Korean international joint ventures: how the exchange climate affects tacit knowledge transfer from foreign parents
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to develop and test a theoretical model to examine how exchange climate attributes and contextual factors between two parent firms in an international joint venture (IJV) affect tacit knowledge transfer. The authors investigate how this tacit knowledge, which comprises international marketing expertise, knowledge about foreign cultures and tastes and managerial practices, impacts IJV performance. Design/methodology/approach Based on data from a survey of IJV managers in 326 Korean firms from a variety of industries, structural equation modeling (AMOS 18.0) is used to test the authors’ hypotheses. Findings The findings show that conflict resolution and cooperation positively affect tacit knowledge transfer, but communication does not. It was found that the difference in the relative levels of economic development in the environments of partners significantly influences tacit knowledge acquisition, but cultural distance does not. Tacit knowledge acquisition positively influences IJV performance. Originality/value The paper fills a gap in the literature by articulating the relationships between exchange climate attributes and tacit knowledge acquisition. Exchange climate, characterized by behavioral processes that directly impact knowledge transfer, constitutes an important missing link in prior research about tacit knowledge transfer. The paper contributes to a better understanding of the dynamic relationships among relational capital, exchange climate and tacit knowledge transfers. The model the authors develop and test has important implications for the design of organizational processes that facilitate tacit knowledge transfer.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it