Bernhard Moos

The Impact of Cultural Differences on IT Nearshoring Risks from a German Perspective

Which nearshoring risks arise from cultural differences between German outsourcers and IT providers located in the nearshore environment? This paper focuses on the domain of IT nearshoring which is quite sparsely researched. Based on exploratory expert interviews from the IT service industry in six typical nearshoring countries from a German perspective (Bulgaria, Russia, Serbia, Lebanon, Tunisia, Turkey), we analyze which and how cultural differences influence typical outsourcing risks. We develop a causal model which derives outsourcing risk factors (such as insufficient formal communication, insufficient interaction, emotionally laden communication, and insufficiently open communication) from different cultural dimensions and links them to traditional outsourcing risk dimensions.

THE ROLE OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS FOR INNOVATION: AN ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY PERSPECTIVE

What is the role of Knowledge Management Systems (KMS) for a firms innovativeness and absorptive capacity (ACAP)? Research shows that a firms capacity to acquire and utilise relevant knowledge, i.e., its absorptive capacity, is decisive for innovation success. We develop a theoretical model that links the availability and usage of KMS with a firms ACAP and its organisational knowledge to explain its contribution for a firms innovation success. Using data from 222 manufacturing firms, we can show that the availability of a KMS in a firm affects its innovation success by contributing to its ACAP. Looking at the impact of different knowledge types on innovativeness, the results show that only technological knowledge is a substantial determinant of innovation success but not market knowledge.

Suggestions for Measuring Organizational Innovativeness: A Review

Innovativeness has emerged as a firms key nonfinancial goal and as an important measure of organizational performance. But, the different measurement models used in empirical research impede the emergence of a consistent perspective on drivers and consequences of innovativeness. We reviewed 12 major journals from various disciplines and found 56 articles that provide measurement models for innovativeness. Based on reviewing and comparing these measurement models, we derive suggestions for a more comprehensive measure of innovativeness for future research.

The Role of Innovation Governance and Knowledge Management for Innovation Success

To innovate is one of the basic functions of a firm and a competitive necessity in dynamic markets. So what management mechanisms can a firm use to foster inno-vation success? This paper analyzes if knowledge management (KM) and innovation governance (IG) distinguish top innovation performers. Theoretically, we scrutinize if KM and IG mechanisms, composed of systems capabilities (organizational structures, policies, and processes) and coordination capabilities, are antecedents of absorptive capacity, knowledge stock and, eventually, innovation success of a firm. Using data from 204 firms, the results show that - IG and KM applying firms have significantly higher innovation success resulting from higher absorptive capacity and greater knowledge stock, - the most important IG mechanisms are measuring innovation success, using tools for monitoring the innovation process and a structured idea management, - KM drives innovation generation but not its transfer to products and markets.

Whom to Ask for What knowledge? A Comparison of Exchange Partners and Their Impact on Knowledge Types

From which sources does a firm acquire its knowledge? One of the most important key assets of a firm is its knowledge stock, which can be distinguished into different types of knowledge (e.g., market knowledge). This knowledge stock results from internal and/or from external sources such as exchange partners (e.g., customers). Our paper focuses on these external partners and investigates how the social capital residing in the relationships to these exchange partners is related to the creation of different types of knowledge. Thereby, this research generates practical guidelines for investing in a firms network. Using data from 161 firms, the results show that (1) customers are the most important source for market knowledge, (2) regarding process, technological and organizational knowledge the combination of R&D partners and customers contributes the most, and (3) for product knowledge no single source being the most important knowledge contributor can be identified.

Social Capital and Usefulness of External Knowledge: The Moderating Role of Group Affiliation

Knowledge is the most important firm asset and studies show that social capital facilitates access to internal and external knowledge and in turn increases business value. In that respect, studies show that companies sharing some similarities such as organizational values and practices may benefit more than companies differing in various aspects. In particular, group affiliations have been shown to influence performance in specific contexts but results are mixed at best. In addition, the question of how the influence of social capital on transferring useful external knowledge might be moderated by closer affiliations between companies is virtually not addressed. Employing a survey among manufacturing companies, this paper contributes to extant research by demonstrating a moderating effect of group affiliations on the relationship between social capital and useful external knowledge.