Search results

The purpose of this paper is to provide a model that can explain how organizations may retain their executives’ tacit knowledge in the organization especially during the succession period. The proposed model takes into consideration three critical contexts that may assist in improving the knowledge flow during the transition period, namely, motivation context, transition context and ability context.

This paper presents a conceptual framework that emphasizes the importance of the will and skill of two parties involved in succession, i.e. the predecessor and successor, as well as the context of the succession. To this end, the paper advances a set of propositions that explain how these different contexts affect the quantity and quality of the knowledge acquired by the successor at the end of the succession period.

This paper advances a theoretical model that describes the antecedents and moderator of job-specific knowledge acquired during executive succession.

This paper presents a theoretical model that explains knowledge flow during the transitory period of succession. It emphasizes the importance of the motivation and ability of the partners involved while taking into consideration the context of succession.

This paper contributes considerably and in a practical manner to managers in general and to human resource managers in particular. It draws the attention of concerned managers to check the motivation of both successor and predecessor in experiencing the transition, explain to the successors the job description of the position to direct their attention to learn specific knowledge and equip both parties involved in the succession with the needed skills.

This paper advances a new concept termed as accelerated engaged tacit knowledge acquisition. This concept complements other perspectives of knowledge flow and learning and takes into consideration the specific context of executive succession.

This conceptual paper uses the resource-based theory (RBT) of the firm to argue that for competitors to improve their innovation through a cooperative relationship – coopetitive relationship – they need to work on building a stable relationship with each other by investing a special type of resources, namely locked-in resources.

The authors draw on RBT criteria to argue that when the antecedent – the locked-in resources – and the mediator – the relationship stability – are valuable, rare, inimitable and organized (VRIO), they will help the parties involved achieve sustained competitive advantage from the coopetitive relationship.

This paper argues that locked-in resources lead to higher coopetitive relationship stability by reducing the impact of opportunistic behavior from any of the partners. More stable relationship leads to more innovations especially radical innovations. In addition, the nature of the industry plays a moderating role. The industry's competitive intensity affects the relationship between locked-in resources and relationship stability. The industry's age affects the relationship between stability and innovation quantity and type.

This conceptual paper anchors its arguments within the RBT related to the firm's strategic resources (VRIO) characteristics and applies the same arguments (VRIO) beyond the firm level to the coopetitive relationship level. The model invites researchers and practitioners to consider two new constructs namely locked-in resources and coopetitive relationship stability in order to build successful coopetitive relationships.

This paper contributes considerably and in a practical manner to managers as it draws their attention to the importance of investing a special type of resources, namely locked-in resources and ensuring the relationship stability with their coopetitors to achieve the desired outcome. It also draws the managers' attention to the impact industry's competitive intensity and industry's age have on the quality of the relationship and on the innovation outcomes.

A distinct contribution of this conceptual paper is the introduction of two new constructs: locked-in resources and coopetitive relationship stability. Locked-in resources are valuable within the coopetitive relationship and they improve the second construct or relationship stability. Relationship stability is different from relationship strength as it leads to more trust between partners over longer periods of time.