Transfer and Management of Knowledge

Carolina Machado, J. Paulo Davim, Carolina Machado, J. Paulo Davim

• Publisher: Wiley-ISTE
• Year: 2014
• Print ISBN: 9781848216938
• eBook ISBN: 9781119035619
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Management
• Index: Business

In present days more and more academics and practitioners are seeking to understand how organizations manage their knowledge and intellectual capital in order to obtain more effective competitive advantages. Taking into account these issues, and in order to answer the concerns expressed by these professionals, this book looks to help them to understand and implement in their organizations effective transfer and management of knowledge strategies. It looks for ways to understand and perceive how organizational HR, individually and as a team, conceptualize, invent, adapt, define and use this knowledge and intellectual capital. The book has a special interest in research on important issues that transcend the boundaries of single academic subjects and managerial functions.

In a modern world, characterized by high levels of competition and complexity, only those organizations which can manage, efficiently, all their assets can survive. Among these the management of knowledge and intellectual assets is a recent and challenging process. Only with human talent organizations can survive. Conscious of these priorities, this book is of great relevance as it looks for ways to understand and perceive how organizational HR, individually and as a team, conceptualize, invent, adapt, define, transfer and use knowledge and intellectual capital. It is, also, very important and with positive implications to practitioners and academics, as it will contribute to a more effective advance and tool of communication in what concerns the understanding of key issues related to the knowledge management and intellectual capital in competitive organizations management all over the world.

1
The Impact of Knowledge Hoarding on Micro-Firm Learning Network Exchange

Felicity KELLIHER, Elaine AYLWARD and Leana REINL.

1.1. Introduction

This chapter documents the knowledge exchange dynamic in a micro-firm learning network environment over a four year period, and explores the impact of knowledge hoarding on micro-firm learning network exchange.

The chapter reflects on the ideal knowledge exchange scenario as presented in the micro-firm learning network literature and compares this with the studied environment, where micro-firms were found, at times, to compete rather than collaborate to the detriment of the exchange benefits relating to open knowledge transfer. Specifically, guarded and/or self-serving knowledge interactions resulted in the hoarding of knowledge by individual members. This activity limited the potential to expand an individual micro-firm’s intellectual resources, ultimately devaluing learning network membership.

When knowledge release occurred, information flow commenced and trust between engaged members increased over time. The resultant shared experience provided exchange benefits, which, in turn, leveraged knowledge value and enhanced the strategic advantage of network membership.

The remainder of the chapter is structured as follows: the chapter begins with a review of the micro-firm learning network literature, discussed from the knowledge exchange perspective. Then we go on to describe the longitudinal interpretive case methodology employed in this research and subsequently the results of this study are presented. Finally, in the concluding section, observations are drawn on the theoretical and empirical contributions of this study.

1.2. Micro-firm learning networks and the pursuit of competitive advantage

Micro-firms are defined as those commercial entities with no more than 10 full-time employees [EUR 05], for the purposes of this study. These firms are encouraged to engage in knowledge exchange to enhance their business capabilities, access resources, and/or improve their competitive position [KEA 14, REI 10]. This ethos promotes a structured approach to micro-firm knowledge transfer and integration, which, in turn, gives rise to the learning network philosophy [MÄK 02, REI 10, TEL 00].

If we define a network as a socially constructed set of relationships [JOH 95] and a learning network as one that is “formally set up for the primary purpose of increasing knowledge” [BES 01, p. 88], then we can assume that relationships can only be developed if the members involved engage in exchange behaviors [CHE 00]. Thus, taking into account the literature on knowledge exchange in a microfirm learning network environment [KEL 09, REI 10], the aim of this chapter is to “explore the impact of knowledge hoarding on micro-firm learning network exchange”.

Within the micro-firm literature, it has been acknowledged that learning networks act as a source of reliable information and a viable method of knowledge creation and transfer, which, in turn, can leverage resources to create and sustain competitive advantage [CHE 00, MÄK 02, REI 10, KEA 14]. By embedding the promotion of cooperative norms, facilitated through cohesion, the process of knowledge exchange can be encouraged or indeed enhanced through these networks.

Thus, the network is a unique learning environment in which knowledge is captured through discourse and exchange [REI 10, TEL 00]. This perspective assumes open exchange via informal sharing of know-how and reciprocal action once trust has been established among network members [MCE 99, JOH 02, MAC 04, HUG 00]. In this forum, “being connected to many interconnected people confers an information advantage” [TAN 11, p. 280] and it is assumed that members build a repertoire of contacts, which in turn provide access to new information [TAN 11, MCE 99].

Of note is Granovetter’s argument [GRA 85] which states that strong ties offer richer, more detailed and accurate information and thus offer superior informational advantage [MCE 99]. Uzzi [UZZ 97] and Hansen [HAN 99] reinforce this view and argue for strong ties when transferring complex, tacit knowledge as relationships embedded with trust may encourage network members to share valuable knowledge, while simultaneously accepting the possibility that this knowledge may be attained by competitors [DYE 98].

1.3. Building trust in a micro-firm learning network: the role of the knowledge facilitator

The trust relationship built through ongoing network connectivity allows for contributory and reciprocal action which, in turn, facilitates mutual understanding. As trust is an enabling factor in accessing resources and facilitating mutual problem-solving, this cooperative behavior is the basis for knowledge transfer and learning across network boundaries [UZZ 97]. This dynamic may even create a challenge in the medium term where members may need to “cope with an incessant production of coincidences which may be turned into opportunities” [JOH 07, p. 10], such that numerous choices need to be made to convert access to knowledge into competitive value.

For network members to exchange such valuable information, they must first comprehend that “cooperation and knowledge sharing can enhance their competitive position” [INK 05, p. 157]. Therefore, notwithstanding the importance of interpersonal relations [REJ 11, REA 03], the promotion of cooperative norms should aid the process of sustainable knowledge exchange in the micro-firm environment [REI 14].

As strong internal support and commitment helps sustain network activity [HUM 00], a knowledge facilitator (KF) may be valuable in the context. Furthermore, in acting as a catalyst for knowledge transfer, the KF can help identify and develop network resources [KEL 09] which “result from the informational advantages [of] participation in inter-firm networks that channel valuable information” [GUL 99, p. 399].

1.4. The pursuit of shared knowledge across network boundaries

As noted earlier, one of the key benefits of engaging with micro-firm learning networks is to leverage knowledge through shared experience [MÄK 02, REI 14]. Interacting with critically-minded individuals in this way can “help foster an environment in which knowledge can be created and shared and, most importantly, used to improve effectiveness, efficiency, and innovation” [LES 01, p. 46]. Thus, the network provides a means for micro-firm members to leverage information and access resources that would otherwise be unavailable to them [WIT 04], creating an impetus for a sustainable future.

Returning to Johannisson’s [JOH 07] posit that network members may struggle to cope with “an incessant production of coincidences”, it is worth considering the view that each member’s prior knowledge confers a capacity to acquire, assimilate, transform and exploit external knowledge [TAN 11, ZAH 02 in REJ 11]. Thus, while a significant pool of knowledge may already be present in the micro-firm learning network, external impulses are sometimes required to trigger internal development and their absence can diminish the value of the network over time. Specifically, network activities should include moving knowledge in and out of the network, creating connections and bringing information and ideas back to the wider group [REI 14].

Essentially, the art of knowledge transfer improves with greater interaction as the absorptive capacity of external knowledge increases. However, knowledge creation may be constrained only if trusted firms can enter knowledgesharing spaces [LEC 03], ultimately reducing the network knowledge value via a “locked in” effect [UZZ 97]. Furthermore, if the network is such that there is a high similarity among members, knowledge redundancy can occur ultimately creating a barrier to capability enhancement [REJ 11].

1.5. Challenging the knowledge exchange assumption

It is often assumed that micro-firm learning network membership begets knowledge access. What if this basic assumption is incorrect? What if knowledge exchange is not a foregone conclusion in a micro-firm learning network [INK 05, TAN 11] and barriers to exchange restrict the principles of knowledge creation and transfer [LUC 06, MCE 99]? Let us assume for a moment that network membership does not automatically guarantee effective knowledge exchange and that success is dependent on a number of influencing factors, which, collectively, contribute to the building of trust within the network over time.

If we step back from the core assumption of open knowledge transfer and instead consider the competitive dynamic that likely exists in micro-firm interactions, it may help us to explain the relatively low levels of sustainable interaction found in these networks [REI 10]. For example, fear that the member receiving such knowledge may use it against the person who provided it can create a barrier to exchange [INK 05]. Thus, for network members to exchange such valuable information, they must first comprehend that “cooperation and knowledge sharing can enhance their competitive position” [INK 05, p. 157].

1.6. Knowledge hoarding and its impact on network exchange

Knowledge hoarding may be more logical than it first appears, even in a learning network setting. If network members perceive that there is no benefit being offered in return for their own contribution [KOC 06, MAL 05], the rational choice may be to not engage in knowledge exchange activities [LUC 06, DYE 98]. In such instances, knowledge exchange may be sacrificed to the detriment of enhanced intellectual resources and, ultimately, to the micro-firm’s competitive benefit.

Increased competition or the potential for increased competition between micro-firms in the same network is another reason why network members may avoid exchanging knowledge [REA 03]. This challenge is amplified in a microfirm environment where the potential for ideas to leak to competitor firms is heightened and the potential to hoard information may ultimately stunt the emergence of new ideas [KEA 14]. In this case, a micro-firm has the power to affect knowledge transfer internally while impeding knowledge transfer externally [ARG 00]. This can, in turn, affect the firm’s competitive capabilities as this would hinder its capacity to access useful information through its networks [MCE 99, TAN 11].

When contemplating knowledge hoarding, it is worth noting that network members are more likely to cooperate with each other for reputat...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Table of Contents
• Title
• Copyright
• Preface
• 1 The Impact of Knowledge Hoarding on Micro-Firm Learning Network Exchange
• 2 Knowledge Exchange in Public–Private Partnerships: the Case of eCH
• 3 Talent Development and Learning Challenges in CEE: the Case of Poland
• 4 Knowledge Sharing: Social, Cultural and Structural Enabling Factors
• 5 Organizational Trust and Knowledge Sharing in Portuguese Technological Enterprises
• 6 Organizational Memory: a Preliminary Model Based on Insights from Neuroscience
• 7 Delving Down to Learn Up: Knowledge Management and Health Reforms
• 8 The Knowledge Spiral in Communities of Practice: Using Information Technology for Structuring the Collectivized Intelligence
• 9 Organizational Learning, Learning Organization and Knowledge Creation and Transmission: Some Reflections
• List of Authors
• Index
• End User License Agreement