Analyzing knowledge transfer between the Netherlands and Russia

(1)

Analyzing knowledge transfer between the Netherlands and

Russia

Pieter Minne Vogels S1541153 Augustus 2010 Name organization: Bles Dairies Holding

Analyzing knowledge transfer to Russia between a Dutch company and its

Russian subsidiaries

(2)

Analyzing knowledge transfer between the Netherlands and

Russia: a case study of knowledge transfer between a Dutch

company and its Russian subsidiaries

Abstract

This paper contextualizes the challenges of internal and external knowledge transfer in and to Russian companies with Western participation. This article addresses critical factors of knowledge transfer in and to Russia. It adds to existing literature since this research takes into account that there are distinctions in transferring knowledge between countries and cultures. On basis of existing literature, assumptions were constructed, which were tested on basis of case study data. In depth interviews were conducted with Russian and Western managers to gather information. It shows from the case data that business conducted in Russia is mainly done by relationships and networks. Moreover, there is no clear support to state that Russians are reluctant to adopt foreign knowledge. Russians are not taking initiative, thereby, they do not have any intent to learn. The article explains as well that the comprehension and usefulness of the knowledge transferred increases when this is done in an explicit form.

Keywords: culture, knowledge transfer, organizations, Russia, Netherlands

(4)

Introduction

Knowledge transfer across borders is being seen as a critical factor in organizations and when executed accurately it can lead to sustainable competitive advantage (Möller & Svahn, 2004; Bhagat, Harveston & Triandis, 2002; Argote & Ingram, 2000). Furthermore, the turbulence of the business environment has rendered organizational knowledge a dominant source of developing competitive benefits (Wijk et al., 2008). Moreover, well organised internal knowledge transfer across organizational units is seen as a factor of success for organizations operating globally (Gupta & Govindarajan, 2000). Within the field of knowledge transfer there are different factors that influence the process of knowledge transfer: social networks (Inkpen & Tsang, 2005; Möller & Svahn, 2004), innovation (Carlile, 2004), mergers and joint ventures (Bresman et al., 1999; Tsang, 2002), organizational learning (Schulz, 2002), motivation (Frey & Osterloh, 2002) and organizational culture (Fey et al., 1999; Wilkesmann et al., 2009).

(5)

managers and Western managers and state more interactive, forms of cross-cultural engagement are being demanded.

The case company Bles Dairies Holding operates in the agricultural market in Russia and the Netherlands. This holding exists of three companies. Currently they focus on improving internal processes in terms of communication and customer orientation. The three companies want to generate more business in Russia by using a form of cooperation of Russian subsidiaries of Bles Dairies Holding and a Russian business partner. Since, there is a common target group; however, there is no common customer base. Moreover, there is a lack of using each others synergy. Furthermore, there are changing markets conditions in Russia. Currently, in the Russian agricultural sector there is awareness of having problems in profitability. These profitability problems are caused by bad management in the agricultural sector. Moreover, the Russian government has launched a national priority plan for the agriculture sector. First, the Russian government facilitated cheap lending. However, due to problems in paying back the loans, the investors in the agricultural sector need to fulfil more requirements for obtaining a loan. Furthermore, the Russian agricultural market is changing from a buyers market to a full-service market. The goal for Bles Dairies Holding is to incorporate a new communication plan in the new strategic plan for Russia. In order to do this they have to know how to transfer knowledge optimally. Therefore the main question of this article is:

What are the critical factors of knowledge transfer to Russian companies with Western participation?

(6)

retain the holistic and meaningful characteristics of real-life events (Yin, 2009). Using a case company allows this research to get hold of information of meaningful characteristics of knowledge transfer in a company. A case study is preferred since the information required deal with operational links needing to be traced over time, rather than mere frequencies or incidence (Yin, 2009). In order to acquire information about the knowledge transfer process, a case study is preferred. The case study’s unique strength is its ability to deal with a full variety of evidence – documents, artifacts, interviews and observations (Yin, 2009). This study wants to know about the respondents facts as well as opinions about knowledge transfer in a company. Moreover, the topic of this research is assumed to be culturally sensitive. It is believed that interviewees can express better their own cultural perception than with a quantitative survey. Therefore, it is believed that the information needed can be best generated by interviews. Interviews are insightful and provide views about causal inferences and explanations.

The first part of this paper will give an overview of the theory concerned. This first part of the literature describes which factors play a part in the process of knowledge transfer between countries. Out of these factors, critical factors are investigated, which will be followed by assumptions. These assumptions are based on critical factors that play a role in knowledge transfer between countries. This is done in order to test if these assumptions hold as well for knowledge transfer of the case companies in Russia and the Netherlands. In the findings, it must show if these assumptions are different for transferring knowledge between the case companies, than what described as critical in the literature. In the conclusion and discussion section it will be discussed what the difference is between what is described as essential in the literature, contrasting to what is found to be essential in the case company.

Theoretical overview

(7)

Knowledge transfer

Evidence is accumulating that internal knowledge transfer across organizational units within firms provides competitive benefits (Gupta & Govindarajan, 2000). For this reason, firms increasingly become aware of the importance of a system that transfers knowledge effectively. Knowledge transferred internally in a company refers to the process through which organizational actors – teams, units, or organizations – exchange, receive and are influenced by the experience and knowledge of others (van Wijk et al, 2008). The term transfer ‘results in the receiving unit accumulating or assimilating new knowledge’ (Bresman et al., 1999). The term knowledge is defined differently by authors. In order to understand knowledge Bhagat et al. (2002) demarcate knowledge in three types, namely, social knowledge, human knowledge and structured knowledge. The authors divide knowledge into three terms to investigate the critical factors of knowledge transfer. Social knowledge exists in relationships among individuals or within groups, this type investigates relationship quality. Human knowledge constitutes what individuals know or knows how to do, this is the articulability of the knowledge transferred. Structured knowledge is embedded in organizational systems, processes, rules and routines, this type of knowledge has to deal as well with the articulability. However, structured knowledge is more directed toward the diffusion of knowledge without human knowers (Glazer, 1998). Bhagat et al. (2002) argues that the relationships among individuals or within group are an important factor in cross-border knowledge transfer. When examining relationship quality you have to consider collectivist versus individualist cultures and the type of structure of the organizations; vertical or horizontal. Bhagat et al. (2002) states as well that articulability of the knowledge must be tailored to the culture, where the knowledge is being transferred.

(8)

organization (Husted & Michailova, 2004). By making knowledge articulate it easy to transfer the stored knowledge, the company can create a sustainable competitive advantage.

Transferring knowledge across borders

Van Wijk (2008) emphasizes that in the literature of inter organizational knowledge transfer there are three crucial factors: knowledge characteristics, organizational characteristics and network characteristics. Knowledge ambiguity is considered to be the most important factor in the characteristics of knowledge. Knowledge ambiguity refers to the inherent and irreducible uncertainty as to precisely what the underlying knowledge components and sources are and how they interact (Van Wijk, 2008). Across borders the underlying knowledge component becomes more important in the interactions. In the field of organizational characteristics the size and the absorptive capacity are the most essential factors. When these factors are large than the comprehension of knowledge transfer increases. The last crucial factor is network characteristics, which are embedded in social ties, trusting relationships, and value systems. When these are strong then the actors can share and acquire more diverse knowledge. Knowledge transfer across borders is particularly challenging from an organizational perspective given differences in time, spatial and cultural distances posing significant barriers to such transfer (Pérez-Nordtveldt et al., 2008). In international organizations well organized knowledge transfer is of vital importance. It will optimize internal communication, which in turn optimizes knowledge transfer. However, in companies operating internationally it is more difficult to transfer knowledge across nations, than in one country specific. When transferring knowledge across countries you have to deal with cultural characteristics. The term culture describes values, attitudes, and behavioral patterns which are programmed or learned (Hofstede, 1994). The differences in the cultural orientation in an organization increase the risk of misunderstandings and conflicts, and often lead to failure, but if managed in a balanced manner may also improve performance (Li, Karakowsky, & Lam, 2002). To overcome these differences in cultural orientation a company has to recognize and understand these challenges in optimizing knowledge transfer. However, culture cannot be linked only to the country. There are cultural layers such as the national culture, the organizational or business culture, and the professional culture, all of which jointly affect an individual’s behavior in a specific context (Kale, 1996).

(9)

Explanation for not using knowledge from the ‘outside’ can have several reasons ranging from not trusting the knowledge, to the preference of developing the knowledge themselves instead of adopting an idea of someone else (Michailova, 2004). As well as the trustworthiness and the perceived reliability of knowledge from foreigners can be challenging. Trustworthiness and the perceived reliability are essential in the relationship quality and source attractiveness. Trust is an important factor in knowledge transfer. When trust levels are high than people are more willing to share information, more willing to absorb it and the costs of transferring are lower (Tsai & Ghoshal, 1998; Andrews & Delahay, 2000). In the paper of Szulanski et al. (2004) the degree to which the perceived trustworthiness of the source contributes to the effectiveness of intrafirm knowledge transfer depends on the nature of the knowledge transferred. The perceived reliability of the knowledge transfer is a problem as well, in most cases it also depends on the country of origin. People are more likely to accept knowledge from local institutions than from foreigners (Spencer, 2000).

Characteristics of knowledge

(10)

company. Nevertheless, it is difficult to convert tacit knowledge into explicit, since people know more than they can tell. Even so, sharing knowledge is important in inter-firm networks. The transfer knowledge, implicitly or explicitly, has different implementations. The knowledge created most of the times has an implicit character, it is not being codified. With the purpose to leverage the created knowledge, one can transmit it solely in the implicit form. In that case, knowledge sharing relies on costly and slow methods like imitation and personal transfer and apprenticeship (Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995). An option is to transfer the created knowledge in an explicit form. The benefit of investing in codification and hereby to some extent detaching specific knowledge from individuals is easier and quicker to leverage across time, distance and users (Michailova, 2000). However, this is a costly and time consuming process. This process of transforming knowledge from an implicit to an explicit state, in order to transfer it and vice versa is not free of cost for neither the transmitter nor the receiver (Grant, 1996).

When transferring knowledge the company characteristics play an important role. Perez-Nordtvedt et al. (2008) have studied in their paper if this factor plays a role in transferring knowledge across borders. The resource-based view of an organisation argues that a resource’s potential for generating a competitive advantage depends on four characteristics: value, rareness, inimitability and non-substitutability (Barney, 1991). These four characteristics influence the process of knowledge transfer. Following Perez-Nordtvedt et al. (2008), these four features have an impact on the source and recipient, who are involved in the exchanged knowledge. They say that if knowledge is being perceived as valuable, this triggers the desire to absorb this knowledge. The authors provide some evidence that when a foreign source has knowledge that is valuable, rare and non-substitutable, it is perceived as being more attractive in the eyes of the recipient.

Knowledge transmitters and Receivers

(11)

(12)

tight connections based on mutual trust. The quality of a relationship in order to transfer knowledge effectively is perceived differently across countries.

Assumptions

The section above made clear which factors play a role in the process of knowledge transfer. Out of the factors that influence knowledge transfer, this section will describe the critical factors. It is explained why these factors are critical and how they influence the process. From the critical factors assumptions are formed. In the research of knowledge transfer across cultures, Wilkesmann et al. (2009) and Husted et al. (2002) have developed assumptions as well related to their critical factors. They have done this in order to demarcate their research. In their research, they investigated knowledge transfer respectively from Germany to Hong Kong and the Western countries to Russia. This research has formed assumptions in order to test if the critical factors hold as well for transferring knowledge between the Netherlands and Russia.

These assumptions are based on the paper of Perez-Nordtvedt et al. (2008), which have done research about several factors on the efficiency and effectiveness of knowledge transfer from international business affiliates of US organisations. These are relationship quality, attractiveness of the foreign source, resource-based characteristics, learning intent and articulability of foreign knowledge. The following section will describe as well why these factors are critical. These assumptions are being tested in the context of knowledge transfer in a company between Russia and the Netherlands. On basis of these assumptions it is investigated if there are differences in knowledge transfer between the Netherlands and Russia in the case company, than knowledge transfer to other countries

Relationship quality. Comprehension of knowledge transferred is classified as the degree to

which the new knowledge transferred is fully understood by the recipient. Relationship quality refers to the degree to which the relationship between source and recipient is close and based on trust and signifies the quality of transmission between the source and the recipient (Perez-Nordtvedt et al, 2008). Comprehension and relation quality are linked together, since having a good relationship with the receiver increases the understanding of the knowledge transferred. Relationship quality is especially important in collectivist cultures. People in collectivist cultures generally have greater difficulties in dealing with outsiders (Triandis et

(13)

Trust is an important aspect between source and recipient. When the source unit is not perceived as reliable, is not seen as trustworthy or knowledgeable, initiating a transfer from that source will be more difficult and its advice and example are likely to be challenged and resisted (Walton, 1975). Trust ‘reflects the belief that a partner’s word or promise is reliable and that a partner will fulfil its obligations in the relationship’ (Inkpen, 2000). Moreover, trust enables the transfer of organizational knowledge since it increases partners’ willingness to commit to helping partners understand new external knowledge (Lane et al., 2001). Transfer of knowledge will flow easier in a well organized structure in an organisation. A good organisational structure will increase trust and closeness among employees. When trust levels are higher, people are more willing to give useful knowledge and also more willing to listen to and absorb it and increases, which increases the level of comprehension (Levin, 1999). Trust is a very important element when conducting business in transition countries. This is also caused by the communist period in many transition countries. The best way of solving the exchange, contracting, and collateral problems in transition countries is to base exchanges and contract enforcement on trust (Camiah et al., 2003).

In the paper of van Wijk en Jansen (2008) it is stated that firms seeking to change the extent of knowledge transfer need to focus particularly on developing strong and trustworthy relations. A good relationship allows for greater interaction, which generates a ‘common language’ between the transmitter and receiver and helps for a better understanding of the transferred knowledge (Reagans & McEvily, 2003). Relationship quality also improves comprehension because trust allows for greater openness and cooperation (Das & Teng, 1998). Therefore, assumption one is:

1. Relationship quality between the foreign source and the recipient will be positively associated with the comprehension of cross-border transferred knowledge.

Attractiveness. In the process of knowledge transfer the perceived usefulness of the

(14)

This consistency over time will increase the perceived usefulness for the recipient. Moreover, strategically important knowledge is often embedded in the firm and supported by the corporate culture, but its meaning may be distorted and usefulness diminished when it is transferred to a different corporate culture (Perez-Nordtvedt et al., 2008). Hence, the knowledge being transferred need to be clear for the recipient. Moreover, the strategic importance for the recipient must be clear, since both parties have to benefit. Likely, the foreign source will be reviewed on the results obtained and used in the market. These results will be judged from their perspective and in this matter being perceived as useful. Without such a record, it is more difficult to induce potential recipients to engage in the transfer (Rogers, 1983).

Moreover, when you have taken part in the knowledge creation process, then the transfer to the recipient will be easier and perceived as more useful. In the paper of Easterby-Smith et al., (2008) it is stated that the foreign source is viewed more useful, because the person knows exactly how the knowledge can be put into practice to improve operations. Another point is the local embeddedness of the foreign source in its home country. Knowledge retrieved locally by the foreign source can be seen as more useful and original.

Therefore, stable results over time, strategic importance, knowledge creation and local embeddedness of the foreign source make the perceived usefulness for the recipient more attractive. My second assumption is:

2. The attractiveness of a foreign source will be positively associated with the perceived usefulness of knowledge that is transferred across borders.

Resource-based characteristics. The resource-based view suggests that a firm’s competitive

advantage is a function of a set of firm-specific resources and capabilities that are valuable, rare, and imperfectly imitable and for which there are no commonly available substitutes (Barney, 1991). These characteristics form a basis for developing a competitive advantage. These features are company specific and not easy transferable.

(15)

as more attractive since this knowledge predictably will obtain better results over time. If the knowledge possessed has success over time than it will be more attractive for the receiver. When resource based knowledge is transferred across firm boundaries, some loss may occur because of the “stickiness” of the knowledge or because partner organizations do not have the absorptive capacity needed to assure full value transfer (Jensen & Szulanski, 2004). However, if an organisation has fully control over its subsidiaries it can keep control over valuable resource-based advantages. Wholly owned modes facilitate efficient transfer of knowledge between parent firm and foreign subsidiary (Brouthers et al., 2008). If you can control valuable resource-based advantages, which increases efficiency in the knowledge transfer process, than this will increase attractiveness.

In today’s globalizing world an organisations competitive advantage can lay outside the normal boundaries of a firm. Therefore, a recipient firm can be positively influenced by the unique resources of another firm when it searches to maintain its competitive advantage. Kogut and Zander (2000) have found that relationships between companies strongly influence the degree to which knowledge spills over. Therefore, other companies are keen to form alliances with the firm that possesses such knowledge, in order to acquire the same knowledge. Deeds and Hill (1996) have found that new product development is partly related to the amount of strategic alliances a company have, which indicates the attractiveness of the firm with knowledge sharing. Knowledge which has advanced levels of rareness, value, non-substitutability and inimitability will increase the attractiveness of the foreign source. Therefore,

3. Perceived value, rareness, inimitability and non-substitutability associated with knowledge being transferred across borders will be positively related to the attractiveness of the foreign knowledge source.

Learning intent. In order to share knowledge successfully the recipient and transmitter must

have the intent to obtain the knowledge. Learning intent refers to the motivation or intention that a potential recipient has to learn (Mowery et al., 1996). A lack of motivation will lead to an ineffective knowledge transfer. Lack of motivation in accepting knowledge leads to ‘stickiness’ or difficulties in the transfer process (Szulanski, 1995). Therefore, a ‘precondition for successful learning is a recognition of the need to learn’ (Goold et al., 1994).

(16)

learn is a key determinant of the extent of knowledge transfer, however, the donor’s motivation to teach can be an equally important factor (Hamel, 1991). In fact, the two may affect each other; for example, the lack of motivation to teach may dampen the enthusiasm for learning, and vice versa (Easterby-Smith et al., 2008). If there is the intention to learn and to teach than this will increase the level of comprehension for the receiver.

Moreover, recipient learning intent will increase efficiency in an organisation. However, Nonaka (1994) suggests that efficient knowledge sharing depends on the willingness of individuals to signal to the organization which knowledge they possess and to share their knowledge when requested.

Recipient learning intent is especially important when knowledge is being transferred across borders. The capability of an organization to learn is particularly important for business development in turbulent markets such as those in East and Central Europe since learning helps in reducing perceived uncertainty (Nieminen & Törnroos, 1997). This reduction in perceived uncertainty increases the comprehension of the foreign knowledge. Moreover, when the recipient organisation is eager to obtain the skills and competencies from the foreign knowledge source, than the psychological understanding of the knowledge transferred is higher. Simonin (2004) has found that the learning intent increases the degree of internalizing the skills and competencies of the foreign source. Thus:

4. Recipient learning intent is positively associated with the comprehension of knowledge transferred across borders.

Articulability. Knowledge transfer success is also affected by its articulability, or the extent to

which knowledge can be verbalized, written, drawn or otherwise articulated (Bresman et al., 1999). In order to transfer knowledge across borders, know-how and information written down is more easily transferable than implicit knowledge. It depends as well in what kind of society the knowledge needs to be codified. Communication and knowledge sharing are easiest in stable and often hierarchical business nets as they contain primarily codifiable, explicit knowledge (Möller & Svahn, 2004).

(17)

open interpretation. Therefore, the chance for transfer success is larger when transfer the knowledge in the explicit form.

Organisations also have experienced that working with technology facilitates knowledge transfer. Explicit, codifiable knowledge that is embedded in technology has been found to transfer more readily than knowledge not embedded in technology (Zander & Kogut, 1995). Similarly, technology transfer attempts have been found to be more successful when the technology is not complex and is well understood (Galbraith, 1990).

In organisational learning codifying knowledge is helping knowledge to become decontextualised and articulated into customs. Codifying the knowledge in a domain thereby facilitates knowledge flows and helps to transform local knowledge into organization-level knowledge (Schultz, 2001). Consequently, codifying knowledge to the organizational level increases transfer success. The articulability of knowledge leads to the fifth assumption:

5. Transfer success increases as the articulability of the knowledge increases.

Critical factors that are investigated for cross border knowledge transfer are relationship quality, attractiveness of the foreign source, resource-based characteristics, learning intent and articulability of foreign knowledge. The following section will investigate if the assumptions related to the critical factors hold as well for transferring knowledge between Russia and the Netherlands.

The case companies

This paper investigates the transfer of knowledge from Bles Dairies Holding to its Russian subsidiaries along with how they transfer knowledge on the Russian market. This company is nominated this year as one of the best agricultural companies in the Netherlands. Bles Dairies holding exists of three companies, namely Bles Dairies Livestock, Semex and The Friesian. Bles Dairies Livestock is active in exporting pedigree cattle. Semex is operating in the business of bull semen including giving advice in relation with the genetic progress of cattle. The Friesian is an agricultural business development company, which is giving advice about improving farm management and educating persons to develop farming. The outline is presented in the appendix.

(18)

Bles Dairies Livestock b.v. peeking till 50% in the past few years. Russia gave subsidy and attractive financial schemes to the dairy industry in order to import cattle so that it could increase the milk production and quality of the cows in Russia. This resulted in a tremendous demand of livestock to Russia.

Semex is an alliance that is situated in Canada. Semex is capable of supplying semen of high quality bulls that contributes to the genetic progress of cattle. In 2005 Bles Dairies Holding took over the Semex branch in Russia. Since, the take-over it witnessed an increase in sales. Currently, it has 5 employees in Nizny-Novogrod and is setting-up another office in Moscow. Semex-Russia still observes an increase in demand for bull-semen.

Russia is an important market for The Friesian. Currently, it has two speaking Russian employees for the Ukrainian and Russian market. It has a subsidiary in Russia, the Dairy Support Centre, where it trains and educates people in the agricultural sector, as well as conducting marketing studies and organizing business visits. At this moment The Friesian is conducting a large project called the LEC (Livestock Expertise Centre) project. The project is a Dutch-Russian project, which organizes training programs in the dairy and pig production sectors. The goal is to develop a sustainable network of Russian and Dutch Institutes and companies.

Case methodology

(19)

different persons in the process of knowledge transfer. It is essential that the people interviewed have experience on the Russian market, as they are more practiced in transferring knowledge. The people interviewed need to have experience and have to be knowledgeable about the transferring knowledge.

From the data collected it must show what the critical factors are of knowledge transfer between Russia and the Netherlands. I wanted to know how these critical factors influence knowledge transfer. This research mainly retrieves its information from companies working in the agricultural sector. The agricultural sector is volatile by nature and it involves a lot of actors from different levels of management. The process of knowledge transfer between these actors is inflicted by norms, believes and values. To take into account these human actions in the process of knowledge transfer, conducting interviews is the best approach. The interviews conducted were semi-structured. This research used semi-structured and open-ended questions, with the objective of obtaining more diverse perspectives, views and opinions sharing (Cresswell, 2006). Moreover, the assumptions underlying semi-structured interview schedules are that questions may need to be worded differently for different respondents if they are to have the same meaning for all respondents, and that the order in which questions are presented should depend on the specific context of each interviewer-respondent interaction (Thomas, 2004). The people interviewed were of Russian or Dutch nationality. I have completed thirteen face to face interviews, whereby six Russian persons. The persons interviewed worked in different layers of management and worked with different kind of people. Six interviewees have experience in the field of learning intent. They had to impart new knowledge about agriculture to Russians. Seven of the interviewees were director. They have experience with choosing business partners, which own specific company characteristics. They know as well how business is conducted, taking into account relationship quality. All the interviewees have practice with source attractiveness and knowledge articulability. An indication that the sample set was sufficient was that the results obtained from the interviews were quite similar. Moreover, the interviewees came from different levels, ranging from the shop floor to company owners. Furthermore, the interviewees have experiences in different parts of the knowledge transfer process. Therefore, I believe that the amount of people interviewed is sufficient. However, it was also difficult to carry out more interviews due to limit of time and organizational boundaries.

The semi-structured interview consists of a set of topics and sub-topics about the information needed. The interviews were based on recommendations given in the paper interviewing

(20)

(1993). Here it is suggested how to conduct interviews. For example to gain trust in the beginning of the interview and when to ask the more controversial questions. It is recommended that ‘sympathetic understanding’ is the attitude most likely to promote such an atmosphere and hence yield the best response (Healy and Rawlinson, 1993). Moreover, the book interviewing of Schostak (2006) was used. This book contained a more theoretical explanation on how to execute semi-structured interviews. The interviews were divided into topics and sub-topics. The interviews began with the company characteristics and the history. The second topic was how the interviewee conducted business in Russia. In this section an image was created of the relationship quality. Then the specific operations of the company were asked to get an insight of how the knowledge is articulated in the company. A sub-section in this part was the learning intent of the employees and managers. In the last topic the respondents were asked how they perceived the attractiveness of the knowledge. In this section information is retrieved of the source attractiveness and resource-based characteristics. Yin (1994) describes three principles to be used in the data collection procedure: use multiple sources of evidence, create a case study database, and maintain a chain of evidence. I used multiple sources of evidence (data triangulation), in order to enhance the construct validity of the research (Eisenhardt, 1989; Yin, 1994). In qualitative research analyzed attitudes and behavior are separated into bits and pieces, assigned to abstract dimensions, meanings, motivations, associations and emotions and finally integrated into one overall picture that can be used to guide the policy of organizations (Spiggle, 1994). I tried to analyze this qualitative research in the same matter. I had access to written documents, which helped me during my interviews. The additional material played an important role in the analysis in terms of verifying and validating the interview data and it helped me with my interpretations. The interviews generally took between ninety minutes and two hours. The first interview was conducted on an exploratory basis to recognize situations, events, and incidents particularly relevant to my research objectives. The minutes were taken directly at the interviews. A tape recorder was not used, because of the history of Russia.

(21)

Findings

In this part it is investigated if the assumptions hold as well for knowledge transfer between the Netherlands and Russia. The critical factors that are investigated are respectively relationship quality, source attractiveness, resource-based characteristics, learning intent and the articulability of knowledge. The outcomes on the assumptions are based on the interviews. In the outcomes it is made clear why a particular factor is critical. In the findings it will show if the factors of knowledge transfer hold as well between the Netherlands and Russia.

Relationship Quality

The factor relationship quality is being tested on basis of how the interviewees conduct business in Russia. Relationship quality is also being tested on how people transfer knowledge to each other in a company. Moreover, it is being investigated how the relationship quality is and how this factor effect the knowledge transfer. The factor relationship quality is a critical factor in conducting business. It is explained what the relationship quality entails between Russia and the Netherlands and if the Russians are eager to conduct business with foreigners. Moreover, it is described how important relationship quality is and how it works.

(22)

Russians like the fact that if something goes wrong that they can appeal to someone in Russia. The Western companies in Russia most of the time have an alliance or have an office in Russia. Being present in Russia increases the trust level and the comprehension of the transferred knowledge. Moreover, relationship quality is inflicted by after sales. In Russia, it is important that you maintain a good relation after the purchase. After-sales is one of the most important factors in order to transfer knowledge that is fully understood by the recipient. If after-sales are not executed well than, you will loose the relation. Good after-sales exist of delivering qualitative service and being physically present sometimes. Being physically present improves the relationship quality and increases the comprehension of knowledge. From the observations it is seen that Russians only do business when the quality of the relationship is strong. This will increase when the foreign company is physically present in Russia and has a good after-sales policy.

This is also observed in the collectivist thinking of the Russian, where the personal networks are important. The collectivist thinking has resulted in long lasting relationships among organizational members. A Russian manager said: ‘in Russia, one needs friends or friends of friends. Otherwise, one cannot do anything.’ Maintaining and establishing strong relationships with business partners and employees enhance the comprehension of knowledge. A Dutch farm manager needed four months to obtain the trust from the director. The place of the farm manager was between the director and middle management. In the first four months, the director communicated directly to the middle management, where he passed the farm manager. This resulted in miss-management on the farm. In those four months, he gained the trust from the director, which leaded into a better understanding of the knowledge transferred. The Dutch farm manager said that now when the employees trust me, the level of acceptance of my instructions is much higher. It follows from the interviews that when you want to increase comprehension of the knowledge transferred in the company, than you first have to establish a good relationship.

(23)

well-machinery and excellent service this will be observed by the neighbour, and create ‘spin-off’. From the data it is observed that all the business people obtain a good network with strong relationships. The observations show that the comprehension of knowledge increases when a foreign company is physically present and has experience on the Russian market. It is described as well that the comprehension increases when trust and credibility levels are high between business people. All the interviewees stated that the comprehension of knowledge increases when the quality of the relationship is strong. Therefore, it is correct to assume that relationship quality between the foreign source and the recipient will be positively associated with the comprehension of cross-border transferred knowledge.

Attractiveness

The attractiveness of the knowledge is being tested in how people in Russia accept new knowledge. The respondents were asked how Russians accepted new knowledge diffused into the company. Almost all the interviewees work in the agricultural sector, this sector has changed tremendously in recent years by new knowledge. The respondents were asked how Russians reacted to this new knowledge. In setting up a new communication plan the Russian respondents were asked how they would implement this communication plan. By the answers it can be seen how Russians accept and diffuse knowledge in the company.

In many countries it is difficult to transfer knowledge that is originated from another country, because they perceive local knowledge as more accurate. From the study of Hofstede (1994) it shows that Russians score very low on individualism, namely 26, where this is 91 in the US. People in collectivist cultures generally have greater difficulties in dealing with outsiders. In the agricultural sector there is not a general mistrust against foreign knowledge. The Dutch agricultural sector is perceived in Russia as highly knowledgeable. Many Russian business people working in the agricultural sector judge knowledge from the Netherlands superior than knowledge from Russia. The usefulness of Dutch knowledge is perceived as more knowledgeable than Russian knowledge.

(24)

with pictures of examples in Russia with similar conditions to show the usefulness. A phrase he often heard in Russia is: ‘your ideas won’t work in Russia’, or ‘your ideas are very interesting, but are not applicable under Russian conditions’. The observations show that the foreign knowledge is seen as useful only when it is already been put into practice in Russia. Another interviewee is entering the Russian market with a new product. The first goal is to set up three pilot firms where the product is being used. A product launch will not succeed if the product does not have a reference from somewhere else in Russia. The foreign source needs to be a consistent performer over a time, before being perceived as useful. The transferred knowledge needs to be identified as retrieved locally so it can be seen as more useful and original. However, Husted and Michailova (2003) state that there is a preference to develop own idea’s and knowledge instead of adopting knowledge from foreigners. It is much more prestigious to create your own ‘knowledge’ rather reusing information created elsewhere. Although from this research observations there is no general aversion against adopting knowledge from foreigners. The only issue is that explaining the perceived usefulness is very time-consuming. All the interviewees stated that to convince the usefulness of a product takes a lot of effort. It follows from the interviews that Russians do accept new knowledge; however it is difficult and time-consuming to explain the perceived usefulness.

The same holds for knowledge diffused within an organization. When introducing a new method within the organisation of Semex, the explicit usefulness of the new method has to be explained carefully. Now when the three case companies introduce a new strategy for Russia, this is carefully being introduced in Russia. The new communication plan, which is part of the new strategy, is compound together with the employees. This implies that they take part in the knowledge creation process and perceive the knowledge as more useful and attractive. The view of Russians to accept new knowledge was positive, although they are reluctant to diffuse the knowledge.

(25)

Resource-based characteristics

All the company owners have developed alliances with other companies in Russia. The company owners were asked on how they chose this business partner and which characteristics appealed to them.

As stated earlier, when transferring knowledge to Russia it is recommended to refer to existing knowledge. A Russian wants prove that the knowledge acquired is already tested on Russian soil. The core elements of a company are positively related to the attractiveness of the source when these core elements are already in use Russia. The company Semex is an alliance where the core company is located in Canada. A sales manager from Semex tells that customers perceive the unique connection between the Russian and Canadian Semex as positive. However, they always ask when acquiring bull semen if it is already tested in Russia. The firm-specific resources and capabilities need to have experience on the Russian market. Example of acquiring experience is taking over a company. Another option is the Greenfield option. A milk machine builder, Lely, is entering the Russian market by setting up three pilot farms. After one year of full operation, they are going to expand their activities. They are doing this in order to show the Russian customer that their new concept works in Russia. It is observed that specific capabilities increase knowledge transfer.

In the new strategic plan for Russia, the three case companies are going to work together with a Russian partner, which sells agricultural machinery. Both sides see a mutual advantage in working together. The Russian partner has chosen Bles Dairies Holding for its diversity in its product range. This partnership allows the companies to offer a wide product range to a potential customer. The Russian partner has chosen Bles Dairies Holding for its perceived value, rareness, inimitability and non-substitutability. However, the Russian partner knows that these capabilities are already been assessed in Russia. The same holds for another company, which exports agricultural machinery. The director stated ‘our customers choose us, because of our unique partnership with several machine builders.’ With these partnerships, the company can offer customer tailored packages and will be more attractive. The company owners state that unique features of their companies work positively in accepting their knowledge. This is observed on how the company owners have chosen their business partners and how they sell their products.

(26)

Learning Intent

Several interviewees have experience in giving trainings about new agricultural knowledge to Russians. It is asked if the Russians were eager to learn. Moreover, the company owners were asked on how they transferred knowledge in their company and how the employees accepted this knowledge. Moreover, related to the new communication plan it was asked of how the employees would use this communication plan.

First, it is explained what the learning intent is of Russian employees. Followed by, the learning intent of decision makers and young Russians.

When asking if Russians are eager to learn, the common respond was: ‘yes, Russians are willing to learn, when ordered by the boss.’ There is a lack of initiative with Russian employees. The general belief on the shop floor is: ‘I will not do anything extra, than I can’t do anything wrong’. Sometimes this is quite understandable when you see how Russian employees are yelled at by the director. During Soviet times, misinterpretations could have serious consequences; hence employees were reluctant to ask something and consequently learn something. Furthermore, on a farm or in a company, a Russian does nothing extra than stated in his protocol. The Russians are only prepared to learn something if you can demonstrate the usefulness of the training being given. However, this is not an easy job. Moreover, there is also a lack of a sense of responsibility. This is sometimes also initiated by the employer. In the Netherlands responsibilities and having the power to act in accordance, goes hand in hand, though this is not the case in Russia. Sometimes a director gives a person responsibility, although not the power to act in accordance with the responsibilities. Moreover, Russians have a different mentality towards making mistakes. A Russian manager with Western experience told that Russians are afraid to undertake something, because they risk making mistakes and therefore they prefer not to act. The Western principle is that if you do not fail, then you do not act and therefore are not developing yourself. From the interviews it follows that Russians are reluctant to learn, this is caused through developments in history and Russian characteristics. The strong hierarchical structures are also not helping in the intention to learn.

(27)

to be free in soviet times. Therefore, many directors still think it should be for free. A statement from an interviewed director, who works with Russian universities, is that in general professors on the universities are ‘arrogant’ and have outdated knowledge. This is also why decision makers are reluctant in learning. One experience from an interviewee is that a professor translated a manual from an agricultural company and presented this as his work. For Western business people it is therefore hard and time consuming, to make this intent understandable for a Russian that in the end you can earn money when you learn. If you make this understandable, then the learning intent increases together with the comprehension. When giving trainings and seminars, the learning intent increases as well when it is in a congenial group. Russians are afraid to ask something in the neighbourhood of their boss, hence the comprehension increases when giving training to congenial groups. The learning intent from decision makers is not high as well. Managers refuse the idea that they can learn from their employees. A Dutch director responds that this can be solved by filling in (visitor) reports and feedback reports. The intention to learn for decision makers is not really present. This emanates as well from developments in history and typical Russian characteristics, but as well from current developments in agricultural universities.

However, not everybody is unwilling to learn. Young managers want to learn, they are more exposed to foreign knowledge. As a consequence, the degree the new transferred knowledge is fully understood by the recipient increases. However, the view of a Russian is short term. This implies you never can state long term goals in Russia. In an organization this is sometimes frustrating. When asking a Dutch director how you deal with such problems, he stated: ‘you always have to set short term goals linked with money, then they are willing to learn and increases the understanding of the knowledge transferred.’ The young Russian interviewees were more eager to accept the new knowledge in the communication plan. They see the new communication plan as a necessity in generating more business. From the interviews it is noticed that the intention to learn for young managers is higher than with other Russians.

(28)

Articulability

The articulability of the knowledge is tested on basis of how interviewees transfer their knowledge in the company and in the market. It was also asked in which form Russians accept the knowledge at best.

First, it is explained how knowledge is being diffused in the companies. Than it is described how knowledge is diffused on farms. Lastly, it is stated how the knowledge is articulated on the Russian market.

In Russia there is a clear structure of who is responsible for what. The structure in Russia is top-down and very hierarchical. Many things are done by protocol. When asking a Russian what their job description is, than they cite their protocol. However, in practice you have to control if they actual do their work following the protocol. Information obtained by managers from their employees is mostly acquired by reports. In practice Russians try to manipulate these reports, in order to show up the best advantage. A reaction of a manager being interviewed on Russian employees is: ‘If you put it straightforward, then Russians try to mislead you, because they are used to say what their boss wants to hear’. A director of a company in Russia tries to implement a system with influences from both Russian and Western methods. The reaction on avoiding twisted reports is that ‘you have to keep after someone; you have to control and supervise strictly, in order to come to optimal transfer successes.’ These reports are mostly entwined with specific bonuses and penalties when not reporting. In a company of an interviewed person they make knowledge explicit by giving employees clear instructions and work with written rules. The company works with clear assignments and deadlines. The company controls the reports and the receipts. A Russian has to feel it in his ‘pocket’ when he not works as being told. The company works as well with personal goals in Russia, where they can obtain points and loose points. These points refer to a percentage of their bonus. Many companies set targets for their employees they need to accomplish. These targets have to be simple and feasible and have to be repeated to the employees. You have to repeat the targets, so that the employees keep the shared vision in mind. This articulated shared vision increases the transfer success. All the company owners work with written rules and reports. They say that this is the best way to transfer knowledge in a company.

(29)

the agricultural sector is that smarter people are not willing to work in this sector due to low self-esteem. Therefore, the communication is at a ‘lower’ level. A farm manager states that on the farm you have to be strict, due to alcohol and absence problems. ‘We give strict guidelines, because there is a lack of initiative.’ These guidelines are based on the protocol. If you ask an employee his or her task on the farm then this person will literally recite the protocol. However, in practice, if you do not control the employees than they will do something completely different, you have to be direct and consequent to the employee’s. The farm manager states that you have to observe and mostly correct them to do the work properly. However, you must not tell too much in once, because then they will clam up. The farm manager says: ‘before I started there were working 90 people, I fired halve of them, as a result the employees are helping each other with their tasks.’ Now the shared vision is clearer and better understood. From the observations on actual farms it is seen that the instructions are strict and well articulated in the protocols. Furthermore, on a farm you need a good farm manager to control the employees strictly.

(30)

knowledge is transferred from an implicit form to an explicit form. This increases the transfer success. One element of the new strategy of the three case companies is placing them under one roof in Moscow and therefore increases the flow of knowledge transfer. All the interviewees say that they try to articulate the products being sold. In this way they are more successful in selling products.

From the interviews it follows that to articulate knowledge is the best way of transferring knowledge. In the company you have to work with clear instructions, reports and feedback papers. On the farm you always have to give clear instructions and work with protocols. The company owners state as well that when selling products on the Russian market, they try to articulate the knowledge. It is correct to say that transfer success increases as the articulability of the knowledge increases. However, the process to make knowledge articulable for Russian is extremely difficult and time consuming. Nevertheless, it is possible to make knowledge more clearly for the Russian.

Relationship quality and articulate knowledge are the two most critical factors when transferring knowledge. When mastering these two factors, the level of comprehension and usefulness of the knowledge transferred increases for the recipient and sender. Thereafter, it is important to force employees to learn and diffuse the learned knowledge into the organisation. When referring to the attractiveness of the foreign knowledge source and the specific capabilities of the company, it is important that these factors already have been put into practice in Russia.

Conclusion and discussion

This research investigated the critical factors of knowledge transfer in and to Russia. In order to come to a clear answer on this question, this research has formulated assumptions on basis of relevant literature. In current literature not many articles make distinctions in knowledge transfer between different countries and cultures. Optimal knowledge transfer refers to diffuse knowledge in an efficient and effective method. However, the process to come to efficient and effective knowledge transfer is not a straightforward process. One would believe that knowledge from well performing units will be adopted by other units in the company. However, this is not the case and mostly leads to a loss in competitiveness.

(31)

western elements in the knowledge transferred. Like, working with reports and speeding up a business process. However, many elements emanated from the Soviet time still play an important role.

The first assumption regarding that good relationship quality between recipient and foreign source enhances the level of comprehension is correct. The use of relationships in Russia is still one of the most important factors in conducting business. This relationship is based on credibility and trust. This can be achieved by being physically present, being honest, delivering quality as required and provide good after-sales. This outcome is in line with the literature. A good relationship allows for greater interaction, which generates a ‘common language’ between the transmitter and receiver and helps for a better understanding of the transferred knowledge (Reagans & McEvily, 2003)

The attractiveness of a foreign source improves the usefulness of knowledge transferred. Husted and Michailova (2003) state that there is a preference for Russians to develop own idea’s and knowledge instead of adopting knowledge from foreigners. Maybe it is much more prestigious to create your own ‘knowledge’ rather reusing information created elsewhere. However, following this research this is not true. Russians are maybe reluctant in the beginning to accept knowledge by a foreign source. Nonetheless, Russians are willing to acquire knowledge from a foreign source, when this foreign knowledge is tested in Russia and the foreign knowledge has proved itself in Russia. This confirms the literature on knowledge transfer. A foreign source becomes attractive from a recipient’s standpoint when it exhibits superior results over time (Perez-Nordtvedt et al., 2008; Easterby-Smith et al., 2008).

The same holds for the third assumption where perceived value, rareness, inimitability and non-substitutability of the knowledge transferred across borders are positively related to the attractiveness of the foreign knowledge source. These characteristics are being seen as positive when valuing the attractiveness of the source. However, when assessing the value of the knowledge, a Russian demands that these characteristics are already being used in Russia. The unique characteristics of a company are being seen as attractive and improve knowledge transfer (Perez-Nordtvedt et al., 2008; Kogut & Zander, 2000).

(32)

my observations. When a company invests in resources to transfer knowledge more easily, then a Russian has the intent to use these resources to take on knowledge and share it. The learning intent can be increased by developing clear structures within an organisation with money driven schemes. It has been established that the recipient’s intent to learn is a key determinant of the extent of knowledge (Hamel, 1991; Simonin, 2004).

The last factor investigated is certainly true. Transfer success increases as the articulability of the knowledge increases. This is observed as well in most of the literature, where it is stated that know-how and information written down is more easily transferable than implicit knowledge (Möller & Svahn, 2004; Carlile, 2004; Schultz, 2001). However, Bhagat et al. (2002) suggest that in individualistic cultures this is not always true. From observations in this research it is both useful to make knowledge explicit to a customer and to employees in an organisation. Communication and knowledge sharing are easiest in stable and often hierarchical business nets as they contain primarily codifiable, explicit knowledge (Möller & Svahn, 2004). This statement of Möller and Svahn is correct, but it is difficult to create correct codifiable and explicit knowledge. When selling products you have to articulate the specific knowledge and try to make it touchable for the customer. In an organisation you have to work with reports and feedback papers, together with strict observations.

The observations from this case study are in line with literature about knowledge transfer. However, some factors are more critical than other factors, like relationship quality and the articulability of the knowledge. Moreover, some factors are also more affected by the specific norms, believes and customs of Russians and Dutch. The factor learning intent must be forced by Russians, together with the feeling that knowledge must be tested in Russia before putting it into practice.

(33)

Table 1

Issues for Western Managers

Relationship quality Particular way of doing business in Russia; the use of relationships (blat), top down structure, being physically present.

Relationship quality Russian investors choose their products on the basis of the trustworthiness, credibility and their network. Money plays an important role as well.

Articulability Use of short term goals together with money driven schemes

Articulability Make knowledge articulable and ‘touchable’ for Russians.

Articulability Use written reports and feedback papers for optimal diffusion

of knowledge within the organization.

Learning intent Force learning with employees. Show the benefits of learning

to managers. Source attractiveness and

resource-based characteristics

Make sure foreign knowledge is already tested in Russia before putting it into the market.

(34)

structure with short lines and written protocols. Again this has to be controlled by the manager. When selling products that are not concrete, like support and service, you have to visualize the products for the customer. This can be done by illustrating it with pictures or describing what the cost benefits are of the new product. Another point highlighted is the learning intent. Because Russians are not likely to take initiative, this has to be forced. When teaching Russians new practices, make sure this happens in congenial groups. Russians are unlikely to ask something when their boss is sitting next to them. Another problem is to make sure the learned knowledge is being diffused in the organization. This is achieved by written reports and feedback papers. Moreover, working with protocols helps as well. Again, make sure you control the workers strictly. When selling product in Russia that are not Russian, make certain that these products have been put into practice in Russia. The same holds for company practices. A business partner wants to know the historical background of the company and product in Russia, before finalizing the business transaction.

Table 2.

Issues for Russian Managers

Relationship quality Try to understand the concepts of western managers. And learn English.

Learning intent Motivate employees. Try to think less hierarchical.

Articulability Use the explicit knowledge correctly in the reports.

Learning Intent Try to accept new knowledge and share it with others in the organization

Try to impart initiative into Russian employees

(35)

Russian managers in all layers of the firm have to adopt new knowledge and share it with others in the organization. This can be done by reports and feedback papers, but also with general meetings. It is important to create an atmosphere in the company that the employees do not manipulate the reports to show up their best advantage. The knowledge diffused in the company has to be accurate. Important as well is to give Russian employees initiative. However, give initiative to only those who can handle initiative and responsibilities.

If Russian and Western managers apply both these recommendations than the comprehension and usefulness of the transferred knowledge will increase.

Issues for future research

This research has investigated some critical factors in the process of knowledge transfer between Russia and the Netherlands. This is based on companies working in the agricultural industry. Future research can expand the view on knowledge transfer by using people from more industries. Or maybe go more into depth with specific industries. Moreover, I have interviewed Russian managers from the provinces Moscow and Nizhny-Novogrod. Other investigations can use people from other regions as well. This study is qualitative of nature and believed to be culturally sensitive. In this qualitative research interviewees can express better their own cultural perception than with a quantitative survey. However, in future research maybe it is possible to make surveys, in order to make it statistically valid as well. Future research on the topic of knowledge transfer in general needs to be more aware that there are cross-cultural differences. I want to recommend other authors to take this into account when investigating knowledge transfer across borders.

Acknowledgements

(36)

References

Adler P. (1999). ‘Building better bureaucracies’,Academy of Management Executive,13,36-47 Argote L, Ingram P. (2000). Knowledge transfer: a basis for competitive advantage in firms.

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 82: 150–169.

Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal

Management, 17, 99–120.

Beamish P. W., Berdrow I. (2000). Unfolding the myth of IJV learning. Ivey working paper, University of Western Ontario.

Bhagat, R. S., Kedia, B. L., Harveston, P. D. and Triandis, H. (2002). ‘Cultural variations in the crossborder transfer of organizational knowledge: an integrative framework’.

Academy of Management Review, 27, 204–21.

Bowman C, Ambrosini V. (1997). Using single respondents in strategy research. British

Journal of Management 8: 119–131.

Bresman, H., Birkinshaw, J. and Nobel, R. (1999). ‘Knowledge transfer in international acquisitions’. Journal of International Business Studies, 30, 439–62.

Brouthers, K. D., Brouthers E. L. and Werner S. (2008), ‘Resource-Based Advantages in an International Context, journal of management, 34, 189-217

Camiah, N., Hollinshead, G. (2003). “Assessing the potential for effective cross-cultural working between ‘‘new’’ Russian managers and western expatriates”. Journal of

World Business, 38, 245-261

Cresswell, J.W. (2006), Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five

Approaches, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Das, T.K., and B.-S. Teng. (1998). Between trust and control: Developing confidence in partner cooperation in alliances. Academy of Management Review, 23, 491–512. Deeds, D. and Hill, C. (1996). ‘Strategic alliances and the rate of new product development:

an empirical study of new biotechnology firms’. Journal of Business Venturing, 11, 41–58.

De Ruyter, K. and Scholl N., (1998). "Positioning qualitative market research: reflections from theory and practice", Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 1, 7 - 14

Easterby-Smith, M., Crossan, M. and Nicolini, D. (2000). ‘Organizational learning: debates past, present and future’. Journal of Management Studies, 37, 783–96.

Eisenhardt, K.M. & M.E. Graebner (2007), Theory-building from cases: opportunities and challenges, Academy of Management Journal, 50, 25-32.

Geppert M. (1996). Paths of managerial learning in the East German context. Organization

Studies 17: 249–268.

Grant, R. M. (1996). ‘Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm’. Strategic Management

Journal, 17, 109– 22.

Gupta, A. K. and Govindarajan, V. (2000). ‘Knowledge flows within multinational corporations’. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 473–96.

Håkanson, L. and Nobel, R. (2000). ‘Technology characteristics and reverse technology transfer’. Management International Review, 40, 29–40.

Håkanson, L. and Nobel, R. (2001). ‘Organizational characteristics and reverse technology transfer’. Management International Review, 41, 395–420.

Hamel G. (1991). “Competition for competence and inter-partner learning within international strategic alliances”. Strategic Management Journal, Summer Special Issue 12: 83–103 Hansen, M. T. (1999). “The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing

Analyzing knowledge transfer between the Netherlands and Russia

Analyzing knowledge transfer between the Netherlands and

Russia

Analyzing knowledge transfer to Russia between a Dutch company and its

Russian subsidiaries

Table of contents

Analyzing knowledge transfer between the Netherlands and

Russia: a case study of knowledge transfer between a Dutch

company and its Russian subsidiaries

Abstract

Introduction

Theoretical overview

Assumptions

The case companies

Case methodology

Findings

Conclusion and discussion

Issues for future research

Acknowledgements

References