4.7 Article

Knowledge worker mobility and knowledge management in MNEs: A bibliometric analysis and research agenda

期刊

JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH
卷 142, 期 -, 页码 464-475

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.12.056

关键词

Knowledge worker; Knowledge management; MNEs; Employee mobility; Bibliometrics

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Resource-Based View emphasizes the importance of valuable, rare, inimitable resources and their exploitation for a sustainable competitive advantage. The Knowledge-Based View views knowledge as an organizational resource, residing in explicit and tacit knowledge held by organizations and individuals. This article reviews the evolution of knowledge transfer in multinational enterprises (MNEs) and the role of knowledge workers, identifies gaps in current literature, and outlines future research agenda.
The Resource-Based View suggests that for an organization to have a sustainable competitive advantage, the firm should have valuable, rare, inimitable resources and have the ability to exploit them. The Knowledge-Based View treats knowledge as an organizational resource, which resides in both the explicit and tacit knowledge held by organizations and their people. For MNEs, the tacit knowledge is transferred by the movement of knowledge workers, who take on a boundary-spanning role. However, this trend is in decline. With increasing barriers (formal and informal) to the movement of professionals, increased digitization, and Industry 4.0, the physical movement of professionals may not be required. This literature review maps the evolution of knowledge transfer by MNEs and the knowledge workers' role. We classify the studies into six clusters related to mobility, the use of expatriates and knowledge transfer, knowledge spillover, transfer practice, relational learning, and knowledge management and post-acquisition integration. The article identifies gaps in the extant literature and sets an agenda for future research.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据