Knowledge transfer from business
schools to business organizations: the
roles absorptive capacity, learning
motivation, acquired knowledge and
job autonomy
Nguyen Dinh Tho
Nguyen Dinh Tho is
based at the International
School of Business,
University of Economics,
Ho Chi Minh City,
Vietnam and the School
of Business, Western
Sydney University, NSW,
Australia
Received 25 August 2016
Revised 1 May 2017
Accepted 25 June 2017
This work was supported by a
grant from the UEH
International School of
Business. (Grant No.
UEH.ISB.15.002).
PAGE 1240 JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impacts of absorptive capacity, learning
motivation and acquired knowledge on knowledge transfer from business schools to business
organizations, as it has been realized that in-service training business students can serve as a channel
as well as a source in this type of knowledge transfer. The study also examines the mixed moderating
role of job autonomy in the relationship between acquired knowledge and knowledge transfer.
Design/methodology/approach – A sample of 344 in-service training business students in Vietnam
was surveyed to collect data. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to validate the measures, and
structural equation modeling was used to test the hypotheses.
Findings – The findings reveal that absorptive capacity positively affects acquired knowledge but it
does not have an effect on knowledge transfer. Learning motivation, however, has positive effects on
both acquired knowledge and knowledge transfer. The findings also indicate that acquired knowledge
is a determinant of knowledge transfer. Finally, job autonomy plays the role of a mixed moderator in the
relationship between acquired knowledge and knowledge transfer.
Practical implications – This study signals the participating parties – business schools, business
organizations and in-service training business students –that absorptive capacity, learning motivation,
acquired knowledge and job autonomy are critical to the transfer of knowledge from business schools
to business organizations.
Originality/value – This study contributes to the literature on university-to-industry knowledge transfer by
providing empirical evidence for key determinants of knowledge transfer from business schools to business
organizations through a new channel of knowledge transfer – in-service training business students.
Keywords Vietnam, Absorptive capacity, Knowledge transfer, Job autonomy, Learning motivation,
In-service training business students
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
In the age of knowledge economy, knowledge is a crucial asset that creates a firm’s
sustainable competitive advantage (Nonaka, 1991). Nonaka observes the following:
In an economy where the only certainty is uncertainty, the one sure source of competitive
advantage is knowledge. When markets shift, technologies proliferate, competitors multiply,
and products become obsolete almost over night, successful companies are those that
consistently create new knowledge, disseminate it widely through the organization, and quickly
embody it in new technology and products (p. 96).
VOL. 21 NO. 5 2017, pp. 1240-1253, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1367-3270 DOI 10.1108/JKM-08-2016-0349
University knowledge is an important source of knowledge for industrial innovation, and
researchers have devoted their effort in investigating the characteristics of transfer of
knowledge from universities to industry (Agrawal, 2001; Bekkers and Freitas, 2008; Iorio
et al., 2017). Three main characteristics of university-to-industry knowledge transfer have
been identified in the literature, including university characteristics, firm characteristics and
transfer channel characteristics (Agrawal, 2001). The literature has also emphasized the
role of channels in university-to-industry knowledge transfer (Agrawal, 2001; Bekkers and
Freitas, 2008; Smirnova, 2016). There are a number of channels of university-to-industry
knowledge transfer that have been investigated by researchers in the past several years,
such as licensing, consulting services, publications, patents and personal exchanges
(Casper, 2013; Crespi et al., 2011; Grimpe and Fier, 2010; Miller et al., 2016). However, little
attention has been paid to the role of in-service training students (i.e. full-time employees
and part-time students) as a channel of university-to-industry knowledge transfer (Tho and
Trang, 2015). The present study attempts to bridge this gap by focusing on the transfer of
knowledge from business schools to business organizations through in-service training
business students.
Knowledge transfer occurs when there is a source and a recipient and knowledge is
transmitted from the source to the recipient who acquires and uses the transferred
knowledge (Ko et al., 2005). Research on knowledge transfer indicates that the
characteristics not only of the source but also of the recipient of knowledge are key to
successful knowledge transfer (Chang et al., 2012; Easterby-Smith et al., 2008). Regarding
the transfer of knowledge from business schools to business organizations, in-service
training business students are people who work for their business organizations and study
part-time at a business school. In the process of transferring knowledge from business
schools to business organizations, these people play the role of a channel of knowledge
transfer, that is, they acquire knowledge from business schools and apply it to their daily
tasks in business organizations. Such a type of knowledge transfer relates to three main
parties: in-service training business students (the channel of knowledge transfer), business
schools (the source of knowledge transfer) and business organizations (the recipient of
knowledge transfer).
Although in-service training business students play the role of a channel of knowledge
transfer, their role is specific compared to other type of channels such as licensing or
consulting services. In the process of transferring knowledge, in-service training business
students acquire knowledge from their business schools; that is, they are the recipient of
knowledge in the process of transferring knowledge from business schools to business
students. The knowledge acquired (hereinafter, acquired knowledge) from business
schools is then transferred to business organizations during their daily work. In this regard,
in-service training business students are also the source of knowledge transfer because
they own the knowledge to be transferred. However, the question of what facilitates
in-service training business students to effectively transfer the knowledge acquired from
business schools to their business organizations has not been fully answered (Tho and
Trang, 2015).
Research has shown that the acquisition and transfer of knowledge can be explained by
three key factors: ability, motivation and opportunities (Alavi and Leidner, 2001; Blumberg
and Pringle, 1982; Chang et al., 2012; Waldman and Spangler, 1989). Drawing upon the
ability-motivation-opportunity (hereinafter AMO) framework, this study endeavors to answer
the above research question by investigating the impacts of both absorptive capacity and
learning motivation of in-service training business students on their knowledge acquired
from business schools and, subsequently, on the transfer of knowledge to their business
organizations. The present study also examines the mixed moderating role (i.e. acting as
an antecedent as well as a pure moderator; Sharma et al., 1981) of job autonomy in the
relationship between acquired knowledge and knowledge transfer.

VOL. 21 NO. 5 2017 JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PAGE 1241

 The test results for a sample of 344 in-service training business students in Ho Chi Minh
City, Vietnam, support almost all of the above relationships. Thus, this study contributes to
the literature on knowledge transfer from universities to industry by:
 shedding light on a new channel of knowledge transfer, that is, in-service training
students, which has not fully been investigated by prior research; and
 providing further empirical evidence for the AMO framework explaining knowledge
transfer in a transitioning economy.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: theoretical background and hypotheses,
research methods, data analysis and results, discussion and implications and conclusions,
limitations and directions for future research.

Theory and hypotheses

Theoretical background
The AMO framework posits that ability, motivation and opportunity are determinants of
successful task performance (Blumberg and Pringle, 1982; Waldman and Spangler, 1989).
Ability reflects an employee’s knowledge, skills and experience and other capabilities such
as health, endurance and stamina required to perform a specific task. Motivation refers to
her or his willingness to perform the task. Finally, opportunity consists of uncontrollable
factors surrounding the employee’s workplace, such as working conditions, leader
behavior and organizational policies, that enable or constrain her or his task performance
(Blumberg and Pringle, 1982; Chang et al., 2012). The AMO framework has widely been
applied in business research in the past several years. For example, Siemsen et al. (2008)
used the AMO framework to study knowledge sharing among employees. Chang et al.
(2012) applied the framework in their study of knowledge transfer from headquarters to
subsidiaries through expatriates. Kundu and Gahlawat (2016) used the framework to
investigate human resource practices and firm performance.
According to the AMO framework, ability, motivation and opportunity are usually specified
in regard to a specific task (Chang et al., 2012). In the present study, in-service training
business students perform two particular tasks. The first task is the acquisition of
knowledge provided by business schools, and the second one is the application
of knowledge acquired from business schools to their daily work (i.e. the transfer of
knowledge from business schools to business organizations). Thus, as discussed
previously, in-service training business students play the role of a channel as well as a
source of knowledge transfer. Because in-service training business students are full-time
workers at business organizations, they unquestionably comprehend what knowledge is
required for their daily tasks in their business organizations. For that reason, when studying
in business schools, they recognize the types of knowledge they are seeking. Thus, these
workers as well as students have opportunities to apply their knowledge acquired from
business schools to their business organizations. This is the process of knowledge
internalization in which explicit knowledge is transformed into tacit knowledge, and this
type of knowledge is more useful for business organizations (Nonaka, 1991). Applying the
AMO framework, this study identifies three factors – students’ learning motivation, students’
absorptive capacity and job autonomy in the workplace – that may assist students in
acquiring knowledge from business schools and in transferring the acquired knowledge to
their business organizations. Figure 1 depicts a conceptual model.

Hypothesis
Antecedents of acquired knowledge and knowledge transfer. Like full-time students,
in-service training business students go to schools with the aim of obtaining valuable
knowledge for use. However, whereas knowledge acquired by full-time students will be
utilized for their future career (i.e. after graduation), in-service training business students

PAGE 1242 JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT VOL. 21 NO. 5 2017

 Figure 1 Conceptual model

Learning motivation

H3 H4

Acquired knowledge H5 Knowledge transfer

H1 H2 H7 H6

Absorptive capacity
Job autonomy

use such knowledge for their current job in their business organizations (i.e. transferring the
knowledge acquired from their business schools to their business organizations). In
addition, unlike full-time students, in-service training business students have prior
knowledge about business because they have been trained elsewhere and are currently
working in the area. Such prior knowledge assists them in evaluating and utilizing outside
knowledge, that is, the knowledge provided by their business schools (Tho and Trang,
2015). Useful knowledge acquired from business schools is the outcome of learning
effectiveness, which depends on several factors. Research has shown that students’
absorptive capacity and students’ learning motivation are two key factors contributing to
the effectiveness of learning outcome (Cole et al., 2004; Diseth et al., 2010; Lane and
Lubatkin, 1998; Nguyen and Nguyen, 2010; Noe, 1986).
Absorptive capacity refers to the ability to recognize, absorb, integrate and apply new
external knowledge to advance competitiveness (Chang et al., 2012; Cohen and Levinthal,
1990; Miller et al., 2016; Zahra and George, 2002). Absorptive capacity helps workers to
identify, learn and comprehend new and novel knowledge from outside sources that is
important for their current jobs (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990). In the context of this study,
absorptive capacity of in-service training business students can be defined as the ability of
students to exploit knowledge from business schools, including the ability to recognize its
value, assimilate it, combine it with existing knowledge and apply it to their daily tasks in
their organizations (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990; Mariano and Walter, 2015). As such,
students’ absorptive capacity is a knowledge-based capability (Miller et al., 2016; Zahra
and George, 2002). This ability enables students to effectively learn when studying at their
business schools and also allows them to apply their acquired knowledge in the workplace.
Therefore, the level of knowledge acquired from business schools and the level of
knowledge transferred into business organizations will depend on the level of absorptive
capacity of in-service training business students. Thus:
H1. Absorptive capacity has a positive effect on acquired knowledge.
H2. Absorptive capacity has a positive effect on knowledge transfer.
Another factor that facilitates students’ learning outcome is learning motivation. It can be
defined as “a desire on the part of trainees to learn the content of the training program”
(Colquitt and Simmering, 1998, p. 654). Learning motivation will shape students’ direction,
focus and level of effort applied to their learning activities (Cole et al., 2004). Thus, students
with higher levels of learning motivation are more likely to equip themselves with more
effective learning strategies that facilitate the acquisition of knowledge from their business
schools (Blumenfeld et al., 2006; Nguyen and Nguyen, 2010). In-service training business
students are also employees in their business organizations, and the ultimate goal of
employees in their organizations is job performance (Blumberg and Pringle, 1982). They
decide to become in-service training business students because they are not satisfied with
their current knowledge and are willing to search for new and novel knowledge from outside
sources that is applicable to their current job (Tho and Trang, 2015). For that reason, if their
learning motivation their goal is likely to be reached. Thus:

VOL. 21 NO. 5 2017 JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PAGE 1243

 H3. Learning motivation has a positive effect on acquired knowledge.
H4. Learning motivation has a positive effect on knowledge transfer.
As posited by the AMO framework, the knowledge that in-service training business
students have acquired from their business schools reflects their ability that helps them to
enhance their job performance (Blumberg and Pringle, 1982; Cohen and Levinthal, 1990).
Therefore, students with higher levels of acquired knowledge are likely to apply it to their
jobs, that is, transfer the knowledge from business schools to business organizations for
better performance (Tho and Trang, 2015). As discussed previously, in-service training
business students are employees who are not satisfied with their current knowledge. Those
employees are willing to search for new and novel knowledge from outside sources that is
applicable to their current job. For that reason, the more knowledge they have acquired
from their business organization, the more knowledge they transfer into their business
organizations. Formally:
H5. Acquired knowledge has a positive effect on knowledge transfer.
Mixed moderating role of job autonomy. Job autonomy can be defined as “the extent to
which a job allows the freedom, independence, and discretion to schedule work, make
decisions, and select the methods used to perform tasks” (Morgeson et al., 2005,
pp. 399-400). When working for a business organization with a high level of job autonomy,
employees will have greater freedom to decide on the way they perform their tasks (Llopis
and Foss, 2016). From the AMO framework perspective, an autonomous working
environment will give an opportunity for employees to apply new and novel knowledge to
the job. Hence, in-service training business students working in such an environment (a job
autonomy environment) are more inclined to apply new knowledge gained from their
business schools to their current job, thus enhancing the transfer of knowledge from
business schools to business organizations.
H6. Job autonomy has a positive effect on knowledge transfer.
As posited by the AMO model, the interaction between ability and opportunity is predicted
to enhance performance (Blumberg and Pringle, 1982; Chang et al., 2012). In the case of
knowledge transfer from business schools to business organizations through in-service
training business students, the autonomy in their workplace (students’ opportunity to apply
new and novel knowledge to the task to be performed) will interact with their acquired
knowledge (students’ ability) to facilitate the application of the acquired knowledge to
everyday tasks (the transfer of knowledge). In other words, job autonomy will reinforce the
relationship between acquired knowledge and knowledge transfer. Thus:
H7. Job autonomy positively moderates the relationship between acquired knowledge
and knowledge transfer.

Research methods
Research context and sample
The Vietnamese economy is in transition and the continuing movement from a centrally
planned economy to a market-oriented economy has required business organizations to
endlessly renew their business knowledge to deal with changing business environments
(Nguyen and Nguyen, 2010). For that reason, Vietnamese business organizations have
encouraged their employees to participate in business programs offered by business
schools with the hope of gaining more competitive advantages through knowledge-based
capability. Realizing the need for business knowledge to enhance competitive positions of
business organizations, in the past several years, Vietnamese universities have introduced
a number of part-time business programs to satisfy the need for knowledge of the business
sector of economy (Tho and Trang, 2015). Thus, Vietnam offers an appropriate case for the

PAGE 1244 JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT VOL. 21 NO. 5 2017

study of knowledge transfer from business schools to business organizations through
in-service training business students.
A sample of 344 in-service training business students at three major universities in Ho Chi
Minh City, including the University of Economics HCM City, the University of Economics
and Law and HCM City Open University, was surveyed to collect data, validate the
measures and test the proposed theoretical model and hypotheses. Confirmatory factor
analysis (CFA) was used to assess the measures of the constructs, and structural equation
modeling (SEM) was used to test the proposed model and hypotheses. The samples
comprised 223 (64.8 per cent) in-service training business students (employees) working
for local firms and 121 (35.2 per cent) students working for foreign-invested firms. In terms
of firm size, there were 182 (52.9 per cent) students working for firms having more than 100
employees and 162 (47.1 per cent) students working for firms having less than or equal to
100 employees. There were 185 (56.7 per cent) undergraduate students and 149 (43.3 per
cent) graduate students. Finally, the sample included 188 (54.7 per cent) female students
and 156 (45.3 per cent) male students.

Measurement
The five constructs examined in this study were absorptive capacity; learning motivation;
acquired knowledge; knowledge transfer; and job autonomy. These constructs were
conceptualized as unidimensional constructs. Absorptive capacity was measured in terms
of four items. These items address the four facets of absorptive capacity, including the
ability to identify and recognize the value of outside knowledge; assimilate it; integrate it
with prior knowledge; and apply it to commercial ends (Chang et al., 2012; Cohen and
Levinthal, 1990). Learning motivation was also measured in terms of four items, borrowed
from Cole et al. (2004). These four items address students’ willingness to attend and learn
the course material. Six items from the generic skills scale in the Course Experience
Questionnaire (Wilson et al., 1997) were borrowed to measure acquired knowledge.
Knowledge transfer was measured in term of three items, adapted from Ko et al. (2005).
These items assess students’ ability to learn the knowledge offered by their business
schools (changes in knowledge) and to apply the knowledge to the workplace (changes in
performance; Argote and Ingram, 2000). Finally, job autonomy was measured in terms of
three items borrowed from Morgeson et al. (2005). These items address the degree of
freedom of in-service training business students in determining how to perform their tasks
in their business organizations.
A seven-point Likert scale was used to measure these items, anchored by 1 (strongly
disagree) and 7 (strongly agree). Note that these measures were initially prepared in
English and then translated into Vietnamese by an academic who is fluent in both the
languages. This procedure was undertaken because English is not a teaching medium in
this market. Back translation was conducted to ensure the reliability of the translation. In
addition, the items measuring the constructs were randomly placed in the questionnaire
with an aim of lessening the tendency of agreement bias.

Data analysis and results

As previously mentioned, this study used CFA to validate the measures of the constructs
and then employed SEM to test the proposed theoretical model and hypotheses. The
maximum likelihood estimation method was used to estimate the parameters in the CFA
and SEM models. This estimation method was employed because the screening process
revealed that although the data exhibited slight deviations from normality, all of the
univariate kurtosis and skewnesses were within the range of [⫺1, 1] (Muthen and Kaplan,
1985).

VOL. 21 NO. 5 2017 JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PAGE 1245

 Measurement validation
To validate the measures of the five constructs (absorptive capacity, learning motivation,
acquired knowledge, knowledge transfer and job autonomy) used in this study, a saturated
model (CFA final measurement model) was formed. The CFA results reveal that this
saturated model received an acceptable fit to the data: ␹2(159) ⫽ 425.14 (p ⫽ 0.000), GFI ⫽
0.888, CFI ⫽ 0.931 and RMSEA ⫽ 0.070. The CFA results also indicate that all items
measuring the constructs in the model had high CFA factor loadings (ⱖ0.54; p ⬍ 0.001),
thus supporting construct unidimensionality and within-method convergent validity
(Steenkamp and van Trijp, 1991). In addition, the average variance extracted for each
construct in any pair of constructs in the model was greater than the squared correlation
between the two constructs in the pair, thus supporting the construct discriminant validity
(Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Table I presents the CFA factor loadings of items and
composite reliability of the scales, and Appendix shows the correlations and squared
correlations between constructs and the average variance extracted for each construct
(results of the discriminant validity test).

Common method bias

Because this study used a data set collected from a single respondent (in-service training
business students), a common method bias could be present (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Note
that in the design phase, the items measuring the constructs under study were randomly
placed in the questionnaire with an aim of minimizing such a bias. Following Podsakoff

Table I Means (M), standard deviations (SD) and standardized CFA loadings (␭) of items
Item M SD ␭ t-value

During my study in this business school

Absorptive capacity: Composite reliability (CR) ⫽ 0.82; Average variance extracted (AVE) ⫽ 0.54
I have the ability to recognize new knowledge and skills provided by my instructors applicable
to my current job 5.15 1.082 0.75 13.80
I have the ability to absorb the new knowledge and skills provided by my instructors 4.99 1.178 0.80 14.58
I have the ability to integrate the new knowledge and skills provided by my instructors with my
prior knowledge 5.08 1.122 0.81 –
I have the ability to apply the new knowledge and skills provided by my instructors to my
current job 4.60 1.179 0.54 9.58
Learning motivation: CR ⫽ 0.88; AVE ⫽ 0.65
I have tried to learn the course material as much as possible 4.68 1.390 0.80 –
I have spent a lot of time for my study 4.61 1.331 0.85 17.25
Investment in studying the course material is my first priority 4.92 1.378 0.83 16.63
I have tried my best to study the course material 4.88 1.298 0.74 14.56
Acquired knowledge: CR ⫽ 0.89; AVE ⫽ 0.57
The business degree course has developed my problem-solving skills 4.95 1.235 0.76 –
The business degree course has sharpened my analytic skills 5.18 1.099 0.82 19.36
The business degree course has helped me develop my ability to work as a team member 5.36 1.095 0.76 13.80
As a result of my business degree course, I feel confident about tackling unfamiliar problems 4.97 1.142 0.75 13.68
The business degree course has improved my skills in communication 5.21 1.157 0.74 13.44
My business degree course has helped me develop the ability to plan my own work 5.30 1.207 0.72 13.17
During my study in this business school and working at my organization
Knowledge transfer: CR ⫽ 0.88; AVE ⫽ 0.71
I have acquired a lot of knowledge and skills applicable to my current job 4.58 1.269 0.80 17.29
I have acquired a lot of knowledge and skills that help me enhance my job performance 4.61 1.284 0.88 19.34
I have effectively applied my knowledge and skills gained from the business school to my
current job 4.54 1.259 0.85 –
Job autonomy: CR ⫽ 0.80; AVE ⫽ 0.58
I have significant autonomy in determining how I do my job 5.10 1.379 0.81 –
I can decide on my own how to go about doing my work 4.85 1.450 0.76 12.24
I have considerable opportunity for independence and freedom in how I do my job 5.01 1.437 0.70 11.72

PAGE 1246 JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT VOL. 21 NO. 5 2017

et al.’s (2003) recommendation, two statistical control procedures were conducted to check
this potential bias. First, a CFA Harman’s single-factor model test was conducted, and then,
an unmeasured latent variable test was conducted in which the unmeasured latent variable
was allowed to load on each item in the trait model (Markel and Frone, 1998). The CFA
Harman’s test result reveals that the single-factor model received a very poor fit to the data
[␹2(189) ⫽ 1,617.48 (p ⫽ 0.000), GFI ⫽ 0.636, CFI ⫽ 0.622 and RMSEA ⫽ 0.158] as
compared to that of the trait factor model [␹2(159) ⫽ 425.14 (p ⫽ 0.000), GFI ⫽ 0.888, CFI ⫽
0.931 and RMSEA ⫽ 0.070]. The unmeasured latent variable test result also indicates that
the size and statistical significance of the loadings were almost identical to those reported
in the saturated model. The result further shows that all loadings of the items on the
unmeasured latent variable were not significant. These results indicate that the common
method bias, if present, was not a pervasive problem in this study.

Structural model and hypothesis testing

In the theoretical model, job autonomy was proposed to play the role of a mixed moderator
(Sharma et al., 1981), that is, it not only had a direct effect on knowledge transfer (as an
independent variable) but also moderated the relationship between acquired knowledge
and knowledge transfer (as a pure moderator). Following Cortina et al. (2001), this study
used a single-step analysis, that is, both the moderator and other variables in the proposed
model were analyzed simultaneously. Further, based on Ping (1995), one indicator was
used for the interaction between acquired knowledge and job autonomy. Because
acquired knowledge and job autonomy were unidimensional constructs, summated
indicators (the sum of all items measuring each construct) were used for calculating the
interaction between these two constructs, that is, the product of acquired knowledge and
job autonomy (Gerbing and Anderson 1988). To avoid multicolinearity, mean-deviated
variables were used for the interaction (Cronbach, 1987). Note that no improper solution
was found in any CFA or SEM models: Heywood cases were absent; all error-term
variances were significant; and all standardized residuals were less than |2.58|. Table II
shows the maximum likelihood estimates of the structural paths of the proposed model.
The SEM results indicate that the proposed model received an acceptable fit to the data:
␹2[179] ⫽ 507.95 (p ⫽ 0.000), GFI ⫽ 0.879, CFI ⫽ 0.915 and RMSEA ⫽ 0.073. The SEM
results also show that six out of the seven hypotheses were supported (Table II). A closer
examination of the structural paths reveals that, consistent with H1, a positive relationship
between students’ absorptive capacity and acquired knowledge was found (p ⬍ 0.001). H2
proposed that students’ absorptive capacity has a positive relationship with knowledge
transfer. The results indicate that this relationship was not significant (p ⬎ 0.499), thus
rejecting H2. H3 proposed a positive relationship between students’ learning motivation
and acquired knowledge. This hypothesis was supported by the data (p ⬍ 0.001). H4
posited that students’ learning motivation has a positive effect on knowledge transfer, and
this relationship was significant (p ⬍ 0.001) as well. H5 stated that acquired knowledge has
a positive effect on the transfer of knowledge from business schools to business

Table II Structural paths

HypothesisStructural path B SE ␤ t-valuep-value

H1 Absorptive capacity ¡ Acquired knowledge 0.380.0630.38 6.03 0.000

H2 Absorptive capacity ¡ Knowledge transfer 0.050.0680.04 0.68 0.499
H3 Learning motivation ¡ Acquired knowledge 0.320.0510.38 6.22 0.000
H4 Learning motivation ¡ Knowledge transfer 0.220.0550.23 3.91 0.000
H5 Acquired knowledge ¡ Knowledge transfer 0.590.0810.53 7.34 0.000
H6 Job autonomy ¡ Knowledge transfer 0.170.0490.19 3.58 0.000
H7 Acquired knowledge ⫻ Job autonomy ¡ Knowledge transfer0.010.0020.13 2.80 0.005
Notes: B: unstandardized estimate; SE: standard error; ␤: standardized estimate

VOL. 21 NO. 5 2017 JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PAGE 1247

 organizations. The estimated structural path between acquired knowledge and knowledge
transfer was significant (p ⬍ 0.001), supporting H5.
Further, a positive relationship between job autonomy and knowledge transfer proposed in
H6 was also found significant (p ⬍ 0.001). Finally, the effect of the interaction between job
autonomy and acquired knowledge (acquired knowledge ⫻ job autonomy) on knowledge
transfer was found significant (p ⬍ 0.01), supporting H7. These findings confirm the mixed
moderating role of job autonomy in the relationship between acquired knowledge and
knowledge transfer. In sum, except for H2, which was rejected, all of the other hypotheses
were supported by the data. The rejection of H2 may be due to the nature of absorptive
capacity. Absorptive capacity facilitates in-service training business students in identifying
and absorbing new and novel knowledge from business schools. Thus, absorptive
capacity will affect the level of knowledge acquired from business schools rather than the
level of knowledge transferred to business organizations.

Discussion and implications

Recognizing that in-service training business students can serve as a channel as well as a
source of knowledge transfer from business schools to business organizations, this study
investigated some key determinants of such a type of knowledge transfer. Based on the
AMO framework, this study proposed that both students’ absorptive capacity and learning
motivation will enhance the knowledge acquired by students from their business schools.
Subsequently, students’ acquired knowledge together with their absorptive capacity and
learning motivation will affect their knowledge transfer from business schools to business
organizations. In addition, job autonomy plays the role of a mixed moderator in the
relationship between acquired knowledge and knowledge transfer. The study results,
based on a data set collected from a sample of 344 in-service training business students
in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, revealed that both students’ absorptive capacity and learning
motivation underlie students’ acquired knowledge, and acquired knowledge is a
determinant of knowledge transfer. In addition, students’ learning motivation enhances
knowledge transfer but students’ absorptive capacity does not. Further, job autonomy does
play the role of a mixed moderator, that is, it has a positive effect on knowledge transfer and
also strengthens the impact of acquired knowledge on knowledge transfer. These findings
offer a number of implications for theory, research and practice.
In terms of theory and research, this study addresses a new channel of knowledge
transfer (i.e. in-service training business students) from business schools to business
organizations, shedding light on this new type of channel of university-to-industry
knowledge transfer that has not fully been investigated by prior research. First, from a
theoretical perspective, the study identifies three key factors – students’ absorptive
capacity, learning motivation and acquired knowledge – and provides empirical evidence
for their role in the transfer of knowledge. Learning motivation not only helps students to
enhance their level of knowledge acquired from business organizations but also assist
them in transferring the acquired knowledge to their business organizations. Although the
findings show that absorptive capacity does not enhance knowledge transfer, it does a
good job in facilitating students to gain knowledge from their business schools, leading to
knowledge transfer. The findings of this study conform to past research findings in other
industries. For example, Chang et al. (2012) found that expatriates’ motivation and ability
are determinants of knowledge transfer from expatriates to subsidiaries in multinational
corporations. Nguyen and Nguyen (2010) found that learning motivation underlies learning
performance. Ko et al. (2005) found that absorptive capacity determines the transfer of
knowledge from consultants to clients.
The study findings also highlight the mixed moderating role that job autonomy plays in
explaining knowledge transfer. Job autonomy creates an opportunity for employees to
apply new and novel knowledge and ideas gained from outside sources – business

PAGE 1248 JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT VOL. 21 NO. 5 2017

schools in this study – to their everyday job at their business organizations, enabling them
to not only enhance their performance (knowledge transfer) but also strengthen the effect
of acquired knowledge on knowledge transfer. This role of job autonomy has also been
verified by past research in knowledge transfer and related areas. For instance, Llopis and
Foss (2016) found that job autonomy positively moderates the impact of cooperative
climate and knowledge sharing among employees. Volmer et al. (2012) found that job
autonomy positively moderates the relationship between the quality of leader–member
exchange and creative work involvement. The findings of the present study further confirm
the explaining power of the AMO framework in a transitioning market, Vietnam,
encouraging further research on this specific type of channel of knowledge transfer –
in-service training students – in such a market.
In terms of practice, the findings of this study signal the participating parties, including the
source (business schools), the recipient (business organizations) and the channel
(in-service training business students), in the process of transferring knowledge from
business schools to business organizations to recognize their role in the course of action.
The findings suggest that in-service training business students are able to play the role of
a channel as well as a source of knowledge transfer from business schools to business
organizations. To facilitate this type of knowledge transfer, first, business schools should
recognize that in-service training business students are full-time employees and
part-time students and that these employees will directly apply the acquired knowledge
to their daily tasks at their business organizations. As part-time students, they go to
schools because they are in need of knowledge appropriate to their business tasks. As
full-time employees, they have opportunities to apply new and novel knowledge to their
everyday business tasks. With such special type of business students, traditional methods
(i.e. lecture-based) of teaching and learning may not be appropriate. Therefore, business
schools should design and implement appropriate business programs for this type of
students to help them acquire new and novel knowledge that can be applicable to their
business organizations. For example, teaching and learning programs that focus on
problem-based and project-based learning (Cörvers et al., 2016) will give in-service
training business students an opportunity to identify, analyze and solve current business
problems in organizations (Tho and Trang, 2015; van Aken, 2004).
Business organizations should also recognize that an autonomous environment in their
organizations helps expedite the transfer of knowledge from business schools to their
organizations by their employees who are currently part-time students at business schools.
In addition to providing an autonomous environment for their employees, business
organizations should purposively select and send employees who have high levels of
absorptive capacity and learning motivation to business schools. Such employees will be
more effective in not only acquiring new and novel knowledge from business schools but
also transferring the acquired knowledge to their business organizations. In so doing,
business organizations are able to effectively utilize outside knowledge to enhance their
employees’ job performance.
In-service training business students should also understand their important role in the
process of transferring knowledge. They simultaneously play two roles – the channel and
the source of knowledge transfer – in the process. While playing the role of a channel,
in-service training business students bring the knowledge obtained from their business
schools to their daily jobs at their business organizations. They are also the source of
knowledge transfer. The knowledge they acquire from their business schools plays an
important role in the process. The relevance and usefulness of the acquired knowledge
depend on both, their ability to identify, assimilate and apply it to the real world (i.e. their
absorptive capacity) and their motivation to learn new and novel knowledge when they are
in business schools. Therefore, in-service training business students should comprehend

VOL. 21 NO. 5 2017 JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PAGE 1249

 their two important roles in the process of transferring knowledge to transfer the knowledge
from business schools to business organizations more effectively.

Conclusions, limitations and directions for future research

In conclusion, in-service training business students play a dual role in the transfer of knowledge
from business schools to business organizations: a channel as well as a source of knowledge
transfer. This dual role has largely been ignored in the literature on university-to-industry
knowledge transfer. In transitioning markets like Vietnam, where business management
practice of business organizations still lags behind that of organizations in advanced
economies, in-service training business students, together with other channels such as
consulting contracts, are critical sources for enhancing business management practice of
Vietnamese business organizations. The findings of this study suggest that students’
absorptive capacity, students’ learning motivation and organizations’ job autonomy are critical
for effective knowledge transfer from business schools to business organizations. Hence,
participating parties – business schools, business organizations and in-service training
business students – should pay attention to these key factors and design and implement
appropriate strategies and action programs to enhance the effectiveness of this type of
knowledge transfer.
A major limitation of this study is the investigation of only some determinants of
knowledge transfer (i.e. absorptive capacity, learning motivation, acquired knowledge
and job autonomy) from business schools to business organizations. A number of other
factors related to the characteristics of all parties involved (business schools, business
organizations and in-service training business students) may contribute to the
effectiveness of this type of knowledge transfer. For example, methods of teaching and
learning (Biggs and Tang, 2011) may affect the knowledge acquired by students that,
in turn, improves their knowledge transfer. Organizational characteristics such as
organizational culture (Chang and Lin, 2015), individual characteristics of employees
such as personality traits (Wilson et al., 2013) and psychological capital, overall or its
components (hope, optimism, resilience and self-efficacy; Luthans et al., 2015) may act
as moderators in the effects of learning motivation and absorptive capacity on both
acquired knowledge and knowledge transfer. Future research should examine such
potential antecedents and/or moderators.

References
Agrawal, A. (2001), “University-to-industry knowledge transfer: literature review and unanswered
questions”, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 285-302.

Alavi, M. and Leidner, D.E. (2001), “Review: knowledge management and knowledge management
systems: conceptual foundations and research issues”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 107-136.

Argote, L. and Ingram, P. (2000), “Knowledge transfer: a basis for competitive advantage in firms”,
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 82 No. 1, pp. 150-169.

Bekkers, R. and Freitas, I.M.B. (2008), “Analyzing knowledge transfer channels between universities
and industry: to what degree do sectors also matter?”, Research Policy, Vol. 37 No. 10, pp. 1837-1853.

Biggs, J. and Tang, C. (2011), Teaching for Quality Learning at University, 4th ed., Open University
Press, Maidenhead.

Blumberg, M. and Pringle, G. (1982), “The missing opportunity in organizational research: some
implications for a theory of work performance”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 7 No. 4,
pp. 560-569.

Blumenfeld, P.C., Kempler, T.M. and Krajcik, J.S. (2006), “Chapter 28: motivation and cognitive
engagement in learning environment”, in Sawyer, R.K. (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning
Sciences, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 475-488.

Casper, S. (2013), “The spill-over theory reversed: the impact of regional economies on the
commercialization of university science”, Research Policy, Vol. 42 No. 8, pp. 1313-1324.

PAGE 1250 JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT VOL. 21 NO. 5 2017

Chang, C.L. and Lin, T.C. (2015), “The role of organizational culture in the knowledge management
process”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 433-455.

Chang, Y.Y., Gong, Y. and Peng, M.W. (2012), “Expatriate knowledge transfer, subsidiary absorptive
capacity, and subsidiary performance”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 55 No. 4, pp. 927-948.

Cohen, W.M. and Levinthal, D.A. (1990), “Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and
innovation”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 128-152.

Cole, M.S., Field, H.S. and Harris, S.G. (2004), “Student learning motivation and psychological
hardiness: interactive effects on students’ reactions to a management class”, Academy of
Management Learning and Education, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 64-85.

Colquitt, J.A. and Simmering, M.J. (1998), “Conscientiousness, goal orientation, and motivation to learn
during the learning process: a longitudinal study”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 83 No. 4,
pp. 654-665.

Cortina, J.M., Chen, G. and Dunlap, W.P. (2001), “Testing interaction effects in LISREL: examination
and illustration of available procedures”, Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 324-360.

Cörvers, R., Wiek, A., de Kraker, J., Lang, D.J. and Martens, P. (2016), “Problem-based and
project-based learning for sustainable development”, in Heinrichs, H., Martens, P., Michelsen, G. and
Wiek, A. (Eds), Sustainability Science – An Introduction, Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 349-358.

Crespi, G., D’Este, P., Fontana, R. and Geuna, A. (2011), “The impact of academic patenting on
university research and its transfer”, Research Policy, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 55-68.

Cronbach, L.J. (1987), “Statistical tests for moderator variables: flaws in analyses recently proposed”,
Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 102 No. 3, pp. 414-417.

Diseth, A., Pallesen, S., Brunborg, G.S. and Larsen, S. (2010), “Academic achievement among first
semester undergraduate psychology students: the role of course experience, effort, motives and
learning strategies”, Higher Education, Vol. 59 No. 3, pp. 335-352.

Easterby-Smith, M., Lyles, M.A. and Tsang, E.W.K. (2008), “Inter-organizational knowledge transfer:
current themes and future prospects”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 677-690.

Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.

Gerbing, W.D. and Anderson, J.C. (1988), “An update paradigm for scale development incorporating
unidimensionality and its assessments”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 186-192.

Grimpe, C. and Fier, H. (2010), “Informal university technology transfer: a comparison between the
United States and Germany”, Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 637-650.

Iorio, R., Labory, S. and Rentocchini, F. (2017), “The importance of pro-social behaviour for the breadth
and depth of knowledge transfer activities: an analysis of Italian academic scientists”, Research Policy,
Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 497-509.

Ko, D.G., Kirsch, L.J. and King, W.R. (2005), “Antecedents of knowledge transfer from consultants to
clients in enterprise system implementations”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 59-85.

Kundu, S.C. and Gahlawat, N. (2016), “Ability–motivation– opportunity enhancing human resource
practices and firm performance: evidence from India”, Journal of Management & Organization, doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2016.22.

Lane, P.J. and Lubatkin, M. (1998), “Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning”,
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 461-477.

Llopis, O. and Foss, N.J. (2016), “Understanding the climate-knowledge sharing relation: the
moderating roles of intrinsic motivation and job autonomy”, European Management Journal, Vol. 34
No. 2, pp. 135-144.

Luthans, F., Youssef-Morgan, C.M. and Avolio, B.J. (2015), Psychological Capital and Beyond, Oxford
University Press, New York, NY.

Mariano, S. and Walter, C. (2015), “The construct of absorptive capacity in knowledge management
and intellectual capital research: content and text analyses”, Journal of Knowledge Management,
Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 372-400.

VOL. 21 NO. 5 2017 JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PAGE 1251

 Markel, K.S. and Frone, M.R. (1998), “Job characteristics, work-school conflict, and school outcomes
among adolescents: testing a structural model”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 83 No. 2,
pp. 277-287.

Miller, K., McAdam, R., Moffett, S., Alexander, A. and Puthusserry, P. (2016), “Knowledge transfer in
university quadruple helix ecosystems: an absorptive capacity perspective”, R&D Management,
Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 383-399.

Morgeson, F.P., Delaney-Klinger, K. and Hemingway, M.A. (2005), “The importance of job autonomy,
cognitive ability, and job-related skill for predicting role breadth and job performance”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 90 No. 2, pp. 399-406.

Muthen, B. and Kaplan, D. (1985), “A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of
non-normal Likert variables”, British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, Vol. 38 No. 2,
pp. 171-189.

Nguyen, T.T.M. and Nguyen, T.D. (2010), “Determinants of learning performance of business students
in a transitional market”, Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 304-316.

Noe, R.A. (1986), “Trainees’ attributes and attitudes: neglected influences on training effectiveness”,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 376-349.

Nonaka, I. (1991), “The knowledge-creating company”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 69 No. 6,
pp. 96-104.

Ping, R.A. (1995), “A parsimonious estimating technique for interaction and quadratic latent variables”,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 336-347.

Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.

Sharma, S., Durand, R.M. and Gur-Arie, O. (1981), “Identification and analysis of moderator variables”,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 291-300.

Siemsen, E., Roth, A.V. and Balasubramanian, S. (2008), “How motivation, opportunity, and ability
drive knowledge sharing: the constraining-factor model”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 26
No. 3, pp. 426-445.

Smirnova, Y.V. (2016), “University–industry knowledge transfer in an emerging economy: evidence

from Kazakhstan”, Science and Public Policy, Vol. 43 No. 5, pp. 702-712.

Steenkamp, J.B.E.M. and van Trijp, H.C.M. (1991), “The use of LISREL in validating marketing
constructs”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 283-299.

Tho, N.D. and Trang, N.T.M. (2015), “Can knowledge be transferred from business schools to business
organizations through in-service training students? SEM and fsQCA findings”, Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 68 No. 6, pp. 1332-1340.

Van Aken, J.E. (2004), “Management research based on the paradigm of the design sciences: the
quest for field-tested and grounded technological rules”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 41
No. 2, pp. 219-246.

Volmer, J., Spurk, D. and Niessen, C. (2012), “Leader–member exchange (LMX), job autonomy, and
creative work involvement”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 456-465.

Waldman, D.A. and Spangler, W.D. (1989), “Putting together the pieces: a closer look at the
determinants of job performance”, Human Performance, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 29-59.

Wilson, C.L., Huang, J.L. and Kraiger, K. (2013), “Personality and the analysis, design, and delivery of
training”, in Christiansen, N.D. and Tett, R.P. (Eds), Handbook of Personality at Work, Routledge,
New York, NY, pp. 543-564.

Wilson, K.L., Lizzio, A. and Ramsden, P. (1997), “The development, validation and application of the
course experience questionnaire”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 33-53.

Zahra, S.A. and George, G. (2002), “Absorptive capacity: a review, reconceptualization, and
extension”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 185-203.

PAGE 1252 JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT VOL. 21 NO. 5 2017

Appendix

Table AI Correlations (r) between and average variance extracted for constructs
Absorptive capacity Learning motivation Acquired knowledge Knowledge transfer Job autonomy

Absorptive capacity 0.54

Learning motivation 0.40 (0.16) 0.65
Acquired knowledge 0.54 (0.29) 0.53 (0.28) 0.57
Transferred knowledge 0.43 (0.18) 0.55 (0.30) 0.69 (0.48) 0.71
Job autonomy 0.34 (0.12) 0.30 (0.09) 0.38 (0.14) 0.41 (0.17) 0.58
Notes: Values on the diagonal are average variance extracted (AVE); values in brackets are the square of corresponding correlation (r2)

About the author

Nguyen Dinh Tho is the Chair of Research and Doctoral Program, International School of
Business, University of Economics HCM City, Vietnam, and an Adjunct Professor, Western
Sydney University, Australia. His works have been published in International Business
Review, Journal of Business Research, Journal of Happiness Studies, Journal of
International Marketing and Journal of Macromarketing, among others. Nguyen Dinh Tho
can be contacted at: ndtho@ueh.edu.vn or tho.nguyen@westernsydney.edu.au

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

VOL. 21 NO. 5 2017 JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PAGE 1253