知识管理战略、创新与企业绩效的关系
|
摘要
现有的理论研究和仿真研究都指出知识管理战略(编码化和人际化)对企业创新行为(探索式创新和利用式创新)有重要而复杂的影响,呼吁对此进行实证检验。同时,关于知识管理战略和创新行为与业务战略之间的匹配关系,现有文献多限于理论探讨,缺乏实证研究。此外,相关研究表明,在企业管理实践中,知识管理战略和创新行为的选择和实施仍然带有一定盲目性,需要明确、可靠的理论指导。针对上述问题,论文研究了企业创新行为的前因和后果,主要关心两类机制:①知识管理战略如何影响创新行为;②创新行为如何影响企业绩效。每一类机制均涉及直接作用、互补作用和调节作用。研究重点是分析上述机制在不同业务战略类型(防守者、前瞻者和分析者)间的差异。
通过文献回顾,提出概念模型和研究假设。在走访企业的基础上,选用现有文献使用过的量表,经过征求专家意见、19位企管人员预测试和113份问卷的小样本研究,形成正式调查问卷。正式调查共获取来自中国东、中、西部272家企业的有效问卷。在检验测量工具信度、效度的基础上,运用企业战略导向量表(STROBE)对业务战略类型进行划分,并运用回归分析和结构方程模型对假设进行检验,发现:
①知识管理战略与业务战略之间存在匹配关系。在防守者中,只有编码化的知识管理战略对创新行为起显著的推动作用;而在前瞻者和分析者中,只有人际化的知识管理战略对创新行为起显著的推动作用。
②创新行为与业务战略之间存在匹配关系。在防守者中,只有探索式创新显著地提升绩效;在前瞻者中,只有利用式创新显著地提升绩效;在分析者中,两类创新行为均能显著地提升绩效。
③在不同业务战略类型中,“知识管理战略→创新行为→企业绩效”关系链的表现形式不同:在防守者中,主要表现为“编码化战略→探索式创新→企业绩效”的路径;在前瞻者中,主要表现为“人际化战略→利用式创新→企业绩效”的路径;而在分析者中,主要表现为“人际化战略→探索式创新→企业绩效”、“人际化战略→利用式创新→企业绩效”两条路径。
④在三种业务战略类型中,编码化战略与人际化战略的互补作用对创新行为均无显著影响。
⑤在防守者中,探索式创新与利用式创新的互补作用对企业绩效有显著的负向影响;在前瞻者和分析者中,探索式创新与利用式创新的互补作用对企业绩效均无显著影响。
⑥在不同业务战略类型的企业中,组织基础(包括组织结构、组织文化和信息技术)对知识管理战略与创新行为的关系有不同的调节作用。在防守者中,正规化和信息技术能力均对人际化战略与探索式创新的关系有负向调节作用,集权化、合作型文化和信息技术能力分别对编码化战略与利用式创新的关系有正向、正向和负向的调节作用,集权化和正规化分别对人际化战略与利用式创新的关系有负向和正向的调节作用;在前瞻者中,集权化对编码化战略与探索式创新的关系有正向调节作用,信息技术能力对人际化战略与探索式创新的关系有负向调节作用;在分析者中,集权化、正规化和合作型文化分别对编码化战略与探索式创新的关系有正向、正向和负向的调节作用,集权化和合作型文化分别对人际化战略与探索式创新的关系有负向和正向的调节作用,集权化和正规化均对编码化战略与利用式创新的关系有正向调节作用。
⑦在不同业务战略类型的企业中,外部环境特征(动态性和竞争性)对创新行为与企业绩效的关系有不同的调节作用。在防守者中,外部环境特征对创新行为与企业绩效关系的调节作用不显著。在前瞻者中,环境动态性和竞争性分别对探索式创新与企业绩效的关系有正向和负向的调节作用;环境竞争性对利用式创新与企业绩效的关系有负向调节作用。在分析者中,环境动态性和竞争性分别对探索式创新与企业绩效的关系有负向和正向的调节作用。
在对假设检验结果进行讨论后,针对防守者、分析者和前瞻者,分别归纳出关于两类作用机制的整合模型(包含直接作用、互补作用和调节作用)。
Previous theoretical studies and simulation studies suggested that knowledge management strategies (i.e. codification and personalization) have important and complicated impact on innovation activities (i.e. exploratory innovation and exploitative innovation), which calls for empirical examination. Meanwhile, concerning the fit among knowledge management strategies, innovation activities, and business strategies, most of the previous literatures are limited to theoretical discussion, lack of empirical research. Moreover, relevant research indicates that, during practical management, firms are blind to some extent in their selection and implementation of a specific KM strategy and innovation activities. These firms need specific and reliable theories as guidance. Considering all of these above, this paper investigates the antecedents and consequences of innovation activities. Two mechanisms are examined:①How knowledge management strategies impact on innovations;②How innovations impact on firm performance. Each mechanism involves direct effects, complementary effects, and moderating effects. Our focus is to analyze the differences of mechanisms among the three business strategy typologies (i.e., Defenders, Prospectors, and Analyzers).
A conceptual model together with research hypotheses is established via literature review. Based on interviewing with some firm managers, existing scales in previous literature are selected, after consulting some academic specialists, pre-tests to 19 firm managers and a pilot study upon 113 MBA students, a formal questionnaire is developed. Large sample study obtains 272 valid questionnaires from enterprises distributed in eastern, middle, and western part of China. Validity and reliability of constructs are examined, samples are classified into business strategy typologies with STROBE scales, and hypotheses are tested empirically through regression analysis and structural equation model approaches. Findings show that:
①Matching-up relationship exists between knowledge management strategy and business strategy. For Defenders, only codification strategy can significantly promote innovation activities; For Prospectors and Analyzers, only personalized strategy can significantly promote innovation activities.
②Matching-up relationship exists between innovation activities and business strategy. For Defenders, only exploratory innovation can significantly promote performance. For Prospectors, only exploitative innovation can significantly promote performance. For Analyzers, both exploratory innovation and exploitative innovation can significantly promote performance.
③For different business strategy typologies, each of their relationship path (KM strategy→innovation activities→firm performance) is different. For Defenders, the path is presented in form of‘codification strategy→exploratory innovation→firm performance’. For Prospectors, the path is presented in form of‘personalization strategy→exploitative innovation→firm performance’. For Analyzers, two paths are presented in form of‘personalization strategy→exploratory innovation→firm performance’and form of‘personalization strategy→exploitative innovation→firm performance’.
④Complementary effect of codification strategy and personalization strategy has no significant effect on innovation activities in the three business strategy typologies.
⑤For Defenders, complementary effect of exploratory innovation and exploitative innovation has significant negative effect on firm performance. For both Prospectors and Analyzers, complementary effect of exploratory innovation and exploitative innovation have no significant effect on firm performance.
⑥Moderating effects of organizational infrastructure (i.e., organization structure, organization culture, and information technology) on the relationship between knowledge management strategies and innovation activities vary in different business strategy typologies. For Defenders, formalization and IT competency both have negative moderating effect on the relationship between codification strategy and exploratory innovation; centralization, collaboration culture and IT competency separately has positive, positive and negative moderating effect on the relationship between codification strategy and exploitative innovation; centralization and formalization separately has negative and positive moderating effect on the relationship between personalization strategy and exploitative innovation. For Prospectors, centralization has positive moderating effect on the relationship between codification strategy and exploratory innovation; IT competency has negative moderating effect on the relationship between personalization strategy and exploratory innovation. For Analyzers, centralization, formalization and collaboration culture separately has positive, positive and negative moderating effect on the relationship between codification strategy and exploratory innovation; centralization and collaboration culture separately has negative and positive moderating effect on the relationship between personalization strategy and exploratory innovation; centralization and formalization both have positive moderating effect on the relationship between codification strategy and exploitative innovation.
⑦Moderating effects of environmental aspects (dynamism and competitiveness) on the relationships between innovation activities and firm performance vary in different business strategy typologies. For Defenders, environmental aspects have no significant moderating effect on the relationships between innovation activities and firm performance. For Prospectors, environmental dynamism and competitiveness separately has positive and negative moderating effect on the relationship between exploratory innovation and firm performance; environmental competitiveness has negative moderating effect on the relationship between exploitative innovation and firm performance. For Analyzers, environmental dynamism and competitiveness separately has negative and positive moderating effect on the relationship between exploratory innovation and firm performance.
Based on the discussion about the results of hypotheses testing, integrated models for the two mechanisms, involving direct effects, complementary effects, and moderating effects, are established respectively for Defenders, Prospectors, and Analyzers.
通过文献回顾,提出概念模型和研究假设。在走访企业的基础上,选用现有文献使用过的量表,经过征求专家意见、19位企管人员预测试和113份问卷的小样本研究,形成正式调查问卷。正式调查共获取来自中国东、中、西部272家企业的有效问卷。在检验测量工具信度、效度的基础上,运用企业战略导向量表(STROBE)对业务战略类型进行划分,并运用回归分析和结构方程模型对假设进行检验,发现:
①知识管理战略与业务战略之间存在匹配关系。在防守者中,只有编码化的知识管理战略对创新行为起显著的推动作用;而在前瞻者和分析者中,只有人际化的知识管理战略对创新行为起显著的推动作用。
②创新行为与业务战略之间存在匹配关系。在防守者中,只有探索式创新显著地提升绩效;在前瞻者中,只有利用式创新显著地提升绩效;在分析者中,两类创新行为均能显著地提升绩效。
③在不同业务战略类型中,“知识管理战略→创新行为→企业绩效”关系链的表现形式不同:在防守者中,主要表现为“编码化战略→探索式创新→企业绩效”的路径;在前瞻者中,主要表现为“人际化战略→利用式创新→企业绩效”的路径;而在分析者中,主要表现为“人际化战略→探索式创新→企业绩效”、“人际化战略→利用式创新→企业绩效”两条路径。
④在三种业务战略类型中,编码化战略与人际化战略的互补作用对创新行为均无显著影响。
⑤在防守者中,探索式创新与利用式创新的互补作用对企业绩效有显著的负向影响;在前瞻者和分析者中,探索式创新与利用式创新的互补作用对企业绩效均无显著影响。
⑥在不同业务战略类型的企业中,组织基础(包括组织结构、组织文化和信息技术)对知识管理战略与创新行为的关系有不同的调节作用。在防守者中,正规化和信息技术能力均对人际化战略与探索式创新的关系有负向调节作用,集权化、合作型文化和信息技术能力分别对编码化战略与利用式创新的关系有正向、正向和负向的调节作用,集权化和正规化分别对人际化战略与利用式创新的关系有负向和正向的调节作用;在前瞻者中,集权化对编码化战略与探索式创新的关系有正向调节作用,信息技术能力对人际化战略与探索式创新的关系有负向调节作用;在分析者中,集权化、正规化和合作型文化分别对编码化战略与探索式创新的关系有正向、正向和负向的调节作用,集权化和合作型文化分别对人际化战略与探索式创新的关系有负向和正向的调节作用,集权化和正规化均对编码化战略与利用式创新的关系有正向调节作用。
⑦在不同业务战略类型的企业中,外部环境特征(动态性和竞争性)对创新行为与企业绩效的关系有不同的调节作用。在防守者中,外部环境特征对创新行为与企业绩效关系的调节作用不显著。在前瞻者中,环境动态性和竞争性分别对探索式创新与企业绩效的关系有正向和负向的调节作用;环境竞争性对利用式创新与企业绩效的关系有负向调节作用。在分析者中,环境动态性和竞争性分别对探索式创新与企业绩效的关系有负向和正向的调节作用。
在对假设检验结果进行讨论后,针对防守者、分析者和前瞻者,分别归纳出关于两类作用机制的整合模型(包含直接作用、互补作用和调节作用)。
Previous theoretical studies and simulation studies suggested that knowledge management strategies (i.e. codification and personalization) have important and complicated impact on innovation activities (i.e. exploratory innovation and exploitative innovation), which calls for empirical examination. Meanwhile, concerning the fit among knowledge management strategies, innovation activities, and business strategies, most of the previous literatures are limited to theoretical discussion, lack of empirical research. Moreover, relevant research indicates that, during practical management, firms are blind to some extent in their selection and implementation of a specific KM strategy and innovation activities. These firms need specific and reliable theories as guidance. Considering all of these above, this paper investigates the antecedents and consequences of innovation activities. Two mechanisms are examined:①How knowledge management strategies impact on innovations;②How innovations impact on firm performance. Each mechanism involves direct effects, complementary effects, and moderating effects. Our focus is to analyze the differences of mechanisms among the three business strategy typologies (i.e., Defenders, Prospectors, and Analyzers).
A conceptual model together with research hypotheses is established via literature review. Based on interviewing with some firm managers, existing scales in previous literature are selected, after consulting some academic specialists, pre-tests to 19 firm managers and a pilot study upon 113 MBA students, a formal questionnaire is developed. Large sample study obtains 272 valid questionnaires from enterprises distributed in eastern, middle, and western part of China. Validity and reliability of constructs are examined, samples are classified into business strategy typologies with STROBE scales, and hypotheses are tested empirically through regression analysis and structural equation model approaches. Findings show that:
①Matching-up relationship exists between knowledge management strategy and business strategy. For Defenders, only codification strategy can significantly promote innovation activities; For Prospectors and Analyzers, only personalized strategy can significantly promote innovation activities.
②Matching-up relationship exists between innovation activities and business strategy. For Defenders, only exploratory innovation can significantly promote performance. For Prospectors, only exploitative innovation can significantly promote performance. For Analyzers, both exploratory innovation and exploitative innovation can significantly promote performance.
③For different business strategy typologies, each of their relationship path (KM strategy→innovation activities→firm performance) is different. For Defenders, the path is presented in form of‘codification strategy→exploratory innovation→firm performance’. For Prospectors, the path is presented in form of‘personalization strategy→exploitative innovation→firm performance’. For Analyzers, two paths are presented in form of‘personalization strategy→exploratory innovation→firm performance’and form of‘personalization strategy→exploitative innovation→firm performance’.
④Complementary effect of codification strategy and personalization strategy has no significant effect on innovation activities in the three business strategy typologies.
⑤For Defenders, complementary effect of exploratory innovation and exploitative innovation has significant negative effect on firm performance. For both Prospectors and Analyzers, complementary effect of exploratory innovation and exploitative innovation have no significant effect on firm performance.
⑥Moderating effects of organizational infrastructure (i.e., organization structure, organization culture, and information technology) on the relationship between knowledge management strategies and innovation activities vary in different business strategy typologies. For Defenders, formalization and IT competency both have negative moderating effect on the relationship between codification strategy and exploratory innovation; centralization, collaboration culture and IT competency separately has positive, positive and negative moderating effect on the relationship between codification strategy and exploitative innovation; centralization and formalization separately has negative and positive moderating effect on the relationship between personalization strategy and exploitative innovation. For Prospectors, centralization has positive moderating effect on the relationship between codification strategy and exploratory innovation; IT competency has negative moderating effect on the relationship between personalization strategy and exploratory innovation. For Analyzers, centralization, formalization and collaboration culture separately has positive, positive and negative moderating effect on the relationship between codification strategy and exploratory innovation; centralization and collaboration culture separately has negative and positive moderating effect on the relationship between personalization strategy and exploratory innovation; centralization and formalization both have positive moderating effect on the relationship between codification strategy and exploitative innovation.
⑦Moderating effects of environmental aspects (dynamism and competitiveness) on the relationships between innovation activities and firm performance vary in different business strategy typologies. For Defenders, environmental aspects have no significant moderating effect on the relationships between innovation activities and firm performance. For Prospectors, environmental dynamism and competitiveness separately has positive and negative moderating effect on the relationship between exploratory innovation and firm performance; environmental competitiveness has negative moderating effect on the relationship between exploitative innovation and firm performance. For Analyzers, environmental dynamism and competitiveness separately has negative and positive moderating effect on the relationship between exploratory innovation and firm performance.
Based on the discussion about the results of hypotheses testing, integrated models for the two mechanisms, involving direct effects, complementary effects, and moderating effects, are established respectively for Defenders, Prospectors, and Analyzers.
引文
陈永霞,贾良定,李超平,宋继文,张君君. 2006.变革型领导、心理授权与员工的组织承诺:中国情景下的实证研究[J].管理世界, (1): 96-105.
达夫特著,王凤彬等译. 2003.组织理论与设计(第7版)[M].北京:清华大学出版社.
郭志刚. 1999.社会统计分析方法——SPSS软件应用[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社.
贺小刚著. 2006.企业家能力、组织能力与企业绩效[M].上海:上海财经大学出版社.
侯杰泰,温忠麟,成子娟著. 2004.结构方程模型及其应用[M].北京:教育科学出版社.
黄芳铭著. 2005.结构方程模式:理论与应用[M].北京:中国税务出版社.
蒋春燕,赵曙明. 2006.社会资本和公司企业家精神与绩效的关系:组织学习的中介作用——江苏与广东新兴企业的实证研究[J].管理世界, (10): 90-99.
廖家庆. 2005.策略配适、组织能力与经营绩效之关联性分析[D].国立东华大学企业管理研究所硕士学位论文.
林东清著,李东改编. 2005.知识管理理论与实务[M].北京:电子工业出版社.
刘军主编. 2008.管理研究方法:原理与应用[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社.
刘小禹,刘军,于广涛. 2008.初始信念、组织诱引对员工心理契约变化的影响[M].心理学报, 40(1): 64-73.
刘新民,李垣,冯进路. 2006.企业内部控制机制对创新模式选择的影响分析[J].南开管理评论, 9(2): 64-68.
卢锐,盛昭瀚. 2007.企业知识战略的属性研究[J].中国管理科学, 15(2): 121-125.
罗宾斯著,黄卫伟等译. 1997.管理学(第四版)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社.
马宏建,芮明杰. 2007.知识管理策略与知识创造[J].科研管理, 28(1): 38-41.
任峰,李垣,刘晓敏. 2004.动态环境中不同控制方式对创新选择的影响[J].科学学研究, 22(增刊): 136-140.
孙爱英,李垣,任峰. 2004.组织文化与技术创新方式的关系研究[J].科学学研究, 22(4): 432-437.
孙永波. 2006.企业知识管理模式选择研究[J].中国软科学, (3): 132-138.
孙永风,李垣,廖貅武. 2007.基于不同战略导向的创新选择与控制方式研究[J].管理工程学报, 21(4): 24-30.
孙永风,李垣. 2007.转型经济下中国企业创新选择的实证研究:环境与组织因素[J].管理工程学报, 21(1): 41-46.
王辉,忻蓉,徐淑英. 2006.中国企业CEO的领导行为及对企业经营业绩的影响[J].管理世界,(4): 87-96.
温忠麟,侯杰泰,马什赫伯特. 2003.潜变量交互效应分析方法[J].心理科学进展, 11(5): 593-599.
温忠麟,侯杰泰,马什赫伯特. 2004.结构方程模型检验:拟合指数与卡方准则[J].心理学报, 36 (2): 186-194.
萧荣德. 2005.知识资源对组织绩效之影响[D].国立中山大学资讯管理学系硕士学位论文.
谢洪明,刘常勇,李晓彤. 2002.知识管理战略、方法及其绩效研究[J].管理世界, (10): 85-92.
忻榕,徐淑英,王辉,张志学,陈维正. 2004.国有企业的企业文化:对其维度和影响的归纳性分析[A].徐淑英,刘忠明主编.中国企业管理的前沿研究[C].北京:北京大学出版社.
杨建君,王龙伟. 2007.企业市场导向与管理控制及创新方式的关系研究[J].科技进步与对策,24(9): 146-149.
张炜. 2007.智力资本与组织创新能力关系实证研究——以浙江中小技术企业为样本[J].科学学研究, 25(5): 1010-1013.
赵永彬,李垣,陈龙波. 2006.高新技术企业组织控制对技术创新选择的影响研究[J].科研管理, 27(3): 23-27.
钟竞,陈松. 2007.外部环境、创新平衡性与组织绩效的实证研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理, (5): 67-71.
周晔,胡汉辉,潘安成. 2005.我国企业知识管理活动的现状调查与分析[J].科研管理, 26(4): 80-85.
周玉泉,李垣. 2006.合作学习、组织柔性与创新方式选择的关系研究[J].科研管理, 27(2): 9-14.
朱伟民著. 2007.企业创新的组织基础[M].北京:经济科学出版社.
Adler P S, Borys B. 1996. Two types of bureaucracy: Enabling and coercive [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 61-89.
Adler P S, Kwon S. 2002. Social Capital: Prospects for a New Concept [J]. Academy of Management Review, 27: 17-40.
Adler P, Goldoftas B, Levine D. 1999. Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system [J]. Organization Science, 10(1): 43-68.
Aiken L S, West S G. 1991. Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions [M]. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Atuahene-Gima K, Murray J Y. 2007. Exploratory and exploitative learning in new product development: A social capital perspective on new technology ventures in China [J]. Journal of International Marketing, 15(2): 1-29.
Atuahene-Gima K. 2003. The Effects of Centrifugal and Centripetal Forces on Product Development Speed and Quality: How does Problem Solving Matter [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 46: 359-374.
Atuahene-Gima K. 2005. Resolving the capability–rigidity paradox in new product innovation [J]. Journal of Marketing, 69: 61-83.
Auh S, Menguc B. 2005. Balancing exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of competitive intensity. Journal of Business Research, 58: 1652-1661.
Ayers D, Dahlstrom R, Skinner S J. 1997. An exploratory investigation of organizational antecedents to new product success [J]. Journal of Marketing, 34: 107-116.
Baum J A C, Li S X, Usher J M. 2000. Making the next move: How experiential and vicarious learning shape the locations of chains’acquisitions [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45: 766-801.
Beckman C M. 2006. The influence of founding team company affiliations on firm behavior [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4): 741-758.
Benner M J, Tushman M L. 2002. Process management and technological innovation: A longitudinal study of the photography and paint industries [J]. Administration Science Quarterly, 47: 676-706.
Benner M J, Tushman M L. 2003. Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited [J]. Academy of Management Review, 28(2): 238-256.
Berends H, Vanhaverbeke W, Kirschbaum R. 2007. Knowledge management challenges in new business development: Case study observations [J]. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 24: 314-328.
Bierly P E, Daly P. 2002. Aligning Human Resource Management Practices and Knowledge Strategies [A]. In C W Choo, N Bontis (eds.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge [C], Oxford University Press, New York: 277-295.
Bierly P, Chakrabarti A. 1996. Generic knowledge strategies in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter special issue): 123-135.
Burgelman R A. 2002. Strategy as vector and the inertia of coevolutionary lock-in [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47: 325-357.
Cardinal L B. 2001. Technological innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: The use of organizational control in managing research and development [J]. Organization Science, 12(1): 19-36.
Caruana A, Morris M H, Vella A J. 1998. The Effect of Centralization and Formalization onEntrepreneurship in Export Firms [J]. Journal of Small Business Management, 36(1): 16-29.
Choi B, Lee H. 2002. Knowledge Management Strategy and Its Link to Knowledge Creation Process [J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 23: 173-187.
Choi B, Lee H. 2003. An Empirical Investigation of KM Styles and Their Effect on Corporate Performance [J]. Information & Management, 40: 403-417.
Choi B, Poon S K, Davis G J. 2008. Effects of Knowledge Management Strategy on Organizational Performance: A Complementarity Theory-Based Approach [J]. Omega the International Journal of Management Science, 36: 235-251.
Cohen J, Cohen P. 1983. Applied multiple regression/correlation for the behavioral science (2nd ed.) [M]. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Daft R L, Lengel R H. 1986. Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design[J]. Management Science, 32: 554-571.
Damanpour F. 1996. Organizational Complexity and Innovation: Developing and Testing Multiple Contingency Models [J]. Management Science, 42(5): 693-716.
Danneels E. 2002. The dynamics of product innovation and firm competences [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 23: 1095-1121.
Davenport T H, Glaser J. 2002. Just-in-Time Delivery Comes to Knowledge Management [J]. Harvard Business Review, 80(7): 107-112.
Davenport T H, Prusak L. 1998. Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know [M]. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Despres C, Chauvel D. 2002. Knowledge, context, and the management of variation [A]. In C. W. Choo, N. Bontis (Eds.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital And Organizational Knowledge [C], New York, Oxford University Press: 89-99.
Dess G G, Beard D W. 1984. Dimensions of organizational task environments [J]. Administration Science Quarterly, 29: 52-73.
Dess G G, Robinson R B. 1984. Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measures: The case of the privately-held firm and conglomerate business unit [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 5(3): 265-273.
Dewar R D, Dutton J E. 1986. The adoption of radical and incremental innovations: An empirical analysis [J]. Management Science, 32(11): 1422-1433.
Dyer J H, Nobeoka K. 2000. Creating and Managing a High-Performance Knowledge-Sharing Network: The Toyota Case [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 21: 345-367.
Ettlie J E, Bridges W P, O’Keefe R D. 1984. Organization strategy and structural differences forradical versus incremental innovation [J]. Management Science, 30(6): 682-695.
Ferrell O C, Skinner S J. 1988. Ethical behavior and bureaucratic structure in marketing research organizations [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, XXV: 103-109.
Ferrier W J, Smith K G, Grimm C M. 1999. The role of competitive action in marketing share erosion and industry dethronement: A study of industry leaders and challenges [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 42(4): 372-388.
Floyd S W, Lane P J. 2000. Strategizing throughout the organization: Managing role conflict in strategic renewal [J]. Academy of Management Review, 25: 154-177.
Geiger S W, Makri M. 2006. Exploration and exploitation innovation processes: The role of organizational slack in R&D intensive firms [J]. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 17: 97-108.
Gold A H, Malhotra A, Segars A H. 2001. Knowledge management: A organizational capabilities perspective [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1): 185-214.
Grover S K, Rajiv S. 2007. Strategic Alignment Between Business and Information Technology: A Knowledge-Based View of Behaviors, Outcome, and Consequences [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(3): 129-162.
Gupta A K, Smith K G, Shalley C E. 2006. The Interplay Between Exploration and Exploitation [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4): 693-706.
Hair J F, Anderson R E, Tatham R L, Black W C. 1998. Multivariate Data Analysis (5th edition) [M]. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Hall R, Andriani P. 2002. Managing Knowledge for Innovation [J]. Long Range Planning, 35(1): 237-253.
Hannan H T, Freeman J. 1984. Structural inertia and organizational change [J]. American Sociological Review, 49: 149-164.
Hansen M T, Haas M R. 2001. Competing for Attention in Knowledge Markets [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46 (1): 1-28.
Hansen M T, Nohria T, Tierney T. 1999. What’s your strategy for managing knowledge [J]. Harvard Business Review, (March-April): 106-116.
He Z, Wong P. 2004. Exploration and exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis [J]. Organization Science, 15(4): 481-494.
Jang S, Hong K, Bock G W, Kim I. 2002. Knowledge Management and Process Innovation: The Knowledge Transformation Path in Samsung SDI [J]. Journal of Knowledge Management, 6(5): 479-485.
Jansen J J P, Van Den Bosch F A J, Volberda H W. 2005. Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and ambidexterity: The impact of environmental and organizational antecedents [J]. Schmalenbach Business Review, 57: 351-363.
Jansen J J P, Van Den Bosch F A J, Volberda H W. 2006. Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators [J]. Management Science, 52(11): 1661-1674.
Katila R, Ahuja G. 2002. Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 1183-1194.
Katila R. 2002. New Product Search Over Time: Past Ideas in Their Prime [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 995-1010.
Keskin H. 2005. The Relationships Between Explicit and Tacit Oriented KM Strategy, and Firm Performance [J]. Journal of American Academy of Business, 7(1): 169-175.
Kline R B. 1998. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling [M]. New York: The Guilford Press.
Knott A M. 2002. Exploration and exploitation as complements [A], In C. W. Choo, N. Bontis (Eds.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital And Organizational Knowledge [C], New York: Oxford University Press.
Kyriakopoulos K, Moorman C. 2004. Tradeoffs in marketing exploitation and exploration strategies: The overlooked role of market orientation [J]. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21: 219-240.
Lee H, Choi B. 2003. Knowledge management enablers, processes, and organizational performance: An integrative view and empirical examination [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(1): 179-228.
Lee J, Lee J, Lee H. 2003. Exploration and exploitation in the presence of network externalities [J]. Management Science, 49: 553-570.
Levinthal D A, March J G. 1993. The myopia of learning [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 95-112.
Lewin A Y, Long C P, Caroll T N. 1999. The co-evolution of new organizational forms [J]. Organization Science, 10: 535-550.
Liao Y S. 2007. The Effects of Knowledge Management Strategy and Organization Structure on Innovation [J]. International Journal of Management, 24(1): 53-60.
Lin X, Germain R. 2003. Organizational structure, context, customer orientation, and performance: lessons from Chinese state-owned enterprises [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 24:1131-1151.
Liu D, Ray G, Whinston A B. 2006. The interaction between knowledge codification and knowledge sharing networks [Z]. Working Paper, http://www.stern. nyu.edu/ciio/ WorkOnline/ IS20052006/ 051106.pdf
Luo Y, Park S H. 2001. Strategic Alignment and Performance of Market-Seeking MNCS in China [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 22: 141-55. March J G, Simon H A. 1958. Organizations [M]. NY: Wiley.
March J G. 1991. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning [J]. Organization Science, 2: 71-87.
Mardia K V, Foster K. 1983. Omnibus tests of multinormality based on skewness and kurtosis [J]. Communication in Statistics, 12: 207-222.
Matusik S F, Hill C W L. 1998. The utilization of contingent work, knowledge creation, and competitive advantage [J]. Academy of Management Review, 23: 680-697.
McFadyen M A, Cannella A A. 2004. Social Capital and Knowledge Creation: Diminishing Returns of the Number and Strength of Exchange Relationships [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 47: 735-746.
Menguc B, Auh S. 2008. The asymmetric moderating role of market orientation on the ambidexterity: Firm performance relationship for prospectors and defenders [J]. Industrial Marketing Management, 37(4): 455-470.
Merali Y. 2001. Building and Developing Capabilities: A Cognitive Congruence Framework [A]. In R. Sanchez (ed.). Knowledge Management and Organizational Competence [C]. New York: Oxford University Press.
Miles R E, Snow C C. 1978. Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process [M]. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Inc.
Miller K D, Zhao M, Calantone R J. 2006. Adding interpersonal learning and tacit knowledge to march’s exploration-exploitation model [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4): 709-722.
Nonaka I, Takeuchi H. 1995. The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation [M]. New York: Oxford Press.
Nonaka I. 1994. A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation [J]. Organization Science, 5(1): 14-47.
Oliver R L, Anderson E. 1994. An empirical test of the consequences of behavior and outcome-based sales control systems [J]. Journal of Marketing, 58: 53-67.
Pai D C. 2005. Knowledge Strategies in Taiwan’s IC Design Firms [J]. Journal of American Academy of Business, 7(2): 73-77.
Podsakoff P M, Organ D W. 1986. Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects [J]. Journal of Management, 12 (4): 531-544.
Popadiuk S, Choo C W. 2006. Innovation and knowledge creation: How are these concepts related? [J]. International Journal of Information Management, 26: 302-312.
Ralston D A, Gustafson D J, Elsass P M, Cheung F, Terpstra R H. 1992. Eastern values: A comparison of managers in the United States, Hong Kong, and the People’s Republic of China [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77: 664-671.
Ray G, Muhanna W A, Barney J B. 2005. Information technology and the performance of the customer service process: A resource-based analysis [J]. MIS Quarterly, 29(4): 625-652.
Rosenkopf L, Nerkar A. 2001. Beyond local search: Boundary-spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 22: 287-306.
Rothaermel R T, Deeds D L. 2004. Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: A system of new product development [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 25: 201-221.
Rowley T, Behrens D, Krackhardt D. 2000. Redundant Governance Structures: An Analysis of Structural and Relational Embeddedness in the Steel and Semiconductor Industries [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 21: 369-386.
Sabherwal R, Chan Y E. 2001. Alignment Between Business and IS Strategies: A Study of Prospectors, Analyzers, and Defenders [J]. Information Systems Research, 12(1): 11-33.
Schulz M, Jobe L A. 2001. Codification and Tacitness as Knowledge Management Strategies: An Empirical Exploration [J]. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 12: 139-165.
Schumpeter J. 1934. The theory of economic development [M]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Shane S, Venkataraman S. 2000. The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research [J]. Academy of Management Review, 25: 217-226.
Sher P J, Lee V C. 2004. Information technology as a facilitator for enhancing dynamic capabilities through knowledge management [J]. Information & Management, 41: 933-945.
Siggelkow N, Levinthal D A. 2003. Temporarily divide to conquer: Centralized, decentralized, and reintegrated organizational approaches to exploration and adaptation [J]. Organization Science, 14(6): 650-669.
Song M, Droge C, Hanvanich S, Calantone R. 2005. Marketing and Technology Resource Complementarity: An Analysis of Their Interaction Effect in Two Environmental Contexts [J].Strategic Management Journal, 26: 259-276.
Subramaniam M, Youndt M A. 2005. The influence of intellectual capital on the types of innovative capabilities [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3): 450-463.
Swan J, Newell S, Robertson M. 2000. Limits of IT-driven Knowledge Management Initiatives for Interactive Innovation Processes: Towards a Community-Based Approach [A]. In Schriver B, Sprague R H (eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences [C], IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, Maui HI.
Tanriverdi H. 2005. Information technology relatedness, knowledge management capability, and performance of multibusiness firms [J]. MIS Quarterly, 29(2): 311-334.
Tanriverdi H. 2006. Performance Effects of Information Technology Synergies in Multi-business Firms [J]. MIS Quarterly, 30(1): 57-77.
Tippins M J, Sohi R S. 2003. IT competency and firm performance: Is organizational learning a missing link? [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 24: 745-761.
Tsui A S, Wang D, Xin K R. 2006. Organizational Culture in China: An Analysis of Culture Dimensions and Culture Types [J]. Management and Organization Review, 2(3): 345-376.
Uzzi B. 1997. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 35-67.
Vassolo R S, Anand J, Folta T. 2004. Non-additivity in portfolios of exploration activities: A real options-based analysis of equity alliances in biotechnology [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 25: 1045-1061.
Venkatraman N, Ramanujam V. 1986. Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison of approaches [J]. Academy of Management Review, 11: 801-814.
Venkatraman N. 1989a. Strategic Orientation of Business Enterprises: The Construct, Dimensionality, and Measurement [J]. Management Science, 35(8): 942-962.
Venkatraman N. 1989b. The Concept of Fit in Strategy Research: Toward Verbal and Statistical Correspondence [J]. Academy of Management Review, 14: 423-444.
Vera D, Crossan M. 2004. Strategic leadership and organization learning [J]. Academy of Management Review, 29: 222-240.
Vermeulen F, Barkema H. 2001. Learning through acquisitions [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 457-478.
Voss G B, Sirdeshmukh D, Voss Z G. 2008. The effects of slack resources and environmental threat on product exploration and exploitation [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 51(1): 147-164.
Wang D, Tsui A S, Zhang Y, Ma L. 2003. Employment Relationship and Firm Performance: Evidence from the People’s Republic of China [J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24: 511-535.
Yalcinkaya G, Calantone R J, Griffith D A. 2007. An examination of exploration and exploitation capabilities: Implications for product innovation and market performance [J]. Journal of International Marketing, 15(4): 63-93.
Zack M. 1999. Developing a Knowledge Strategy [J]. California Management Review, 41(3): 125-143.
Zack M. 2002. Epilogue: Developing a Knowledge Strategy [A]. In C W Choo, N Bontis (eds.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge [C], Oxford University Press, New York: 268-276.
Zander U, Kogut B. 1995. Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities: An empirical test [J]. Organization Science, 6: 76-92.
达夫特著,王凤彬等译. 2003.组织理论与设计(第7版)[M].北京:清华大学出版社.
郭志刚. 1999.社会统计分析方法——SPSS软件应用[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社.
贺小刚著. 2006.企业家能力、组织能力与企业绩效[M].上海:上海财经大学出版社.
侯杰泰,温忠麟,成子娟著. 2004.结构方程模型及其应用[M].北京:教育科学出版社.
黄芳铭著. 2005.结构方程模式:理论与应用[M].北京:中国税务出版社.
蒋春燕,赵曙明. 2006.社会资本和公司企业家精神与绩效的关系:组织学习的中介作用——江苏与广东新兴企业的实证研究[J].管理世界, (10): 90-99.
廖家庆. 2005.策略配适、组织能力与经营绩效之关联性分析[D].国立东华大学企业管理研究所硕士学位论文.
林东清著,李东改编. 2005.知识管理理论与实务[M].北京:电子工业出版社.
刘军主编. 2008.管理研究方法:原理与应用[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社.
刘小禹,刘军,于广涛. 2008.初始信念、组织诱引对员工心理契约变化的影响[M].心理学报, 40(1): 64-73.
刘新民,李垣,冯进路. 2006.企业内部控制机制对创新模式选择的影响分析[J].南开管理评论, 9(2): 64-68.
卢锐,盛昭瀚. 2007.企业知识战略的属性研究[J].中国管理科学, 15(2): 121-125.
罗宾斯著,黄卫伟等译. 1997.管理学(第四版)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社.
马宏建,芮明杰. 2007.知识管理策略与知识创造[J].科研管理, 28(1): 38-41.
任峰,李垣,刘晓敏. 2004.动态环境中不同控制方式对创新选择的影响[J].科学学研究, 22(增刊): 136-140.
孙爱英,李垣,任峰. 2004.组织文化与技术创新方式的关系研究[J].科学学研究, 22(4): 432-437.
孙永波. 2006.企业知识管理模式选择研究[J].中国软科学, (3): 132-138.
孙永风,李垣,廖貅武. 2007.基于不同战略导向的创新选择与控制方式研究[J].管理工程学报, 21(4): 24-30.
孙永风,李垣. 2007.转型经济下中国企业创新选择的实证研究:环境与组织因素[J].管理工程学报, 21(1): 41-46.
王辉,忻蓉,徐淑英. 2006.中国企业CEO的领导行为及对企业经营业绩的影响[J].管理世界,(4): 87-96.
温忠麟,侯杰泰,马什赫伯特. 2003.潜变量交互效应分析方法[J].心理科学进展, 11(5): 593-599.
温忠麟,侯杰泰,马什赫伯特. 2004.结构方程模型检验:拟合指数与卡方准则[J].心理学报, 36 (2): 186-194.
萧荣德. 2005.知识资源对组织绩效之影响[D].国立中山大学资讯管理学系硕士学位论文.
谢洪明,刘常勇,李晓彤. 2002.知识管理战略、方法及其绩效研究[J].管理世界, (10): 85-92.
忻榕,徐淑英,王辉,张志学,陈维正. 2004.国有企业的企业文化:对其维度和影响的归纳性分析[A].徐淑英,刘忠明主编.中国企业管理的前沿研究[C].北京:北京大学出版社.
杨建君,王龙伟. 2007.企业市场导向与管理控制及创新方式的关系研究[J].科技进步与对策,24(9): 146-149.
张炜. 2007.智力资本与组织创新能力关系实证研究——以浙江中小技术企业为样本[J].科学学研究, 25(5): 1010-1013.
赵永彬,李垣,陈龙波. 2006.高新技术企业组织控制对技术创新选择的影响研究[J].科研管理, 27(3): 23-27.
钟竞,陈松. 2007.外部环境、创新平衡性与组织绩效的实证研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理, (5): 67-71.
周晔,胡汉辉,潘安成. 2005.我国企业知识管理活动的现状调查与分析[J].科研管理, 26(4): 80-85.
周玉泉,李垣. 2006.合作学习、组织柔性与创新方式选择的关系研究[J].科研管理, 27(2): 9-14.
朱伟民著. 2007.企业创新的组织基础[M].北京:经济科学出版社.
Adler P S, Borys B. 1996. Two types of bureaucracy: Enabling and coercive [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 61-89.
Adler P S, Kwon S. 2002. Social Capital: Prospects for a New Concept [J]. Academy of Management Review, 27: 17-40.
Adler P, Goldoftas B, Levine D. 1999. Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system [J]. Organization Science, 10(1): 43-68.
Aiken L S, West S G. 1991. Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions [M]. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Atuahene-Gima K, Murray J Y. 2007. Exploratory and exploitative learning in new product development: A social capital perspective on new technology ventures in China [J]. Journal of International Marketing, 15(2): 1-29.
Atuahene-Gima K. 2003. The Effects of Centrifugal and Centripetal Forces on Product Development Speed and Quality: How does Problem Solving Matter [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 46: 359-374.
Atuahene-Gima K. 2005. Resolving the capability–rigidity paradox in new product innovation [J]. Journal of Marketing, 69: 61-83.
Auh S, Menguc B. 2005. Balancing exploration and exploitation: The moderating role of competitive intensity. Journal of Business Research, 58: 1652-1661.
Ayers D, Dahlstrom R, Skinner S J. 1997. An exploratory investigation of organizational antecedents to new product success [J]. Journal of Marketing, 34: 107-116.
Baum J A C, Li S X, Usher J M. 2000. Making the next move: How experiential and vicarious learning shape the locations of chains’acquisitions [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45: 766-801.
Beckman C M. 2006. The influence of founding team company affiliations on firm behavior [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4): 741-758.
Benner M J, Tushman M L. 2002. Process management and technological innovation: A longitudinal study of the photography and paint industries [J]. Administration Science Quarterly, 47: 676-706.
Benner M J, Tushman M L. 2003. Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited [J]. Academy of Management Review, 28(2): 238-256.
Berends H, Vanhaverbeke W, Kirschbaum R. 2007. Knowledge management challenges in new business development: Case study observations [J]. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 24: 314-328.
Bierly P E, Daly P. 2002. Aligning Human Resource Management Practices and Knowledge Strategies [A]. In C W Choo, N Bontis (eds.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge [C], Oxford University Press, New York: 277-295.
Bierly P, Chakrabarti A. 1996. Generic knowledge strategies in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter special issue): 123-135.
Burgelman R A. 2002. Strategy as vector and the inertia of coevolutionary lock-in [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47: 325-357.
Cardinal L B. 2001. Technological innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: The use of organizational control in managing research and development [J]. Organization Science, 12(1): 19-36.
Caruana A, Morris M H, Vella A J. 1998. The Effect of Centralization and Formalization onEntrepreneurship in Export Firms [J]. Journal of Small Business Management, 36(1): 16-29.
Choi B, Lee H. 2002. Knowledge Management Strategy and Its Link to Knowledge Creation Process [J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 23: 173-187.
Choi B, Lee H. 2003. An Empirical Investigation of KM Styles and Their Effect on Corporate Performance [J]. Information & Management, 40: 403-417.
Choi B, Poon S K, Davis G J. 2008. Effects of Knowledge Management Strategy on Organizational Performance: A Complementarity Theory-Based Approach [J]. Omega the International Journal of Management Science, 36: 235-251.
Cohen J, Cohen P. 1983. Applied multiple regression/correlation for the behavioral science (2nd ed.) [M]. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Daft R L, Lengel R H. 1986. Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design[J]. Management Science, 32: 554-571.
Damanpour F. 1996. Organizational Complexity and Innovation: Developing and Testing Multiple Contingency Models [J]. Management Science, 42(5): 693-716.
Danneels E. 2002. The dynamics of product innovation and firm competences [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 23: 1095-1121.
Davenport T H, Glaser J. 2002. Just-in-Time Delivery Comes to Knowledge Management [J]. Harvard Business Review, 80(7): 107-112.
Davenport T H, Prusak L. 1998. Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know [M]. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Despres C, Chauvel D. 2002. Knowledge, context, and the management of variation [A]. In C. W. Choo, N. Bontis (Eds.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital And Organizational Knowledge [C], New York, Oxford University Press: 89-99.
Dess G G, Beard D W. 1984. Dimensions of organizational task environments [J]. Administration Science Quarterly, 29: 52-73.
Dess G G, Robinson R B. 1984. Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measures: The case of the privately-held firm and conglomerate business unit [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 5(3): 265-273.
Dewar R D, Dutton J E. 1986. The adoption of radical and incremental innovations: An empirical analysis [J]. Management Science, 32(11): 1422-1433.
Dyer J H, Nobeoka K. 2000. Creating and Managing a High-Performance Knowledge-Sharing Network: The Toyota Case [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 21: 345-367.
Ettlie J E, Bridges W P, O’Keefe R D. 1984. Organization strategy and structural differences forradical versus incremental innovation [J]. Management Science, 30(6): 682-695.
Ferrell O C, Skinner S J. 1988. Ethical behavior and bureaucratic structure in marketing research organizations [J]. Journal of Marketing Research, XXV: 103-109.
Ferrier W J, Smith K G, Grimm C M. 1999. The role of competitive action in marketing share erosion and industry dethronement: A study of industry leaders and challenges [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 42(4): 372-388.
Floyd S W, Lane P J. 2000. Strategizing throughout the organization: Managing role conflict in strategic renewal [J]. Academy of Management Review, 25: 154-177.
Geiger S W, Makri M. 2006. Exploration and exploitation innovation processes: The role of organizational slack in R&D intensive firms [J]. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 17: 97-108.
Gold A H, Malhotra A, Segars A H. 2001. Knowledge management: A organizational capabilities perspective [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1): 185-214.
Grover S K, Rajiv S. 2007. Strategic Alignment Between Business and Information Technology: A Knowledge-Based View of Behaviors, Outcome, and Consequences [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(3): 129-162.
Gupta A K, Smith K G, Shalley C E. 2006. The Interplay Between Exploration and Exploitation [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4): 693-706.
Hair J F, Anderson R E, Tatham R L, Black W C. 1998. Multivariate Data Analysis (5th edition) [M]. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Hall R, Andriani P. 2002. Managing Knowledge for Innovation [J]. Long Range Planning, 35(1): 237-253.
Hannan H T, Freeman J. 1984. Structural inertia and organizational change [J]. American Sociological Review, 49: 149-164.
Hansen M T, Haas M R. 2001. Competing for Attention in Knowledge Markets [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46 (1): 1-28.
Hansen M T, Nohria T, Tierney T. 1999. What’s your strategy for managing knowledge [J]. Harvard Business Review, (March-April): 106-116.
He Z, Wong P. 2004. Exploration and exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis [J]. Organization Science, 15(4): 481-494.
Jang S, Hong K, Bock G W, Kim I. 2002. Knowledge Management and Process Innovation: The Knowledge Transformation Path in Samsung SDI [J]. Journal of Knowledge Management, 6(5): 479-485.
Jansen J J P, Van Den Bosch F A J, Volberda H W. 2005. Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and ambidexterity: The impact of environmental and organizational antecedents [J]. Schmalenbach Business Review, 57: 351-363.
Jansen J J P, Van Den Bosch F A J, Volberda H W. 2006. Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators [J]. Management Science, 52(11): 1661-1674.
Katila R, Ahuja G. 2002. Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 1183-1194.
Katila R. 2002. New Product Search Over Time: Past Ideas in Their Prime [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 995-1010.
Keskin H. 2005. The Relationships Between Explicit and Tacit Oriented KM Strategy, and Firm Performance [J]. Journal of American Academy of Business, 7(1): 169-175.
Kline R B. 1998. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling [M]. New York: The Guilford Press.
Knott A M. 2002. Exploration and exploitation as complements [A], In C. W. Choo, N. Bontis (Eds.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital And Organizational Knowledge [C], New York: Oxford University Press.
Kyriakopoulos K, Moorman C. 2004. Tradeoffs in marketing exploitation and exploration strategies: The overlooked role of market orientation [J]. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21: 219-240.
Lee H, Choi B. 2003. Knowledge management enablers, processes, and organizational performance: An integrative view and empirical examination [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(1): 179-228.
Lee J, Lee J, Lee H. 2003. Exploration and exploitation in the presence of network externalities [J]. Management Science, 49: 553-570.
Levinthal D A, March J G. 1993. The myopia of learning [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 14: 95-112.
Lewin A Y, Long C P, Caroll T N. 1999. The co-evolution of new organizational forms [J]. Organization Science, 10: 535-550.
Liao Y S. 2007. The Effects of Knowledge Management Strategy and Organization Structure on Innovation [J]. International Journal of Management, 24(1): 53-60.
Lin X, Germain R. 2003. Organizational structure, context, customer orientation, and performance: lessons from Chinese state-owned enterprises [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 24:1131-1151.
Liu D, Ray G, Whinston A B. 2006. The interaction between knowledge codification and knowledge sharing networks [Z]. Working Paper, http://www.stern. nyu.edu/ciio/ WorkOnline/ IS20052006/ 051106.pdf
Luo Y, Park S H. 2001. Strategic Alignment and Performance of Market-Seeking MNCS in China [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 22: 141-55. March J G, Simon H A. 1958. Organizations [M]. NY: Wiley.
March J G. 1991. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning [J]. Organization Science, 2: 71-87.
Mardia K V, Foster K. 1983. Omnibus tests of multinormality based on skewness and kurtosis [J]. Communication in Statistics, 12: 207-222.
Matusik S F, Hill C W L. 1998. The utilization of contingent work, knowledge creation, and competitive advantage [J]. Academy of Management Review, 23: 680-697.
McFadyen M A, Cannella A A. 2004. Social Capital and Knowledge Creation: Diminishing Returns of the Number and Strength of Exchange Relationships [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 47: 735-746.
Menguc B, Auh S. 2008. The asymmetric moderating role of market orientation on the ambidexterity: Firm performance relationship for prospectors and defenders [J]. Industrial Marketing Management, 37(4): 455-470.
Merali Y. 2001. Building and Developing Capabilities: A Cognitive Congruence Framework [A]. In R. Sanchez (ed.). Knowledge Management and Organizational Competence [C]. New York: Oxford University Press.
Miles R E, Snow C C. 1978. Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process [M]. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Inc.
Miller K D, Zhao M, Calantone R J. 2006. Adding interpersonal learning and tacit knowledge to march’s exploration-exploitation model [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4): 709-722.
Nonaka I, Takeuchi H. 1995. The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation [M]. New York: Oxford Press.
Nonaka I. 1994. A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation [J]. Organization Science, 5(1): 14-47.
Oliver R L, Anderson E. 1994. An empirical test of the consequences of behavior and outcome-based sales control systems [J]. Journal of Marketing, 58: 53-67.
Pai D C. 2005. Knowledge Strategies in Taiwan’s IC Design Firms [J]. Journal of American Academy of Business, 7(2): 73-77.
Podsakoff P M, Organ D W. 1986. Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects [J]. Journal of Management, 12 (4): 531-544.
Popadiuk S, Choo C W. 2006. Innovation and knowledge creation: How are these concepts related? [J]. International Journal of Information Management, 26: 302-312.
Ralston D A, Gustafson D J, Elsass P M, Cheung F, Terpstra R H. 1992. Eastern values: A comparison of managers in the United States, Hong Kong, and the People’s Republic of China [J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77: 664-671.
Ray G, Muhanna W A, Barney J B. 2005. Information technology and the performance of the customer service process: A resource-based analysis [J]. MIS Quarterly, 29(4): 625-652.
Rosenkopf L, Nerkar A. 2001. Beyond local search: Boundary-spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 22: 287-306.
Rothaermel R T, Deeds D L. 2004. Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: A system of new product development [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 25: 201-221.
Rowley T, Behrens D, Krackhardt D. 2000. Redundant Governance Structures: An Analysis of Structural and Relational Embeddedness in the Steel and Semiconductor Industries [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 21: 369-386.
Sabherwal R, Chan Y E. 2001. Alignment Between Business and IS Strategies: A Study of Prospectors, Analyzers, and Defenders [J]. Information Systems Research, 12(1): 11-33.
Schulz M, Jobe L A. 2001. Codification and Tacitness as Knowledge Management Strategies: An Empirical Exploration [J]. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 12: 139-165.
Schumpeter J. 1934. The theory of economic development [M]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Shane S, Venkataraman S. 2000. The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research [J]. Academy of Management Review, 25: 217-226.
Sher P J, Lee V C. 2004. Information technology as a facilitator for enhancing dynamic capabilities through knowledge management [J]. Information & Management, 41: 933-945.
Siggelkow N, Levinthal D A. 2003. Temporarily divide to conquer: Centralized, decentralized, and reintegrated organizational approaches to exploration and adaptation [J]. Organization Science, 14(6): 650-669.
Song M, Droge C, Hanvanich S, Calantone R. 2005. Marketing and Technology Resource Complementarity: An Analysis of Their Interaction Effect in Two Environmental Contexts [J].Strategic Management Journal, 26: 259-276.
Subramaniam M, Youndt M A. 2005. The influence of intellectual capital on the types of innovative capabilities [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3): 450-463.
Swan J, Newell S, Robertson M. 2000. Limits of IT-driven Knowledge Management Initiatives for Interactive Innovation Processes: Towards a Community-Based Approach [A]. In Schriver B, Sprague R H (eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences [C], IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, Maui HI.
Tanriverdi H. 2005. Information technology relatedness, knowledge management capability, and performance of multibusiness firms [J]. MIS Quarterly, 29(2): 311-334.
Tanriverdi H. 2006. Performance Effects of Information Technology Synergies in Multi-business Firms [J]. MIS Quarterly, 30(1): 57-77.
Tippins M J, Sohi R S. 2003. IT competency and firm performance: Is organizational learning a missing link? [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 24: 745-761.
Tsui A S, Wang D, Xin K R. 2006. Organizational Culture in China: An Analysis of Culture Dimensions and Culture Types [J]. Management and Organization Review, 2(3): 345-376.
Uzzi B. 1997. Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 35-67.
Vassolo R S, Anand J, Folta T. 2004. Non-additivity in portfolios of exploration activities: A real options-based analysis of equity alliances in biotechnology [J]. Strategic Management Journal, 25: 1045-1061.
Venkatraman N, Ramanujam V. 1986. Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison of approaches [J]. Academy of Management Review, 11: 801-814.
Venkatraman N. 1989a. Strategic Orientation of Business Enterprises: The Construct, Dimensionality, and Measurement [J]. Management Science, 35(8): 942-962.
Venkatraman N. 1989b. The Concept of Fit in Strategy Research: Toward Verbal and Statistical Correspondence [J]. Academy of Management Review, 14: 423-444.
Vera D, Crossan M. 2004. Strategic leadership and organization learning [J]. Academy of Management Review, 29: 222-240.
Vermeulen F, Barkema H. 2001. Learning through acquisitions [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 457-478.
Voss G B, Sirdeshmukh D, Voss Z G. 2008. The effects of slack resources and environmental threat on product exploration and exploitation [J]. Academy of Management Journal, 51(1): 147-164.
Wang D, Tsui A S, Zhang Y, Ma L. 2003. Employment Relationship and Firm Performance: Evidence from the People’s Republic of China [J]. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24: 511-535.
Yalcinkaya G, Calantone R J, Griffith D A. 2007. An examination of exploration and exploitation capabilities: Implications for product innovation and market performance [J]. Journal of International Marketing, 15(4): 63-93.
Zack M. 1999. Developing a Knowledge Strategy [J]. California Management Review, 41(3): 125-143.
Zack M. 2002. Epilogue: Developing a Knowledge Strategy [A]. In C W Choo, N Bontis (eds.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge [C], Oxford University Press, New York: 268-276.
Zander U, Kogut B. 1995. Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities: An empirical test [J]. Organization Science, 6: 76-92.