Abstract: We draw upon theories of routine based learning to examine corporate boards’ CEO selection decision in a sample of CEO successions from 1993 and 2010. We theorize that boards learn from three different sources: internal-based routines created by task specific co-working experience, performance feedback routine driven by market evaluation of prior task performance, and external-based routine influenced by director interlocks . Findings are consistent with our theoretical predictions: internal-based routine learning and performance feedback routine learning are positively related to hiring a new CEO that is similar to the prior CEO, the interaction between them is positive and external-based routine learning is positively related to hiring a new CEO that is similar to the interlocked firm CEO.

Abstract: How can leaders better anticipate future unknowns and transform their organisations as needed? In rapidly changing environments, transformative leadership is crucial for a firm to be able to adapt and remain viable. Unfortunately, human cognitive mindsets, as part of individuals’ identities, impose rigid structures that make it hard for leaders to recognise the necessity of preparing for the unknown. There are three main obstacles to transformative leadership: Narcissism, historical baggage and organisational inertia. To overcome the first two identity-related obstacles, leaders must develop dynamic learning capabilities or learn to unlearn. This can be done by creating transitional space to explore hypothetical new situations and thereby learn to adapt to change. Secondly, leaders must have sufficient control over their organisations overcome inertia that impedes organisational transformation.

Abstract: We study the effect of exports on firms’ innovation output in search for a better understanding of the process underlying the so-called ‘learning by exporting’ phenomenon. To do so, we distinguish between two types of knowledge that might be acquired in export markets: market and technological knowledge. These two types of knowledge have been generally treated equally by previous studies, although what is actually learnt in these cases is substantially different. How do firms actually obtain these two types of knowledge? We hypothesize that formal technology transfers are particularly salient if firms want to achieve also technological learning in export markets, and not merely learn about local market conditions, which can be provided by simple knowledge spillovers as prior literature has generally assumed.

Abstract: Firms fail to utilize their knowledge because the firm lacks complementary assets in order to complete the innovation process or merely because the firm does not acknowledge the true value of their new findings. This paper attempts to identify the impact of networks on the diffusion of a firm’s unutilized knowledge and the benefits of such knowledge spillovers to the focal firm by a mechanism called second degree exploitation. I assess how a firm can benefit from spillovers through vicariously learning from its competitors of how to exploit the focal firm’s own unutilized knowledge. In order to support the proposed hypotheses, I examine the citation patterns of patents that are not utilized by the creator within the context of U.S. pharmaceutical industry.

Abstract: Prior literature emphasizes the importance of balancing exploitative and exploratory knowledge sharing in the pursuit of sustainable competitive advantage. This capability is defined as ambidextrous organizational learning and involves the integration of internal and external knowledge sources. In service firms, where customers actively participate in the value creation process, the reconciliation of internal firm- and external customer knowledge requires specific attention. Knowledge asymmetries resulting from different degrees of specialization can influence benefits service firms can derive from their customers. Since professional service firms, such as management consultancies, reveal extreme degrees of specialized expertise, we build on the knowledge-based theory of the firm, the relational view of the firm, and agency theory to clarify the particular role of professional service firms in organizational ambidextrous learning.

Abstract: This paper explores how the sequencing of knowledge transfer methods impacts transfer difficulty (stickiness). We propose the existence of two basic patterns of organizational learning. In the first, which we refer to as “up-hill” learning (towards richer methods), richer methods are used at transfer ramp-up than at transfer initiation. In the second, which we refer to as “down-hill” learning (away from richer methods), richer methods are used at transfer initiation than at transfer ramp-up. We hypothesize that when the content of the learning is causally ambiguous and/or when there is an easy relationship between the source and the recipient, down-hill learning is more effective than up-hill in reducing stickiness. Using fine-grained proprietary data we operationalize the two patterns and empirically test of our predictions.