Experiential and Informational Knowledge, Architectural Marketing Capabilities, and the Adaptive Performance of Export Ventures: A Cross-National Study

Decision Sciences, Spring 2003 by Morgan, Neil A, Zou, Shaoming, Vorhies, Douglas W, Katsikeas, Constantine S

ABSTRACT

Knowledge-based view (KBV) theory posits that the acquisition and use of relevant knowledge is key to understanding organizational performance. However, there is relatively little empirical evidence to support or refute several important propositions underlying KBV theory explanations of organizational performance. In particular, the extant literature has focused on individual technical and scientific components of the knowledge bases of firms in dynamic industries, and largely ignored both different levels of informational and experiential knowledge relevant to the market environment, and the increasingly important context of exporting. Our study addresses these knowledge gaps by developing a framework for export venture knowledge management and empirically examining relationships between different types of individual-level and organizational-level knowledge relevant to the market environment, architectural marketing capabilities, and the adaptive performance of export ventures. Using primary data collected in the United Kingdom and China, our study indicates that export ventures' organizational-level experiential and informational knowledge, and individual-level experiential knowledge relevant to the market environment, is positively associated with export ventures' architectural marketing capabilities, which are in turn associated with the adaptive performance of export ventures.

Subject Areas: Causal Models, Globalization, Knowledge-Based Systems, Organizational Theory, Planning/Strategy, Survey Research/Design.

INTRODUCTION

Two fundamental questions in the study of organizations are "Why do firms exist?" and "Why do some firms perform better than others?" (e.g., Conner, 1991; Helfat & Raubitschek, 2000). Over the past decade, a new school of thought addressing both of these questions labeled the "knowledge-based view of the firm" (KBV) has emerged (e.g., Conner & Prahalad, 1996; Gupta & Govindarajan, 2000). The KBV posits that firms exist as social communities of knowledge (e.g., Demsetz, 1991; Kogut & Zander, 1996), with knowledge forming the most strategically significant firm resource, and heterogeneity in knowledge resources explaining interfirm performance variations (e.g., Grant, 1996b; Kogut & Zander, 1992). The KBV has generated significant scholarly interest across a large number of disciplines including organization theory, decision sciences, strategic management, management information system (MIS), operations, marketing, and international business (e.g., Basu, 1998; Earl, 2001; Hult, 1998; Inkpen & Dinur, 1998; Sinkula, 1994; Spender, 1996). Managers have also shown considerable interest in KBV theory, resulting in the creation of knowledge management functions in many organizations and knowledge management services becoming a significant source of revenue for consulting firms.

However, despite this widespread scholarly and managerial interest, understanding of the KBV theory on which knowledge management practice is based is limited by three characteristics of the existing literature. First, while a fundamental KBV premise is that an organization's knowledge base, comprising different types of knowledge at different levels of the organization, is linked with business performance outcomes, there have been remarkably few direct attempts to empirically examine this proposition. While the literature reveals a number of studies examining relationships between individual types of knowledge at particular levels within organizations, such as corporate-level research and development (R&D) activity and patents, with performance outcomes (e.g., Henderson & Clark, 1990), there have been few, if any, studies that simultaneously examine multiple components of an organization's knowledge base. Since KBV theory explicitly views a firm's knowledge base as comprising different types of knowledge at different levels in the organization, this is an important gap in existing knowledge. Failing to empirically examine such a fundamental KBV proposition can lead to questions concerning the utility of KBV theory, and the validity of resulting knowledge management prescriptions.

Second, both theoretical and empirical research in the KBV literature has focused primarily on technology-intensive and dynamic industries such as semi-conductors, biotechnology, and pharmaceuticals. As a result, most studies have emphasized technical and R&D knowledge, largely ignoring knowledge relating to an organization's market environment (e.g., Lord & Ranft, 2000; Sinkula, 1994). Although the notion of external market information as an important resource has been addressed in the marketing literature (e.g., Jaworski & Kohli, 1993; Slater & Narver, 1994), this has not been integrated within a KBV theory framework to include different types and levels of market knowledge in an organization's knowledge base, and the use of this knowledge in the development and utilization of organizational capabilities that allow organizations to adapt to their environment.