The knowledge strategy orientation scale: individual perceptions of firm-level phenomena.

--and--. 1998. "Fit Indices in Covariance Structure Modeling: Sensitivity to Underparameterized Model Misspecification." Psychological Methods 3: 424-453.

--and--. 1995. "Evaluating Model Fit." Chapter in Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues, and Applications. Ed. R. H. Hoyle. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. pp. 76-99.

Ichijo, K. 2002. "Knowledge Exploitation and Knowledge Exploration: Two Strategies for Knowledge Creating Companies." Chapter in The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge. Eds. C. W. Choo and N. Bontis. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. pp. 477-483.

Joreskog, K. and D. Sorbom. 2004. LISREL 8. 71 [computer software]. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.

Judd, C. M., R. Jessor and J. E. Donovan. 1986. "Structural Equation Models and Personality Research." Journal of Personality 54: 148-196.

Katila, R. and G. Ahuja. 2002. "Something Old, Something New: A Longitudinal Study of Search Behavior and New Product Introduction." Academy of Management Journal 45: 1183-1194.

Kline, R. B. 1998. Principles and Practices of Structural Equation Modeling. New York, NY: Guilford.

Knott, A. M. 2002. "Exploration and Exploitation as Complements." Chapter in The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge. Eds. C. W. Choo and N. Bontis. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. pp. 339-358.

Lee, J., J. Lee and H. Lee. 2003. "Exploration and Exploitation in the Presence of Network Externalities." Management Science 49: 553-570.

Levinthal, D. and J. G. March. 1993. "The Myopia of Learning." Strategic Management Journal 14 (Winter Special Issue): 95-112.

March, J. G. 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning." Organization Science 2: 71-87.

McNamara, P. and C. Baden-Fuller. 1999. "Lessons from Celltech Case: Balancing Knowledge Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Renewal." British Journal of Management 10: 291.

Meng, X-L., R. Rosenthal and D. B. Rubin. 1992. "Comparing Correlated Correlation Coefficients." Psychological Bulletin 111: 172-175.

Miles, R. E. and C. C. Snow. 1978. Organizational Strategy, Structure and Process. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Nunnally, J. C. 1978. Psychometric Theory, 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Payne, S. C., J. F. Finch and T. R. Tremble. 2003. "Validating Surrogate Measures of Psychological Constructs: The Application of Construct Equivalence to Archival Data." Organizational Research Methods 6: 363-382.

Porter, M. 1980. Competitive Strategy. New York, NY: Free Press.

Rosenkopf, L. and A. Nerkar. 2001. "Beyond Local Search: Boundary-spanning, Exploration, and Impact in the Optical Disk Industry." Strategic Management Journal 22: 287-306.

Sharfman, M. 1998. "On the Advisability of Using CEOs as the Sole Informant in Strategy Research." Journal of Managerial Issues 10 (3): 373-392.

Snow, C. C. and D. C. Hambrick. 1980. "Measuring Organizational Strategies: Some Theoretical and Methodological Problems." Academy of Management Review 5: 527-538.

Thompson, B. and L. G. Daniel. 1996. "Factor Analytic Evidence for the Construct Validity of Scores: A Historical Overview and Some Guidelines." Educational and Psychological Measurement 56: 197-208.

Volberda, H. W. 1996. "Toward the Flexible Form: How to Remain Vital in Hypercompetitive Environments." Organization Science 7: 359-374.

Zack, M. H. 1999. "Developing a Knowledge Strategy." California Management Review 41 (3): 125-145.

Brian K. Miller

Assistant Professor of Management

Texas State University

Paul E. Bierly, III

Assistant Professor of Management

James Madison University

Paula S. Daly

Assistant Professor of Management

James Madison University Table 1 Pattern Matrix for Principal Axis Factor Analysis in Sample One

Factor

1 2 Explorer 1 .763 -.057 Explorer 2 .674 .048 Explorer 3 .626 .044 Explorer 4 .356 .243 Exploiter 1 .159 .535 Exploiter 2 .047 .300 Exploiter 3 -.135 .993 Exploiter 4 .282 .429 Note: Largest factor loadings in bold. Table 2 Item Level Knowledge Strategy Orientation Scale Descriptive Statistics and Correlations

1 2 3 4 Mean 2.77 3.07 2.57 2.84 Standard deviation 1.15 1.07 1.05 1.00 Skewness 0.39 0.06 0.44 0.06 Kurtosis -1.12 -1.39 -0.67 -1.07 Explorer 1 0.51 ** 0.37 ** 0.42 ** Explorer 2 0.61 ** 0.20 * 0.19 Explorer 3 0.32 ** 0.25 * 0.48 ** Explorer 4 0.40 ** 0.42 ** 0.29 ** Exploiter 1 0.23 * 0.34 ** 0.32 ** 0.21 * Exploiter 2 0.30 ** 0.38 ** 0.17 0.07 Exploiter 3 0.29 ** 0.42 ** 0.01 0.25 * Exploiter 4 0.31 ** 0.17 -0.02 0.06 Mean 2.94 3.05 2.69 2.89 Standard deviation 1.06 0.94 1.06 1.05 Skewness 0.39 0.05 0.38 0.22 Kurtosis -1.36 -1.56 -0.79 -0.99

5 6 7 8 Mean 3.49 4.00 3.43 3.62 Standard deviation 0.97 0.81 0.93 0.87 Skewness -0.86 -1.10 -0.65 -1.11 Kurtosis -0.40 1.31 -0.71 0.43 Explorer 1 0.33 ** 0.16 0.30 ** 0.26 ** Explorer 2 0.41 ** 0.19 0.27 ** 0.31 ** Explorer 3 0.47 ** 0.28 ** 0.30 ** 0.27 ** Explorer 4 0.33 ** 0.35 ** 0.30 ** 0.13 Exploiter 1 0.46 ** 0.48 ** 0.48 ** Exploiter 2 0.46 ** 0.48 ** 0.32 ** Exploiter 3 0.58 ** 0.36 ** 0.32 ** Exploiter 4 0.29 ** 0.32 ** 0.33 ** Mean 3.70 3.94 3.47 3.66 Standard deviation 0.80 0.80 0.92 0.90 Skewness -0.88 -1.14 -0.59 -0.86 Kurtosis 0.36 1.45 -0.52 -0.17 Note: N = 98. Sample Two statistics in upper right side of table; Sample Three statistics in lower left side of table. * p < .05 (two-tailed), ** p < 0.01 (two-tailed). Table 3 Fit Statistics for the Knowledge Strategy Orientation Models Model [chi square] df [DELTA] [DELTA]df

[chi square] Sample Two (a)

2-Factor Model 39.60 19 33.64 1

1-Factor Model 73.24 20 -- -- Sample Three (a)

2-Factor Model 35.43 19 12.85 1

1-Factor Model 48.28 20 -- -- Model p-value CFI RMSEA SRMR Sample Two (a)

2-Factor Model 0.000 0.92 0.097 0.065

1-Factor Model 0.000 0.79 0.160 0.098 Sample Three (a)

2-Factor Model 0.000 0.95 0.093 0.066

1-Factor Model 0.000 0.91 0.120 0.080 (a) N = 98 Note: [DELTA][chi square] = change in Chi-square; [DELTA]df = change in degrees of freedom; CFI = comparative fit index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual. Table 4 Completely Standardized Factor Patterns (a) for Alternative Models of Knowledge Strategy Orientation in Three Samples

1-Factor Models

Sample Two Sample Three Item Knowledge Strategy Factor Explorer 1 0.71 (0.45) 0.61 (0.28) Explorer 2 0.69 (0.54) 0.54 (0.25) Explorer 3 0.37 (0.12) 0.61 (0.34) Explorer 4 0.49 (0.22) 0.52 (0.27) Exploiter 1 0.47 (0.35) 0.75 (0.59) Exploiter 2 0.43 (0.29) 0.46 (0.33) Exploiter 3 0.56 (0.36) 0.57 (0.38) Exploiter 4 0.34 (0.14) 0.46 (0.28)

2-Factor Models

Sample Two Sample Three Item Explorer Exploiter Explorer Exploiter Explorer 1 0.80 (0.56) -- 0.76 (0.44) -- Explorer 2 0.75 (0.65) -- 0.57 (0.28) -- Explorer 3 0.40 (0.14) -- 0.66 (0.40) -- Explorer 4 0.55 (0.28) -- 0.61 (0.37) -- Exploiter 1 -- 0.61 (0.57) -- 0.78 (0.64) Exploiter 2 -- 0.46 (0.34) -- 0.49 (0.36) Exploiter 3 -- 0.68 (0.54) -- 0.59 (0.41) Exploiter 4 -- 0.39 (0.19) -- 0.48 (0.31) (a) [R.sup.2] values in parentheses. Table 5 Correlations and Z-tests for Relationship between Focal Constructs and Distinctive Competencies Distinctive Sample Three Correlations Competencies Explorer Exploiter Z score Radical Innovation

Research and development .42 ** .38 ** 0.454

Product technology .40 ** .44 ** -0.499

New product development .56 ** .38 ** 2.152 *

Speed to market .60 ** .41 ** 2.344 * Incremental Innovation

Process technology .29 ** .47 ** -2.021 *

Customer preferences .02 .26 * -2.468 *

Cost reduction .26 * .42 ** -3.048 *