Javernick Will, A N (2009) Mobilizing institutional knowledge for international projects: The relative importance, acquisition and transfer of institutional knowledge for international firms. PhD thesis, Stanford University, USA.
Abstract
Knowledge regarding a local area's institutions - regulations, norms, and cultural-cognitive beliefs and meanings - is recognized as being critically important for firms entering foreign countries. Acquiring and maintaining this knowledge can reduce the liabilities, costs and risks faced by firms when internationalizing - especially developers, engineers and constructors engaged in global projects. However, the relative importance of different types of institutional knowledge, identification and analysis of external methods and sources for acquiring this knowledge, and recognition and analysis of processes that different types of firms use to integrate and share this kind of knowledge remain poorly understood. This dissertation employs qualitative, case-based research methodology with informants from fifteen international real estate development, construction and engineering firms in the Architecture-Engineering-Construction (AEC) industry to help address these issues. The dissertation follows a three-journal paper format. The first paper identifies the types of local institutional knowledge that are important for firms engaged in international projects, categorizes these according to Scott's three pillars of institutions - regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive - and analyzes differences according to firm types. The second paper explores and elaborates the methods and external sources firms use to acquire this knowledge when they enter a foreign market; it accounts for differences according to firm and knowledge type; and it develops propositions about why organizational learning approaches differ across types of firms. The third paper identifies knowledge sharing methods and processes used within firms to integrate and transfer institutional knowledge across the firm over time; and it discusses the benefits and limitations associated with the identified transfer processes. This dissertation expands upon existing theory, contributing to a more complete understanding of organizational learning and knowledge transfer for the institutional knowledge required on international projects. It also addresses a practical need for international AEC firms who want to understand where they should focus their efforts for acquiring, integrating and transferring the knowledge that is most important to their specific organizations and strategies. The long-range goal of this research, when combined with follow-on work, is to allow firms to capture and reuse global institutional knowledge more effectively, so they can develop economically, environmentally and socially sustainable practices for diverse local environments.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Levitt, R E |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | organizational learning; real estate; international project; learning; regulation; reuse; developer; market |
| Index terms: | norms, journal, regulation, real estate development, relative importance, research methodology, dissertation, international firm, international project, engineer, liability, sustainable practice, engineering firm, strategy, knowledge transfer, acquisition, meaning, knowledge sharing, organizational learning, real estate |
| Subjects: | sociology, economic development, research dissemination and communication, firms, knowledge management, strategic management, sustainable practices, professional development, real estate economics, research design and methodology, management, liability law, profession, risk assessment, political science, business |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Urban Studies, International Construction, Risk Management, Legal Issues, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Digital Applications, Business Strategy, Information Management, Governance |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here