SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW ASSIGNMENT

TOPIC

THE SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW PROCESS FOLLOWED FOR

EXTRACTING LITERATURE FOR THE RESEARCH TOPIC

“INTRA-FIRM KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER IN SMES IN DEVELOPING NATIONS:

AN AFRICAN PERSPECTIVE

Module Code: 56104

Module Title: Constructing Systematic Literature Reviews

Date: 21ST NOVEMBER 2013

1

CONTENT

PAGE

Introduction 3

Systematic Literature Review 3

Systematic Literature Review for Knowledge Transfer 7

Deriving and Defining the Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria 7

Running the Search on WoS Database 9

Bibliography – 12 12

APPENDIX 23

Table 1 6

Table 2 9

Figure 1 10

Figure 2 23

Figure 3 23

Figure 4 24

Figure 5 24

Figure 6 25

2

INTRA-FIRM KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER IN SMEs IN DEVELOPING NATIONS:

AN AFRICAN PERSPECTIVE

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this report is to provide a detailed account of the criteria used and the steps taken

in sourcing for relevant articles to inform the body of literature for the topic outlined above in

bold prints and underlined. Doing so is in keeping up with the requisite of the process of the

literature review method employed, that is, a systematic literature review.

Before proceeding into the details of the process, a brief discussion on the review method is

outlined below.

SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW

Systematic literature review in recent times has been receiving increasing attention and

approval in management research (Smith et al., 2008). Unlike the more popular view that it

originated from the medical profession (Pittaway et al., 2004; Thorpe et al., 2005), earlier use

of the method is said be found in the education and psychology subject groups (Littell et al.,

2008). Its accepted use however in management research can be attributed to several factors.

Among these are the need for a bias-free alternative to the previously predominant method (a

traditional narrative literature review) (Denyer and Neely, 2004; Mulrow, 1994) and need for

a method that can effectively assist in synthesizing a wide range of research findings

particularly in light of an ever-increasing literature pool to draw from (Armitage and Keeble-

Allen, 2008; Petticrew and Roberts, 2006; Saini and Shlonsky, 2012).

The proliferation of research findings which calls for the adoption of a method capable of

managing them is arguably the most fundamental problem responsible for the growing

adoption of and interest in systematic literature review in management research. Claiming it

is the most fundamental problem is due to the fact that, at first, it results in a greater

3

fragmentation of research findings (Tranfield, et al., 2003). Secondly, it makes it impractical

and inefficient for a reviewer to go through every available article assumed to be relevant to a

given phenomenon of study and thirdly, in light of the use of the traditional narrative

literature review (TNLR), inevitably selection bias would occur as reviewers try to find

strategies to cope with the information overload they are confronted with in view of scarce

time resources (Booth et al., 2012; Mckinley et al., 1999; Scherer and Steinman, 1999). The

growing research findings consequently contribute to widen the researcher-practitioner gap

(Denyer and Tranfield, 2006) and hence, the obvious need for an alternative to the usual

TNLR which has proven incapable of handling the new challenges.

The adoption of a systematic literature review method helps management researchers and

practitioners to objectively evaluate, aggregate and synthesize the large body of research

work on a certain phenomenon of interest to provide new insights (Brereton et al., 2007), give

update on present state of literature on the issue or identify a potential gap (Greenhalgh et al.,

2009; Leibovici and Reeves, 2005; Macpherson and Holt, 2007; Mulrow, 1994).

In contrast to the TNLR, a systematic literature review (SLR henceforth) follows a detailed

plan (protocol) which is stipulated in advance and it ensures that there is a consistency in the

set of criteria used in including or excluding articles for the review ( Tranfield et al., 2003),

thus signifying transparency and objectivity of the method (Pittaway et al., 2004; Smith et al.,

2008). While providing readers with the opportunity to follow and evaluate the methods

employed by the reviewer (Littell et al., 2008), the documentation of the protocol helps them

to be able to make better judgment as regards the methodological rigour involved, validity of

the findings and it likewise makes the review process reproducible (Denyer and Tranfield,

2006). The SLR’s systematic approach permits comprehensiveness in regards to how

literature is sought for and thus a resultant retrieval of available and relevant studies, an

extensiveness not permitted by the TNLR.

4

The SLR method can thus be defined as a “syntheses of primary research studies that use

(and describe) specific, explicit and therefore reproducible methodological strategies to

identify, assemble, critical[ly] appraise and synthesise all relevant issues on a specific topic”

(Cipriani and Geddes, 2003, pg 146, parentheses added).

SLR promises management researchers a lot of benefits, however it should be noted that it is

not without its flaws. The review methods strength of appropriability for synthesizing a large

body of literature makes it ineffective for newly emerging phenomenon where literature is

just beginning to build up (Collins and Fauser, 2005). Its use of strictly adhered-to exclusion

criteria, depending on degree of rigorousness may result in the exclusion of certain relevant

articles which would have been of great significance to the review’s outcome (Petticrew,

2003). The element of subjectivity which is usually the foundation of bias in research work

is argued not to be completely eliminated even in a SLR. Reviewers still have to make

subjective decisions when further examining the content of the extracted literature as regards

their usefulness and thus bias becomes plausible. For Petticrew and Roberts (2006), the

review method is seen as been incapable of doing anything about the vigorousness of the

research process that underlies individual articles, thus an incapability to make up for poor

quality whenever existent.

For a quick overview of how this review method called SLR differs from the traditional

narrative literature review, Table 1 below is employed to delineate this.

5

Table 1: Major differences between Systematic Literature Review and Narrative Literature

Review (Adapted from Armitage and Keeble-Allen, 2008, pg 104)

Issues to consider Good quality systematic

reviews

Traditional reviews

Deciding on review

question

Start with clear question to be

answered or hypothesis to be

tested.

May also start with clear

question to be answered, but

they more often involve

general discussion of subject

with no stated hypothesis.

Searching for relevant

studies

Strive to locate all relevant

published and unpublished

studies to limit impact of

publication and other biases.

Do not usually attempt to

locate all relevant literature.

Deciding which

studies to

include and exclude

Involve explicit description of

what types of studies are to be

included to limit selection bias

on behalf of reviewer.

Usually do not describe why

certain studies are included and

others excluded.

Assessing study

quality

Examine in systematic manner

methods used in primary

studies, and investigate

potential biases in those

studies and sources of

heterogeneity between study

results.

Often do not consider

differences in study methods or

study quality.

Synthesising study

results

Base their conclusions on

those studies which are most

methodologically sound.

Often do not differentiate

between methodologically

sound and unsound studies.

6

SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW FOR KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER

Deriving and Defining the Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

A SLR begins with the reviewer(s) agreeing and explicitly outlining a protocol which details

the plan and conditions by which an article would be excluded or included. The protocol

should be stated a priori so as to maintain objectivity as regards articles chosen and thus to

reduce selection or researcher’s bias. Taking into account Tranfield et al’s (2003)

suggestion, the protocol should however accommodate modifications as the study progresses

to ensure that a cap is not put on researcher’s creativity. However, the modifications made

should likewise be explicitly stated with the rationale behind them given to still make certain

that the review is free from researcher/selection bias.

Once the protocol is addressed, the conditions set out in it would guide and determine the

choice of search strings or queries to use to ensure that only relevant citations are extracted

from the chosen bibliometric database(s). Multiple databases are advised to be used since no

single bibliometric database holds all journals available in any particular field. The use of

multiple sources thus helps increase the comprehensiveness and validity of a SLR by

guaranteeing that all relevant citations are reached and considered. However, for the purpose

of this report only the Web of Science database (hence forth referred to as WoS) was used.

The research focus for this report was to examine the role of internal knowledge transfer

within a ‘brick and mortar’ organization and in the context of a single national boundary.

The key terms in the stated research focus (“internal knowledge transfer”, “within an

organization”, and “single national boundary”) set the direction for the choice of search query

and strings to use. Considering that knowledge is an ambiguous word, as it exists in all

spheres of life, the search was to include only knowledge transfer studies done within the

Management and Business domain. To avoid getting results addressing external rather than

7

internal knowledge transfer, articles with terms that signified external relationship with a

focal firm (subsidiary and alliance) were thus perceived as appropriate to be excluded. A

concern for how the transfer occurred from the macro-level perspective restricted inclusion to

only citations without the group-level terms of project and team. The peculiarities of the

context in which the research is intended to be carried out called for the exclusion of studies

carried out from a virtual perspective. This been that the majority of the firms which the

research intended to under-study in the chosen region don’t usually have a functioning virtual

presence. The interest in discovering if there are country-dependent differences in

knowledge transfer, a local context focus, informed the decision to exclude words that

signifies bridging national borders. Citations with the words, multinational, inter, mnc, mne,

acquisition, cross border, overseas and expatriates were therefore described to be ineligible

for the literature review list.

From the inclusion and exclusion criteria generated, based on the concerns explained above,

search strings or queries were thus generated for extracting relevant articles from the extant

literature available on the WoS database. A summary of the search strings with

corresponding operators are listed in Table 2. Due to the fact that knowledge and transfer are

very ambiguous words, they were put together and constrained by parentheses to limit result

returns to citations addressing knowledge transfer precisely. Being a part of a larger

construct called Knowledge Management, the search was restricted to only the Title field to

ensure that only studies focusing exclusively on knowledge transfer were included.

8

Table 2: Generated terms from Key terms from research focus

Key terms from research focus Operator Generated terms for search criteria

Internal Knowledge transfer

NOT

NOT

“Knowledge transfer”

Subsidiar*

Alliance*

Within a ‘brick and mortar’

organization

NOT

NOT

NOT

Virtual

Team*

Project*

Single national boundary NOT

NOT

NOT

NOT

NOT

NOT

NOT

NOT

Multinational*

Inter*

MNC*

MNE*

Acquisition*

Cross boundar*

Oversea*

Expatriate*

NOTE: The boolean operator asterisks (*) was used to signify the plural forms of the

terms

Running the Search on WoS Database

The first search included all the generated terms listed in Table 2 and their corresponding

operators. Setting a time frame of 1970 to 2013, the search returned 1,010 citations. The

research is concerned with the implication of knowledge transfer from a management and

business perspective. Consequently, under the WoS categories, management, business, and

operations research management science were thus chosen to eliminate irrelevant articles.

9

This action substantially reduced the previous hits to 408 citations. Since most conference

proceedings usually end up in journal articles, the search criteria was set to limit the returned

hits to only journal articles to reduce the possibility of the duplication of any given study.

This brought the total hits to 171 citations. The final search criteria involved excluding from

the returned hits the research areas that were identified to be outside the scope of the intended

research. Using the Research Area dialog box on the WoS database, all areas except

Business Economics and Operations Research Management Science were excluded to bring

the total returned hits for the SLR to 71 citations. This signalled the end of the first phase of

the search for relevant citations for inclusion in the SLR (the use of bibliometric database) for

the intended study on intra-firm knowledge transfer in SMEs in developing nations. The

screen shots in order of occurrence detailing how each step for the SLR was carried out can

be found in Appendix I. Figure 1 summarizes the process with corresponding returned

citations.

Figure 1: Overview of the Inclusion/Exclusion process followed

10

The final results of the search would be further exported into a referencing database

(Endnote) and a spreadsheet program (Microsoft Excel) for further review using the

exclusion and inclusion criteria and to perform a citation analysis in other to enhance the

SLR.

11

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Agrawal, A. & Henderson, R. (2002), "Putting patents in context: Exploring knowledge

transfer from MIT." Management Science, Vol. 48, No.1: pp. 44-60.

Armitage, A. & Keeble-Allen, D. (2008), “Undertaking a Structured Literature Review or

Structuring a Literature Review: Tales from the Field.” The Electronic Journal of

Business Research Methods, Vol. 6, No. 2: pp. 103 - 114.

Arvanitis, S., Sydow, N. & Woerter, M. (2008), "Is there any impact of university-industry

knowledge transfer on innovation and productivity? An empirical analysis based on

swiss firm data." Review of Industrial Organization, Vol. 32, No.2: pp. 77-94.

Bae, J. & Koo, J. (2008), "Information loss, knowledge transfer cost and the value of social

relations." Strategic Organization, Vol. 6, No.3: pp. 227-258.

Baggio, R. & Cooper, C. (2010), "Knowledge transfer in a tourism destination: the effects of

a network structure." Service Industries Journal, Vol. 30, No.10: pp. 1757-1771.

Berbegal-Mirabent, J., Lafuente, E. & Sole, F. (2013), "The pursuit of knowledge transfer

activities: An efficiency analysis of Spanish universities." Journal of Business

Research, Vol. 66, No.10: pp. 2051-2059.

Berbegal-Mirabent, J., Sabate, F. & Canabate, A. (2012), "Brokering knowledge from

universities to the marketplace The role of knowledge transfer offices." Management

Decision, Vol. 50, No.7-8: pp. 1285-1307.

Boland, R. J., Singh, J., Salipante, P., Aram, J. D., Fay, S. Y. & Kanawattanachai, P. (2001),

"Knowledge representations and knowledge transfer." Academy of Management

Journal, Vol. 44, No.2: pp. 393-417.

Bond, E. U., Houston, M. B. & Tang, Y. H. (2008), "Establishing a high-technology

knowledge transfer network: The practical and symbolic roles of identification."

Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 37, No.6: pp. 641-652.

12

Booth, A., Papaioannou, D., & Sutton, A. (2012) "Systematic approaches to a successful

literature review", London, Sage Publications Ltd.

Brereton, P., Kitchenham, B. A., Budgen, D., Turner, M. & Khalil, M. (2007), "Lessons from

applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering

domain." Journal of systems and software, Vol. 80, No.4: pp. 571-583.

Buckley, P. J., Clegg, J. & Tan, H. (2006), "Cultural awareness in knowledge transfer to

China - The role of guanxi and mianzi." Journal of World Business, Vol. 41, No.3: pp.

275-288.

Calderon-Martinez, M. G. & Garcia-Quevedo, J. (2013), "Knowledge transfer and university

patents in Mexico." Academia-Revista Latinoamericana De Administracion, Vol. 26,

No.1: pp. 33-60.

Cassidy, C. M. & Loree, D. (2001), "Dynamics of knowledge transfer among multimarket

competitors." Multiunit Organization and Multimarket Strategy, Vol. 18, No.141-174.

Chen, C. Y. & Tseng, K. H. (2011), "Knowledge transfer and innovation performance of

competitive knowledge communities: Case of a high-tech firm in Taiwan." African

Journal of Business Management, Vol. 5, No.22: pp. 9665-9675.

Chua, A. L. & Pan, S. L. (2008), "Knowledge transfer and organizational learning in IS

offshore sourcing." Omega-International Journal of Management Science, Vol. 36,

No.2: pp. 267-281.

Ciabuschi, F., Martin, O. M. & Stahl, B. (2010), "Headquarters' Influence on Knowledge

Transfer Performance." Management International Review, Vol. 50, No.4: pp. 471-

491.

Cipriani, A., & Geddes, J. (2003), "Comparison of systematic and narrative reviews: the

example of the atypical antipsychotics". Epidemiologia e psichiatria sociale, Vol 12:

pp. 146-153.

13

Collins, J. A., & Fauser, B. C. (2005), "Balancing the strengths of systematic and narrative

reviews." Human Reproduction Update, Vol 11, No. 2: pp. 103-104.

Denyer, D., & Neely, A. (2004), "Introduction to special issue: innovation and productivity

performance in the UK." International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 5/6: pp.

131–135.

Denyer, D., & Tranfield, D. (2006), "Using qualitative research synthesis to build an

actionable knowledge base." Management Decision, Vol. 44, No. 2: pp. 213-227.

Dhanaraj, C., Lyles, M. A., Steensma, H. K. & Tihanyi, L. (2004), "Managing tacit and

explicit knowledge transfer in IJVs: the role of relational embeddedness and the

impact on performance." Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 35, No.5: pp.

428-442.

Filatotchev, I., Liu, X. H., Buck, T. & Wright, M. (2009), "The export orientation and export

performance of high-technology SMEs in emerging markets: The effects of

knowledge transfer by returnee entrepreneurs." Journal of International Business

Studies, Vol. 40, No.6: pp. 1005-1021.

Giannakis, M. (2008), "Facilitating learning and knowledge transfer through supplier

development." Supply Chain Management-an International Journal, Vol. 13, No.1:

pp. 62-72.

Gorovaia, N. & Windsperger, J. (2013), "Determinants of knowledge transfer strategy in

franchising: integrating knowledge-based and relational governance perspectives."

Service Industries Journal, Vol. 33, No.12: pp. 1117-1134.

Greenhalgh T., Potts H., Wong G., Bark P., & Swinglehurst D. (2009), "Tensions and

Paradoxes in Electronic Patient Record Research: A Systematic Literature Review

Using the Meta-narrative Method." Milbank Quarterly, Vol. 87, No. 4: pp 729-788

14

Gronhaug, K. (1989), "KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER - THE CASE OF THE NORWEGIAN

TECHNOLOGY AGREEMENTS." Omega-International Journal of Management

Science, Vol. 17, No.3: pp. 273-279.

Heliot, Y. & Riley, M. (2010), "A study of indicators of willingness in the knowledge

transfer process." Journal of Management & Organization, Vol. 16, No.3: pp. 399-

410.

Herrera, L., Munoz-Doyague, M. F. & Nieto, M. (2010), "Mobility of public researchers,

scientific knowledge transfer, and the firm's innovation process." Journal of Business

Research, Vol. 63, No.5: pp. 510-518.

Hocking, J. B., Brown, M. & Harzing, A. W. (2004), "A knowledge transfer perspective of

strategic assignment purposes and their path-dependent outcomes." International

Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 15, No.3: pp. 565-586.

Hsiao, R. L., Tsai, S. D. H. & Lee, C. F. (2006), "The problems of embeddedness:

Knowledge transfer, coordination and reuse in information systems." Organization

Studies, Vol. 27, No.9: pp. 1289-1317.

Inkpen, A. C. & Pien, W. (2006), "An examination of collaboration and knowledge transfer:

China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park." Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 43,

No.4: pp. 779-811.

Jackson, J., Brooks, M., Greaves, D. & Alexander, A. (2013), "A review and comparative

study of innovation policy and knowledge transfer: An Anglo-French perspective."

Innovation-Management Policy & Practice, Vol. 15, No.2: pp. 130-148.

Jasimuddin, S. M. & Zhang, Z. (2009), "The symbiosis mechanism for effective knowledge

transfer." Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 60, No.5: pp. 706-716.

Jensen, R. J. & Szulanski, G. (2007), "Template use and the effectiveness of knowledge

transfer." Management Science, Vol. 53, No.11: pp. 1716-1730.

15

Kane, A. A. (2010), "Unlocking Knowledge Transfer Potential: Knowledge Demonstrability

and Superordinate Social Identity." Organization Science, Vol. 21, No.3: pp. 643-660.

Kotabe, M., Martin, X. & Domoto, H. (2003), "Gaining from vertical partnerships:

Knowledge transfer, relationship duration, and supplier performance improvement in

the US and Japanese automotive industries." Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 24,

No.4: pp. 293-316.

Lam, A. (1997), "Embedded firms, embedded knowledge: Problems of collaboration and

knowledge transfer in global cooperative ventures." Organization Studies, Vol. 18,

No.6: pp. 973-996.

Lazarova, M. & Tarique, I. (2005), "Knowledge transfer upon repatriation." Journal of World

Business, Vol. 40, No.4: pp. 361-373.

Leibovici L., Reeves D., (2005), "Systematic reviews and meta-analyses." Journal of

Antimicrobial Chemotherapy,Vol. 56: pp 803–804.

Letmathe, P., Schweitzer, M. & Zielinski, M. (2012), "How to learn new tasks: Shop floor

performance effects of knowledge transfer and performance feedback." Journal of

Operations Management, Vol. 30, No.3: pp. 221-236.

Levin, D. Z. & Cross, R. (2004), "The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating role

of trust in effective knowledge transfer." Management Science, Vol. 50, No.11: pp.

1477-1490.

Levine, S. S. & Prietula, M. J. (2012), "How Knowledge Transfer Impacts Performance: A

Multilevel Model of Benefits and Liabilities." Organization Science, Vol. 23, No.6:

pp. 1748-1766.

Liao, T. J. & Yu, C. M. J. (2012), "Knowledge transfer, regulatory support, legitimacy, and

financial performance: The case of foreign firms investing in China." Journal of

World Business, Vol. 47, No.1: pp. 114-122.

16

Littell, J. H., Corcoran, J. & Pillai, V. (2008), Systematic reviews and meta-analysis. New

York, Oxford University Press.

Lockett, N., Kerr, R. & Robinson, S. (2008), "Multiple Perspectives on the Challenges for

Knowledge Transfer between Higher Education Institutions and Industry."

International Small Business Journal, Vol. 26, No.6: pp. 661-681.

Machikita, T. & Ueki, Y. (2013), "Knowledge transfer channels to Vietnam for process

improvement." Management Decision, Vol. 51, No.5: pp. 954-972.

Macpherson, A. & R. Holt. (2007). “Knowledge, Learning and Small Firm Growth: A

Systematic Review of the Evidence.” Research Policy, Vol. 36, No. 2: pp 172–192

Massingham, P. (2010), "Managing knowledge transfer between parent country nationals

(Australia) and host country nationals (Asia)." International Journal of Human

Resource Management, Vol. 21, No.9: pp. 1414-1435.

Maurer, I., Bartsch, V. & Ebers, M. (2011), "The Value of Intra-organizational Social

Capital: How it Fosters Knowledge Transfer, Innovation Performance, and Growth."

Organization Studies, Vol. 32, No.2: pp. 157-185.

McKinley, W., Mone, M. A., & Moon, G. (1999), "Determinants and development of schools

in organization theory." Academy of Management Review, Vol. 24: pp. 634-648.

Minguela-Rata, B., Lopez-Sanchez, J. I. & Rodriguez-Benavides, M. C. (2010), "Knowledge

transfer mechanisms and the performance of franchise systems: An empirical study."

African Journal of Business Management, Vol. 4, No.4: pp. 396-405.

Modi, S. B. & Mabert, V. A. (2007), "Supplier development: Improving supplier

performance through knowledge transfer." Journal of Operations Management, Vol.

25, No.1: pp. 42-64.

17

Mudambi, S. M., Oliva, T. A. & Thomas, E. F. (2009), "Industrial marketing firms and

knowledge transfer: Toward a basic typology of community structures." Industrial

Marketing Management, Vol. 38, No.2: pp. 181-190.

Mulrow, C. D. (1994). "Rationale for systematic reviews." BMJ: British Medical Journal,

Vol. 309, No. 6954: pp. 597-599.

Najafi-Tavani, Z., Giroud, A. & Sinkovics, R. R. (2012), "Mediating Effects in Reverse

Knowledge Transfer Processes The Case of Knowledge-Intensive Services in the

U.K." Management International Review, Vol. 52, No.3: pp. 461-488.

Natti, S., Halinen, A. & Hanttu, N. (2006), "Customer knowledge transfer and key account

management in professional service organizations." International Journal of Service

Industry Management, Vol. 17, No.3-4: pp. 304-319.

Pajouh, M. S. & Blenkinsopp, J. (2012), "Knowledge transfer into a developing country:

HRM practice in an Iranian hotel chain." European Journal of International

Management, Vol. 6, No.3: pp. 283-299.

Palacios-Marques, D., Peris-Ortiz, M. & Merigo, J. M. (2013), "The effect of knowledge

transfer on firm performance An empirical study in knowledge-intensive industries."

Management Decision, Vol. 51, No.5: pp. 973-985.

Petticrew, M. (2003), "Why certain systematic reviews reach uncertain conclusions." BMJ:

British Medical Journal, Vol. 326, No. 7392: pp. 756-758

Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006), "Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical

guide", Oxford, Malden, Mass, Blackwell Publishing.

Perez-Nordtvedt, L., Kedia, B. L., Datta, D. K. & Rasheed, A. A. (2008), "Effectiveness and

efficiency of cross-border knowledge transfer: An empirical examination." Journal of

Management Studies, Vol. 45, No.4: pp. 714-744.

18

Pittaway, L., Robertson, M., Munir, K., Denyer, D., Neely, A. (2004), "Networking and

innovation: a systematic review of the evidence." International Journal of

Management Reviews,Vol. 5/6 No. 3/4: pp. 137-168.

Ramasamy, B., Goh, K. W. & Yeung, M. C. H. (2006), "Is Guanxi (relationship) a bridge to

knowledge transfer?" Journal of Business Research, Vol. 59, No.1: pp. 130-139.

Reagans, R. & McEvily, B. (2003), "Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects

of cohesion and range." Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 48, No.2: pp. 240-

267.

Richter, A. & Niewiem, S. (2009), "Knowledge transfer across permeable boundaries: An

empirical study of clients' decisions to involve management consultants."

Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 25, No.3: pp. 275-288.

Riege, A. & Zulpo, M. (2007), "Knowledge transfer process cycle: Between factory floor and

middle management." Australian Journal of Management, Vol. 32, No.2: pp. 293-

314.

Saini M, Shlonsky A. (2012) "Systematic synthesis of qualitative research", New York,

Oxford University Press

Salomon, R. & Martin, X. (2008), "Learning, knowledge transfer, and technology

implementation performance: A study of time-to-build in the global semiconductor

industry." Management Science, Vol. 54, No.7: pp. 1266-1280.

Sanders, C. B., Steward, M. D. & Bridges, S. (2009), "Facilitating knowledge transfer during

SOX-mandated audit partner rotation." Business Horizons, Vol. 52, No.6: pp. 573-

582.

Scherer, A. G. & Steinmann, H., (1999), "Some Remarks on the Problem of

Incommensurability in Organization Studies.", Organization Studies, Vol. 2, No.3:

pp. 519-544

19

Sheng, M. L., Chang, S. Y., Teo, T. & Lin, Y. F. (2013), "Knowledge barriers, knowledge

transfer, and innovation competitive advantage in healthcare settings." Management

Decision, Vol. 51, No.3: pp. 461-478.

Spraggon, M. & Bodolica, V. (2012), "A multidimensional taxonomy of intra-firm

knowledge transfer processes." Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65, No.9: pp.

1273-1282.

Squire, B., Cousins, P. D. & Brown, S. (2009), "Cooperation and Knowledge Transfer within

Buyer-Supplier Relationships: The Moderating Properties of Trust, Relationship

Duration and Supplier Performance." British Journal of Management, Vol. 20, No.4:

pp. 461-477.

Stevens, J. M. & Bagby, J. W. (2001), "Knowledge transfer from universities to business:

Returns for all stakeholders?" Organization, Vol. 8, No.2: pp. 259-268.

Su, C. K., Huang, M. K. & Contractor, N. (2010), "Understanding the structures, antecedents

and outcomes of organisational learning and knowledge transfer: a multi-theoretical

and multilevel network analysis." European Journal of International Management,

Vol. 4, No.6: pp. 576-601.

Szulanski, G., Cappetta, R. & Jensen, R. J. (2004), "When and how trustworthiness matters:

Knowledge transfer and the moderating effect of causal ambiguity." Organization

Science, Vol. 15, No.5: pp. 600-613.

Szulanski, G. & Jensen, R. J. (2006), "Presumptive adaptation and the effectiveness of

knowledge transfer." Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 27, No.10: pp. 937-957.

Taskin, L. & Bridoux, F. (2010), "Telework: a challenge to knowledge transfer in

organizations." International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 21,

No.13: pp. 2503-2520.

20

Tsai, W. P. (2001), "Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network

position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance."

Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44, No.5: pp. 996-1004.

Thorpe, R., Holt, R., Macpherson, A., & Pittaway, L. (2005), "Using knowledge within small

and medium-sized firms: A systematic review of the evidence." International Journal

of Management Reviews, Vol. 7, No. 4: pp. 257-281.

Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003), "Towards a methodology for developing

evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review." British

Journal of Management, Vol. 14, No. 3: pp. 207-222.

Tuan, L. T. (2012), "Behind knowledge transfer." Management Decision, Vol. 50, No.3-4:

pp. 459-478.

Watson, S. & Hewett, K. (2006), "A multi-theoretical model of knowledge transfer in

organizations: Determinants of knowledge contribution and knowledge reuse."

Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 43, No.2: pp. 141-173.

Wilkesmann, U., Wilkesmann, M. & Virgillito, A. (2009), "The Absence of Cooperation Is

Not Necessarily Defection: Structural and Motivational Constraints of Knowledge

Transfer in a Social Dilemma Situation." Organization Studies, Vol. 30, No.10: pp.

1141-1164.

Williams, C. (2007), "Transfer in context: Replication and adaptation in knowledge transfer

relationships." Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 28, No.9: pp. 867-889.

Wu, G. C., Cheng, Y. H. & Huang, S. Y. (2010), "The study of knowledge transfer and green

management performance in green supply chain management." African Journal of

Business Management, Vol. 4, No.1: pp. 44-48.

21

Yang, J., Alejandro, T. G. B. & Boles, J. S. (2011), "The role of social capital and knowledge

transfer in selling center performance." Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing,

Vol. 26, No.3: pp. 152-161.

Yang, Y., Nomoto, S. & Kurokawa, S. (2013), "Knowledge transfer in corporate venturing

activity and impact of control mechanisms." International Entrepreneurship and

Management Journal, Vol. 9, No.1: pp. 21-43.

Zhang, Y. & Begley, T. M. (2011), "Perceived organisational climate, knowledge transfer

and innovation in China-based research and development companies." International

Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 22, No.1: pp. 34-56.

Zhao, Z. J. & Anand, J. (2009), "A multilevel perspective on knowledge transfer: evidence

from the Chinese automotive industry." Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 30,

No.9: pp. 959-983.

22

APPENDIX

Systematic Literature Review Process Taken - Screen Shots In Order Of Occurrence

Figure 2: Search terms and corresponding operators

Figure 3: Total Citations returned using search strings

23

Figure 4: Exclusion based on Web of Science Categories

Figure 5: Refining citations to only Journal Articles

24

Figure 6: Exclusion using Research Areas

25