How MNC's subsidiaries may improve their innovative performance? The role of external sources and knowledge management capabilities

Purpose This paper aims at exploring the effect of knowledge management (KM) practices on the relationship between external research and development (R&D) and innovative performance. The authors argue that the firms which develop and possess superior KM capabilities have the ability to better manage external knowledge and combine it with the internal one. Design/methodology/approach The authors used a sample of 117 European MNC subsidiaries. An OLS regression analysis was carried out to evaluate the moderator effect of KM on the relationship between external R&D and innovative performance. Findings The authors found positive evidences in favor of a moderator effect of KM. This means that subsidiaries with superior KM capabilities are more effective in using external R&D, augmenting the magnitude of their external sources of knowledge and, consequently, improving their innovative performance. Practical implications Managerially speaking, both corporate and subsidiaries’ managers need to understand the relevance of managing knowledge effectively and efficiently at the subsidiary level. Corporate managers need to allocate more resources (both financial and managerial) to the subsidiaries that are active in knowledge transfer and sharing, while subsidiaries managers need to implement practically the KM tools and processes at the subsidiary organizational level to improve subsidiary’s innovative performance. Originality/value This paper contributes mainly to the KM field, highlighting the importance of KM at the subsidiary level, whereas most of previous studies focus on different units of analysis.

[1]  BENEFITING FROM MARKETS FOR IDEAS — AN INVESTIGATION ACROSS DIFFERENT TYPOLOGIES , 2013 .

[2]  D. Aloini,et al.  Technological strategy, open innovation and innovation performance: evidences on the basis of a structural-equation-model approach , 2015 .

[3]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[4]  Torben Pedersen,et al.  The impact of knowledge management on MNC subsidiary performance: the role of absorptive capacity , 2005 .

[5]  Darrell Rigby,et al.  Open-market innovation. , 2002, Harvard business review.

[6]  E. Carayannis,et al.  The Quadruple/Quintuple Innovation Helixes and Smart Specialisation Strategies for Sustainable and Inclusive Growth in Europe and Beyond , 2014 .

[7]  Elias G. Carayannis,et al.  Culture and Cooperative Strategies: Knowledge Management Perspectives , 2012 .

[8]  Henry Chesbrough,et al.  Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology , 2003 .

[9]  Roger J. Calantone,et al.  Drivers of Outsourced Innovation: An Exploratory Study* , 2007 .

[10]  Jeffrey H. Dyer,et al.  The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage , 1998 .

[11]  Ulf Andersson,et al.  Subsidiary importance in the MNC: What role does internal embeddedness play? , 2011 .

[12]  V. Albino,et al.  Search and Recombination Process to Innovate: A Review of the Empirical Evidence and a Research Agenda , 2017 .

[13]  Ji Li,et al.  Regional diversification and firm performance , 2008 .

[14]  D. Gann,et al.  How open is innovation , 2010 .

[15]  Morten T. Hansen,et al.  How to build collaborative advantage , 2004 .

[16]  A. Petruzzelli,et al.  Partner Geographic and Organizational Proximity and the Innovative Performance of Knowledge‐Creating Alliances , 2014 .

[17]  Jenny Darroch,et al.  Knowledge management, innovation and firm performance , 2005, J. Knowl. Manag..

[18]  Henrik Dellestrand.  Subsidiary embeddedness as a determinant of divisional headquarters involvement in innovation transfer processes , 2011 .

[19]  Dominik Walcher,et al.  Toolkits for Idea Competitions: A Novel Method to Integrate Users in New Product Development , 2006 .

[20]  A. Ferraris,et al.  Rethinking the literature on “multiple embeddedness” and subsidiary-specific advantages , 2014 .

[21]  A. Ferraris,et al.  Come dovrebbero essere sviluppati i progetti di social innovation nelle smart city? Un'analisi comparativa , 2014 .

[22]  I. Nonaka.  A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation , 1994 .

[23]  Vito Albino,et al.  From Technological Inventions to New Products: A Systematic Review and Research Agenda of the Main Enabling Factors , 2015 .

[24]  Alberto Ferraris,et al.  How SMEs Engage in Open Innovation: a Survey , 2018 .

[25]  Manlio Del Giudice,et al.  Managerial practices and operative directions of knowledge management within inter-firm networks: a global view , 2014, J. Knowl. Manag..

[26]  J. West,et al.  Leveraging External Sources of Innovation: A Review of Research on Open Innovation , 2013 .

[27]  Paloma Miravitlles,et al.  Knowledge sharing and subsidiary R&D mandate development: A matter of dual embeddedness , 2014 .

[28]  Stefano Bresciani,et al.  The Localization Choice of Multinational Firms’ R&D Centers: A Survey in the Piedmont Area , 2014 .

[29]  Rajneesh Narula,et al.  How do collaboration and investments in knowledge management affect process innovation in services? , 2016, J. Knowl. Manag..

[30]  Antonio Messeni Petruzzelli,et al.  Investigating the antecedents of general purpose technologies , 2016 .

[31]  A. Ferraris,et al.  Innovation-receiving subsidiaries and dual embeddedness: impact on business performance , 2016 .

[32]  T. Davenport,et al.  Toward an innovation sourcing strategy , 2003 .

[33]  Karl-Erik Sveiby.  The New Organizational Wealth: Managing and Measuring Knowledge-Based Assets , 1997 .

[34]  Bandar Muadzam Shah,et al.  KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND FIRM PERFORMANCE IN SMEs: THE ROLE OF SOCIAL CAPITAL AS A MEDIATING VARIABLE , 2010 .

[35]  S. West,et al.  Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. , 1994 .

[36]  D. Vrontis,et al.  Ambidexterity, external knowledge and performance in knowledge-intensive firms , 2017 .

[37]  Ammon Salter,et al.  The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms , 2004 .

[38]  E. B. Andersen,et al.  Modern factor analysis , 1961 .

[39]  H. Chesbrough,et al.  Open Innovation: A New Paradigm for Understanding Industrial Innovation , 2006 .

[40]  Michela Gallo,et al.  Waste management in Smart Cities: the application of circular economy in Genoa (Italy) , 2014 .

[41]  Francesco Ciabuschi,et al.  Internal Embeddedness, Headquarters Involvement, and Innovation Importance in Multinational Enterprises , 2011 .

[42]  Kenneth W. Koput,et al.  A Chaotic Model of Innovative Search: Some Answers, Many Questions , 1997 .

[43]  J. West,et al.  Open Innovation: The Next Decade , 2014 .

[44]  M. Bogers,et al.  Explicating Open Innovation: Clarifying an Emerging Paradigm for Understanding Innovation , 2014 .

[45]  John Cantwell,et al.  MNE competence‐creating subsidiary mandates , 2005 .

[46]  Patricia Deflorin,et al.  Benefits of internal manufacturing network integration : the moderating effect of country context , 2016 .

[47]  Luca Berchicci,et al.  Towards an open R&D system: Internal R&D investment, external knowledge acquisition and innovative performance , 2013 .

[48]  Antonio Messeni Petruzzelli,et al.  Unveiling the breakthrough potential of established technologies: an empirical investigation in the aerospace industry , 2016, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[49]  Daniele Rotolo,et al.  Institutional diversity, internal search behaviour, and joint-innovations , 2015 .

[50]  Maria Rosaria Della Peruta,et al.  The impact of IT-based knowledge management systems on internal venturing and innovation: a structural equation modeling approach to corporate performance , 2016, J. Knowl. Manag..

[51]  R. Gulati,et al.  The Architecture of Cooperation: Managing Coordination Costs and Appropriation Concerns in Strategic Alliances , 1998 .

[52]  Constance E. Helfat,et al.  INNOVATION OBJECTIVES, KNOWLEDGE SOURCES, AND THE BENEFITS OF BREADTH , 2010 .

[53]  J. Darroch,et al.  Examining the link between knowledge management practices and types of innovation , 2002 .

[54]  Pierpaolo Pontrandolfo,et al.  Different practices for open innovation: a context-based approach , 2013, J. Knowl. Manag..

[55]  Roger J. Calantone,et al.  Tacit knowledge transfer and firm innovation capability , 2003 .