and relational empowerment foster absorptive capacity , 2014 .

[29]  Brendan Galbraith,et al.  An Exploratory Study of Principal Investigator Roles in UK University Proof-of-Concept Processes: An Absorptive Capacity Perspective , 2010 .

[30]  Roberto Filippini,et al.  Ambidextrous organisation and knowledge exploration and exploitation: the mediating role of internal networking , 2017 .

[31]  Sebastian Gurtner,et al.  Ambidextrous Idea Generation—Antecedents and Outcomes* , 2016 .

[32]  Julian Birkinshaw,et al.  Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance , 2009, Organ. Sci..

[33]  Elkin Olaguer Pérez Sánchez,et al.  Measurement of potential absorption capacity in Colombia's innovative companies , 2017 .

[34]  L. Argote,et al.  KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER: A BASIS FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE IN FIRMS , 2000 .

[35]  Michael Frese,et al.  Creativity in the opportunity identification process and the moderating effect of diversity of information , 2012 .

[36]  D. C. Pullés,et al.  Network ties and transactive memory systems: leadership as an enabler , 2017 .

[37]  Zhiying Liu,et al.  Is distributed leadership a driving factor of innovation ambidexterity? An empirical study with mediating and moderating effects , 2018 .

[38]  A. Sengupta,et al.  University Research and Knowledge Transfer: A Dynamic View of Ambidexterity in British Universities , 2017 .

[39]  J. Brix.  Innovation capacity building , 2019, The Learning Organization.

[40]  H. Zacher,et al.  Ambidextrous leadership and team innovation , 2015 .

[41]  Pankaj C. Patel,et al.  How Do Young Firms Manage Product Portfolio Complexity? The Role of Absorptive Capacity and Ambidexterity , 2012 .

[42]  Boris Durisin,et al.  Absorptive capacity: Valuing a reconceptualization , 2007 .

[43]  Robert W. Zmud,et al.  Behavioral Intention Formation in Knowledge Sharing: Examining the Roles of Extrinsic Motivators, Social-Psychological Factors, and Organizational Climate , 2005, MIS Q..

[44]  Fariborz Damanpour,et al.  The Application of External Knowledge: Organizational Conditions for Exploration and Exploitation , 2009 .

[45]  T. Swift.  The perilous leap between exploration and exploitation , 2016 .

[46]  J. Johanson,et al.  Work-team bonding and bridging social networks, team identity and performance effectiveness , 2014 .

[47]  Jiancheng Guan,et al.  Factors influencing knowledge productivity in German research groups: lessons for developing countries , 2006, J. Knowl. Manag..

[48]  N. Contractor,et al.  The Effects of Diversity and Network Ties on Innovations , 2015, The American behavioral scientist.

[49]  Dmitry Zhukov,et al.  How to measure trust: the percolation model applied to intra-organisational knowledge sharing networks , 2016, J. Knowl. Manag..

[50]  J. Ferreira,et al.  Absorptive capacity and organizational mechanisms , 2019, Review of International Business and Strategy.

[51]  Manuel Fernández-Esquinas,et al.  Measuring university–industry collaboration in a regional innovation system , 2010, Scientometrics.

[52]  U. Wehn,et al.  Knowledge transfer dynamics and innovation: Behaviour, interactions and aggregated outcomes , 2016 .

[53]  Sandeep Chalasani,et al.  On the Value of a Social Network , 2008, ArXiv.

[54]  L. G. Pee,et al.  Intrinsically motivating employees' online knowledge sharing: Understanding the effects of job design , 2015, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[55]  Claudia N. González-Brambila.  Social capital in academia , 2014, Scientometrics.

[56]  K. D. Joshi,et al.  An investigation of factors that influence the management of knowledge in organizations , 2000, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[57]  Justin J. P. Jansen,et al.  Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Ambidexterity: The Impact of Environmental and Organizational Antecedents , 2005 .

[58]  H. Greve,et al.  Superman or the Fantastic Four? Knowledge Combination and Experience in Innovative Teams , 2006 .

[59]  S. Fang,et al.  A critical view of knowledge networks and innovation performance: The mediation role of firms' knowledge integration capability , 2018, Journal of Business Research.

[60]  Shiu-Wan Hung,et al.  To give or to receive? Factors influencing members' knowledge sharing and community promotion in professional virtual communities , 2010, Inf. Manag..

[61]  David Byrne,et al.  Complexity Theory and the Social Sciences : An Introduction , 2002 .

[62]  Sanjay Kumar Singh,et al.  Employee perception of impact of knowledge management processes on public sector performance , 2019, J. Knowl. Manag..

[63]  James C. Ryan.  An Empirical Examination of the Relationship between Scientists' Work Environment and Research Performance , 2007 .

[64]  Daniel H. Kim.  The Link between individual and organizational learning , 1997 .

[65]  Qing Cao,et al.  Unpacking Organizational Ambidexterity: Dimensions, Contingencies, and Synergistic Effects , 2009, Organ. Sci..

[66]  Jonathon N. Cummings,et al.  Tie and Network Correlates of Individual Performance in Knowledge-Intensive Work , 2004 .

[67]  G. Farris,et al.  Knowledge Management in Research and Development , 2001 .

[68]  Ingrid M. Nembhard,et al.  Product Development and Learning in Project Teams: The Challenges Are the Benefits* , 2009 .

[69]  Letycja Sołoducho-Pelc,et al.  The Impact of Trust on the Approach to Management—A Case Study of Creative Industries , 2019, Sustainability.

[70]  Mike Thelwall,et al.  Which are the best innovation support infrastructures for universities? Evidence from R&D output and commercial activities , 2014, Scientometrics.

[71]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[72]  O. Sorenson,et al.  Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data , 2001 .

[73]  R. Johnston.  Effects of resource concentration on research performance , 1994 .

[74]  Adam Worrall,et al.  Composition of scientific teams and publication productivity at a national science lab , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[75]  A. Petruzzelli,et al.  When does centrality matter? Scientific productivity and the moderating role of research specialization and cross‐community ties , 2013 .

[76]  Mohammad Safari Kahreh,et al.  A Survey of Critical Success Factors for Strategic Knowledge Management Implementation: Applications for Service Sector☆ , 2014 .

[77]  S. Zahra,et al.  Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension , 2002 .

[78]  Balaji R. Koka,et al.  The Reification of Absorptive Capacity: A Critical Review and Rejuvenation of the Construct , 2006 .

[79]  D. Teece,et al.  The Dynamic Capabilities of Firms: an Introduction , 1994 .

[80]  J. Mitchell.  2 Networks, norms and institutions , 1973 .

[81]  I. Nonaka,et al.  How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation , 1995 .

[82]  Tom J. M. Mom,et al.  Investigating Managers' Exploration and Exploitation Activities: The Influence of Top-Down, Bottom-Up, and Horizontal Knowledge Inflows , 2006 .

[83]  S. Mulaik,et al.  EVALUATION OF GOODNESS-OF-FIT INDICES FOR STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELS , 1989 .

[84]  Kyle Lewis,et al.  Transactive Memory Systems, Learning, and Learning Transfer , 2005, Organ. Sci..

[85]  Zi-Lin He,et al.  Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[86]  Andrew Pettigrew,et al.  The determinants of research group performance: Towards Mode 2? , 2002 .

[87]  Leopoldo J. Gutierrez Gutierrez,et al.  Transactive memory system and TQM: exploring knowledge capacities , 2013, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[88]  Edward W. N. Bernroider,et al.  The roles of absorptive capacity and cultural balance for exploratory and exploitative innovation in SMEs , 2017, Journal of Business Research.

[89]  Adela García-Aracil,et al.  Analysis of the evaluation process of the research performance: An empirical case , 2006, Scientometrics.

[90]  Mary Tripsas,et al.  Thinking About Technology: Applying a Cognitive Lens to Technical Change , 2008 .

[91]  Zeki Simsek,et al.  Distributed Cognition in Top Management Teams and Organizational Ambidexterity , 2017 .

[92]  Rodolfo Baggio,et al.  Knowledge transfer in a tourism destination: the effects of a network structure , 2009, 0905.2734.

[93]  Anne O'Brien,et al.  Predicting transactive memory systems in multidisciplinary teams : The interplay between team and professional identities , 2015 .

[94]  Wei-Li Wu,et al.  How to make a knowledge-sharing group: a group social capital perspective , 2016 .

[95]  Do Han Kim,et al.  How Do Scientists Respond to Performance-Based Incentives? Evidence From South Korea , 2016 .

[96]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing , 2002, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[97]  R. Keller,et al.  The Impact of Team‐Member Exchange, Differentiation, Team Commitment, and Knowledge Sharing on R&D Project Team Performance , 2011 .

[98]  Edward F. McDonough,et al.  Managing the Exploitation/Exploration Paradox: The Role of a Learning Capability and Innovation Ambidexterity , 2013 .

[99]  Nieves L. Diaz-Diaz,et al.  How Diversity Contributes to Academic Research Teams Performance , 2017 .

[100]  Henk W. Volberda,et al.  Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation and Peformance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[101]  M. Hughes,et al.  Drivers of innovation ambidexterity in small- to medium-sized firms , 2012 .

[102]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[103]  C. Sáez,et al.  Collaboration in R&D with universities and research centres: an empirical study of Spanish firms , 2002 .

[104]  Teresa L. Ju,et al.  A contingency model for knowledge management capability and innovation , 2006, Ind. Manag. Data Syst..

[105]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error , 1981 .

[106]  Miguel Hernández-Espallardo,et al.  Performance implications of organizational ambidexterity versus specialization in exploitation or exploration: The role of absorptive capacity , 2018, Journal of Business Research.

[107]  B. Kogut,et al.  Exploring internal stickiness : Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm , 2007 .

[108]  W. Powell.  Learning from Collaboration: Knowledge and Networks in the Biotechnology and Pharmaceutical Industries , 1998 .

[109]  Wendy K. Smith,et al.  Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams , 2005 .

[110]  F. Lloréns-Montes,et al.  Drivers for Performance in Innovative Research Groups: The Mediating Role of Transactive Memory System , 2018, BRQ Business Research Quarterly.

[111]  Eric T. G. Wang,et al.  Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories , 2006, Decis. Support Syst..

[112]  M. Tushman,et al.  Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future , 2013 .

[113]  Alvaro López-Cabrales,et al.  Leveraging the innovative performance of human capital through HRM and social capital in Spanish firms , 2011 .