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?