organizational learning and technology development

ORGANIZATIONAL LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY

DEVELOPMENT

Mahan SepehrifarAmir Hossein Semsarzadeh

Amin Dehdarian

Purpose

A model of organizational learning A model of crisis construction

Why Hyundai??? Leader automaker on its own despite the global

shakeout Increasing production more tan tenfold every

decade Largest automobile producer in a developing

country

Research Questions

1. How to move from imitative ”learning by doing” to innovative “learning by research”?

2. Difference between learning in catching-up process in a developing country and a developed one?

3. Crisis construction is useful for OL?

4. Can these models be imitated?

5. Any implications?

Organizational learning

Creation

Distribution & Co

mmunication

Integration

into strategy &

managemen

t

Source: Crossan (1995)

Source: Daniel Kim (1993)

Absorptive Capacity

Ability of a firm to recognize the value of new, external information, assimilate it, and apply it to commercial ends (Cohen & Levinthal . 1990)

Source: Cohen & Levinthal (1990)

R&D Spending

Absorptive Capacity

Technological Opportunity

AppropriabilityCompetitor

Interdependence

Sources of a Firm’s Technical Knowledge

Source: Cohen & Levinthal (1990)

Own R&DTechnical

Knowledge

Absorptive Capacity

Spillovers of Competitors Knowledge

Extraindustry Knowledge

Knowledge & Learning

Anderson’s ACT model Ryle’s classifications

Declarative knowledge

Knowing that sth. “Exists” Tacit

Procedural knowledge Knowing “How” it operates Explicit

Modes of knowledge creation (conversion)

Socialization

Externalization

Internalization

Combination

Tacit knowledge

Taci

t know

ledge

Explicit knowledge

Explic

it

know

ledge

To

From

Spiral of Organizational Knowledge creation

Learning Systems

Source: Nonaka (1994)

Crisis & Learning

Need to tacit & explicit knowledge Elevating the level of ACAP External or internal

Catching-up in Hyundai

Pre-crisis era Agreement with Ford Transferring packaged technology Training of Hyundai engineers

Results: Translating explicit knowledge to tacit knowledge Valuable migratory knowledge Higher prior knowledge level

Catching-up in Hyundai

Phase 1 (Internal crisis in the absence of external crisis) Complete plant construction in shortest time Acquire a production capability in shortest time (For

production members)

Prior knowledge base Intense interaction among the members Reassembling cars for routinization

Intensity of effort 16 hours a day, seven days a week

Catching-up in Hyundai

Phase 2 Shift from assembly production to development of locally

designed cars (By government) Assimilating the imported foreign technology ASAP

Prior Knowledge base Studying all related literature Licensing agreements with Italdesign & Mitsubihi Approaching 26 firms to receive unpackaged sources Hiring a manager to put knowledge together

Intensity of effort Intensive interaction among members (in Italy)

Catching-up in Hyundai

Phase 3: Translating external crisis to internal Oil crisis Developing next generation FF car and tripling production

Prior knowledge base Approaching Mitsubishi for licenses Studying about CAM/CAD Studying Catia package for expanding knowledge

Intensity of effort 14 months for internalizing literature 36 months of hard preparatory work

Catching-up in Hyundai

Phase 4: Internal Crisis Becoming independent Developing a state-of-the-art engine

Prior knowledge base Opening R&D centers and doing research Recruiting Korean-American engineers from US Collecting all English & Japanese literature Agreement with British Ricardo Engineering for technical training

Intensity of effort Dividing taskforce to do research 14 months of trial & error before first prototype and 11 broken ones!

ussion

A Model of Absorptive Capacity

Source: Zahra & George (2002)

Knowledge source and

complementarity

Experience

Competitive Advantage

Strategic FlexibilityInnovation

Performance

Social Integratio

n Mechanis

m

Regimes of Appropriabili

ty

Absorptive Capacity

Activation Triggers

Potential Realized

Acquisition

Assimilation

Transformation

Exploitation

Implications

1. Catching-up firms in developing countries reverse the sequence of R,D,E of advanced countries

2. Migratory knowledge that is available for catching-up firms, gives rise to prior knowledge base

3. Crises were constructed proactively rather than reactively

4. Past successes in transforming crises into creative learning evoke the self-confidence that leads to further risk-taking by crisis construction

Discussion

Can Hyundai also use crisis construction for pioneering?

Can catching-up firms in other countries emulate Hyundai’s learning model?

What are the benefits and risks of internal crisis against external ones?