482 research outputs found

    Storing and sharing knowledge: Supporting the management of knowledge made explicit in transnational organisations

    Get PDF
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to indicate and illustrate the potential for use of different types of technologies to support knowledge process in transnational organisations. Design/methodology/approach - The paper uses a standard literature review plus illustrations from case organisations to demonstrate the potential applications and value of technology for knowledge sharing. Findings - Transnational organisations have specific issues relating to space and time, and increasingly virtuality, in their working practices. Technology can assist to alleviate these issues and can provide the organisations with ways to share and distribute knowledge throughout their processes, sites and workforces. Successful knowledge management however, continues to need a sociotechnical approach where the social aspects of knowledge creation, storage and sharing need to be considered alongside the technical. Sociotechnical theory tells us we must importantly consider people, task, process, and environment (both internal and external) when considering how best to implement technology into our organisations. Research limitations/implications - Case studies that specifically describe the work of transnationals are not common and thus the organisations used as illustrations may be atypical, however we believe this limitation is alleviated by using both a for-profit and a not-for-profit organisation to illustrate the variety of purposes to which technology can be put in transnational organisations. Originality/value - This paper has major practical implications. It is now common in the knowledge management literature to lower the value of technology for knowledge sharing and to emphasise the human aspects of knowledge sharing. This paper agrees with this perspective but illustrates how technology can be used successfully to assist in the knowledge sharing processes across time, space and virtuality

    Developing communities of innovation by identifying innovation champions

    Get PDF
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to propose that a form of communities of practice (CoP), a community of innovation (CoInv), is the best support for sustainable innovation. It aims to outline a method for identifying champions of innovation in organisation. Design/methodology/approach - The paper draws on extant research to argue that innovation is facilitated and supported by innovation champions, who have most influence outside traditional organisational structures when they are members of a close-knit community - a CoInv. A potential method for identification of champions of innovation is highlighted. Findings - Innovation champions are special people, with particular personality types and psychological profiles. In order to succeed in championing innovations in organisations they need both procedural and resource support, and social and cognitive support. The influence of innovation champions comes through social contacts, multiplied through the communities in which they participate, through the genuine esteem in which they are held. Developing CoInv around such champions makes practical sense for organisations. Originality/value - Identifying champions of innovation will permit a CoInv to form that links social networks and transcends organisational internal boundaries and forming such a community will potentially trigger more successfully supported innovations

    Knowledge Management: A Primer

    Get PDF
    Knowledge Management is an expanding field of study. In this paper we clarify and explain some of the terms and concepts that underlie this field. In particular we discuss knowledge and its related philosophies; how the sociotechnical aspects of organizations can assist in knowledge management and how communities of practice can thus be supported; how knowledge can be valued in an organization; and the idea of intellectual capital. We conclude that knowledge management is not an easy \u27fix\u27 to an organisation\u27s problems. Implemented well it can increase productivity, improve worker collaboration, and shorten product development times. Implemented badly it may incur significant costs without delivering these benefits

    Dynamics of knowledge sharing in a cross-cultural environment

    Get PDF
    Studies have indicated that national culture may impact the choice of who shares knowledge with whom. This paper considers the problem of tacit knowledge sharing in multi-cultural environments and the issues that relate to trust, language, and culture that impact on the choice of how tacit knowledge is shared. A study was conducted in a multi-national, international, and multi-cultural Business School to discover if the theoretical research relating to a potential tacit and thus implicit knowledge sharing archetype had validity. The study conducted with 70 students from 28 nations and 24 languages, discovered that there were a number of variables that impacted who students chose to ask for (academic) tacit knowledge: these variables indicated that the longer that students spent in the Business School; the longer they were in London and the UK; and the older they were; the less they were concerned about the nationality, ethnicity, and language of the person they asked. Additionally, testing the knowledge archetype model it was found that there were no moderating factors. This indicates that a knowledge archetype that is common to all nationalities can be developed. Future research intends to develop a configurable technical based archetype - or avatar - that can be utilised by students as they enter university for implicit knowledge sharing purposes. This avatar will then be tested in multi-cultural business environment to assist tacit/implicit knowledge sharing across divisions and nation as well as languages and culture

    Focus Issue on Legacy Information Systems and Business Process Change:The Role of Stakeholders in Managing Change

    Get PDF
    To manage organisational change in the context of legacy information systems, which may need replacement or revision, the strategy process should respond to corporate opportunity rather than past internal difficulties. Steering groups are often used to guide the strategy process. An important problem is the identification of appropriate stakeholders that need to be represented on the steering group. A related problem is to establish the boundary of the new information system. Computer Information Systems development often focuses on direct users and affected internal departments as the exclusive stakeholders. However these groups may present too narrow a perspective. To improve the effectiveness of the development process, a wider constituency should be considered that includes organisational partners in the wider business environment. This paper presents a method, the stakeholder web, that identifies appropriate stakeholders and their viewpoints. It illustrates the concepts with a large-scale university information systems project. The stakeholder web is used to analyse the relationships between the activities and membership of a university information systems steering group over a five-year period. The results demonstrate the dynamic nature of the project and the associated changes in membership of the steering group

    Knowledge Archetype: Facilitating Cross Cultural Knowledge Sharing

    Get PDF
    Studies have indicated that national culture may impact the choice of who shares knowledge with whom. This paper considers the problem of tacit knowledge sharing in multi-cultural environments and the issues that relate to trust, language, and culture that could impact on tacit knowledge sharing choices. A study was conducted in an international and multi-cultural Business School to discover if the theoretical research relating to a potential tacit and implicit knowledge sharing archetype had validity. The study which was conducted with 70 students from 28 nations speaking 24 languages, discovered that the variables that impacted who students chose to ask for indicated that the longer that students spent in the Business School; the longer they were in London and the UK; and the older they were, the less they were concerned about the nationality, ethnicity, and language of the person they asked. Additionally, testing the knowledge archetype module it was found that there were no moderating factors. This indicates that a knowledge archetype that is common to all nationalities can be developed

    The impact of cluster connectedness on firm innovation: R&D effort and outcomes in the textile industry

    Get PDF
    This is an Author's Accepted Manuscript of an article published in "The impact of cluster connectedness on firm innovation: R&D effort and outcomes in the textile industry" version of the article as published in the Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 2012 september,[copyright Taylor & Francis], available online at: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/08985626.2012.710260"[EN] Recent research into the clustering effect on firms has moved away from a simplistic view to a more complex approach. More realistic and complex causal relationships are now considered when analysing these territorial networks. Specifically, this paper attempts to analyse how cluster connect- edness moderates the relationship of a firm's innovation effort and the results obtained from this effort. We want to question the commonly accepted direct and positive impact of R&D effort, and moreover, we suggest the existence of a saturation effect and that the level of cluster's inter-connectedness in the cluster moderates this effect. We have developed our empirical study focusing on the Spanish textile industrial cluster. This is a complex manufacturing industry that uses relatively low-technology manufacturing and R&D. Our findings suggest that the degree to which a firm is involved with, or connected to, other firms in the cluster can moderate the effect of the R&D effort on its innovation results. More generally, we aim to contribute to the discussion on the degree to which firms should be involved in the cluster network in order to operate efficiently and gain the maximum competitive advantages. Our findings have implications both in recent cluster and network literature as well for institutional policy.Molina Morales, FX.; Expósito Langa, M. (2012). The impact of cluster connectedness on firm innovation: R&D effort and outcomes in the textile industry. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development. 24(7-8):685-704. doi:10.1080/08985626.2012.710260S685704247-8Agarwal, R., Audretsch, D., & Sarkar, M. B. (2007). The process of creative construction: knowledge spillovers, entrepreneurship, and economic growth. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1(3-4), 263-286. doi:10.1002/sej.36Aharonson, B. S., Baum, J. A. C., & Feldman, M. P. (2007). Desperately seeking spillovers? Increasing returns, industrial organization and the location of new entrants in geographic and technological space. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(1), 89-130. doi:10.1093/icc/dtl034Albino, V., Carbonara, N., & Giannoccaro, I. (2006). Innovation in industrial districts: An agent-based simulation model. International Journal of Production Economics, 104(1), 30-45. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2004.12.023Audretsch, D. B., & Lehmann, E. E. (2005). Does the Knowledge Spillover Theory of Entrepreneurship hold for regions? Research Policy, 34(8), 1191-1202. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2005.03.012Bell, G. G. (2005). Clusters, networks, and firm innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 287-295. doi:10.1002/smj.448Bell, M., & Albu, M. (1999). Knowledge Systems and Technological Dynamism in Industrial Clusters in Developing Countries. World Development, 27(9), 1715-1734. doi:10.1016/s0305-750x(99)00073-xBelussi, F., & Arcangeli, F. (1998). A typology of networks: flexible and evolutionary firms. Research Policy, 27(4), 415-428. doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(98)00074-2Cantwell, J., & Piscitello, L. (2005). Recent Location of Foreign-owned Research and Development Activities by Large Multinational Corporations in the European Regions: The Role of Spillovers and Externalities. Regional Studies, 39(1), 1-16. doi:10.1080/0034340052000320824Boschma, R. A., & ter Wal, A. L. J. (2007). Knowledge Networks and Innovative Performance in an Industrial District: The Case of a Footwear District in the South of Italy. Industry & Innovation, 14(2), 177-199. doi:10.1080/13662710701253441Brass, D. J. (1984). Being in the Right Place: A Structural Analysis of Individual Influence in an Organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(4), 518. doi:10.2307/2392937Breschi, S. (2001). Knowledge Spillovers and Local Innovation Systems: A Critical Survey. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4), 975-1005. doi:10.1093/icc/10.4.975CALANTONE, R. (1997). New product activities and performance: The moderating role of environmental hostility. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 14(3), 179-189. doi:10.1016/s0737-6782(97)00004-0Chell, E., & Baines, S. (2000). Networking, entrepreneurship and microbusiness behaviour. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 12(3), 195-215. doi:10.1080/089856200413464Chung, S. (Andy), Singh, H., & Lee, K. (2000). Complementarity, status similarity and social capital as drivers of alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal, 21(1), 1-22. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(200001)21:13.0.co;2-pCockburn, I. M., & Henderson, R. M. (2003). Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 46(2), 157-182. doi:10.1111/1467-6451.00067Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1989). Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R & D. The Economic Journal, 99(397), 569. doi:10.2307/2233763Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128. doi:10.2307/2393553Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95-S120. doi:10.1086/228943Coombs, J. E., Deeds, D. L., & Duane Ireland, R. (2009). Placing the choice between exploration and exploitation in context: a study of geography and new product development. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3(3), 261-279. doi:10.1002/sej.74Crestanello, P., & Tattara, G. (2011). Industrial Clusters and the Governance of the Global Value Chain: The Romania–Veneto Network in Footwear and Clothing. Regional Studies, 45(2), 187-203. doi:10.1080/00343401003596299Dierickx, I., & Cool, K. (1989). Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of Competitive Advantage. Management Science, 35(12), 1504-1511. doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.12.1504Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage. The Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660. doi:10.2307/259056Eraydin, A., & Armatli-Köroğlu, B. (2005). Innovation, networking and the new industrial clusters: the characteristics of networks and local innovation capabilities in the Turkish industrial clusters. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 17(4), 237-266. doi:10.1080/08985620500202632Evenson, R. E., & Kislev, Y. (1973). Research and Productivity in Wheat and Maize. Journal of Political Economy, 81(6), 1309-1329. doi:10.1086/260129Expósito-Langa, M., Molina-Morales, F. X., & Capó-Vicedo, J. (2011). New Product Development and Absorptive Capacity in Industrial Districts: A Multidimensional Approach. Regional Studies, 45(3), 319-331. doi:10.1080/00343400903241535Foss, N. J. (1996). Higher-order industrial Capabilities and competitive advantage. Journal of Industry Studies, 3(1), 1-20. doi:10.1080/13662719600000001George, G., Robley Wood, D., & Khan, R. (2001). Networking strategy of boards: implications for small and medium-sized enterprises. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 13(3), 269-285. doi:10.1080/08985620110058115Giuliani, E. 2005. The structure of cluster knowledge networks: Uneven and selective, not pervasive and collective. DRUID Working Paper no. 05-11Giuliani, E., & Bell, M. (2005). The micro-determinants of meso-level learning and innovation: evidence from a Chilean wine cluster. Research Policy, 34(1), 47-68. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2004.10.008Glasmeier, A. (1991). Technological discontinuities and flexible production networks: The case of Switzerland and the world watch industry. Research Policy, 20(5), 469-485. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(91)90070-7Grant, R. M. (1996). Prospering in Dynamically-Competitive Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration. Organization Science, 7(4), 375-387. doi:10.1287/orsc.7.4.375Guerrieri, P., & Pietrobelli, C. (2004). Industrial districts’ evolution and technological regimes: Italy and Taiwan. Technovation, 24(11), 899-914. doi:10.1016/s0166-4972(03)00048-8Huggins, R., & Johnston, A. (2010). Knowledge flow and inter-firm networks: The influence of network resources, spatial proximity and firm size. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 22(5), 457-484. doi:10.1080/08985620903171350Ibarra, H. (1992). Homophily and Differential Returns: Sex Differences in Network Structure and Access in an Advertising Firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(3), 422. doi:10.2307/2393451Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), 461-477. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199805)19:53.0.co;2-lLechner, C., Frankenberger, K., & Floyd, S. W. (2010). Task Contingencies in the Curvilinear Relationships Between Intergroup Networks and Initiative Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53(4), 865-889. doi:10.5465/amj.2010.52814620Levin, D. Z., & Cross, R. (2004). The Strength of Weak Ties You Can Trust: The Mediating Role of Trust in Effective Knowledge Transfer. Management Science, 50(11), 1477-1490. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1030.0136Madill, J. J., Haines, G. H., & Riding, A. L. (2004). Networks and linkages among firms and organizations in the Ottawa-region technology cluster. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 16(5), 351-368. doi:10.1080/0898562042000188414Maskell, P. (1998). Low-Tech Competitive Advantages and the Role Of Proximity. European Urban and Regional Studies, 5(2), 99-118. doi:10.1177/096977649800500201Maskell, P. (2001). Towards a Knowledge-based Theory of the Geographical Cluster. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4), 921-943. doi:10.1093/icc/10.4.921McEvily, B., & Marcus, A. (2005). Embedded ties and the acquisition of competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 26(11), 1033-1055. doi:10.1002/smj.484McEvily, B., & Zaheer, A. (1999). Bridging ties: a source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 20(12), 1133-1156. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199912)20:123.0.co;2-7Xavier Molina-Morales, F., & Teresa Martínez-Fernández, M. (2006). Industrial districts: something more than a neighbourhood. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 18(6), 503-524. doi:10.1080/08985620600884750Molina-Morales, F. X., & Martínez-Fernández, M. T. (2009). Too much love in the neighborhood can hurt: how an excess of intensity and trust in relationships may produce negative effects on firms. Strategic Management Journal, 30(9), 1013-1023. doi:10.1002/smj.766Morrison, A. (2008). Gatekeepers of Knowledgewithin Industrial Districts: Who They Are, How They Interact. Regional Studies, 42(6), 817-835. doi:10.1080/00343400701654178Morrison, A., & Rabellotti, R. (2009). Knowledge and Information Networks in an Italian Wine Cluster. European Planning Studies, 17(7), 983-1006. doi:10.1080/09654310902949265Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. (1996). Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 77-91. doi:10.1002/smj.4250171108Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage. The Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242. doi:10.2307/259373O’Connor, G. C. (1998). Market Learning and Radical Innovation: A Cross Case Comparison of Eight Radical Innovation Projects. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 15(2), 151-166. doi:10.1111/1540-5885.1520151Oba, B., & Semerciöz, F. (2005). Antecedents of trust in industrial districts: an empirical analysis of inter-firm relations in a Turkish industrial district. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 17(3), 163-182. doi:10.1080/08985620500102964Parrilli, M. D. (2009). Collective efficiency, policy inducement and social embeddedness: Drivers for the development of industrial districts. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 21(1), 1-24. doi:10.1080/08985620801886513Podolny, J. M., & Baron, J. N. (1997). Resources and Relationships: Social Networks and Mobility in the Workplace. American Sociological Review, 62(5), 673. doi:10.2307/2657354Porter, M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. doi:10.1007/978-1-349-11336-1Pouder, R., & St. John, C. H. (1996). Hot Spots and Blind Spots: Geographical Clusters of Firms and Innovation. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1192-1225. doi:10.5465/amr.1996.9704071867Torre, A., & Rallet, A. (2005). Proximity and Localization. Regional Studies, 39(1), 47-59. doi:10.1080/0034340052000320842Rosenkopf, L., & Almeida, P. (2003). Overcoming Local Search Through Alliances and Mobility. Management Science, 49(6), 751-766. doi:10.1287/mnsc.49.6.751.16026Rosenthal, S. S., & Strange, W. C. (2003). Geography, Industrial Organization, and Agglomeration. Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(2), 377-393. doi:10.1162/003465303765299882Rowley, T., Behrens, D., & Krackhardt, D. (2000). Redundant governance structures: an analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 369-386. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(200003)21:33.0.co;2-mRusso, M. (1985). Technical change and the industrial district: The role of interfirm relations in the growth and transformation of ceramic tile production in Italy. Research Policy, 14(6), 329-343. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(85)90003-4Sammarra, A., & Belussi, F. (2006). Evolution and relocation in fashion-led Italian districts: evidence from two case-studies. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 18(6), 543-562. doi:10.1080/08985620600884685Simmie, J. (2004). Innovation and Clustering in the Globalised International Economy. Urban Studies, 41(5-6), 1095-1112. doi:10.1080/00420980410001675823Sparrowe, R. T., Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Kraimer, M. L. (2001). SOCIAL NETWORKS AND THE PERFORMANCE OF INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 316-325. doi:10.2307/3069458STABER, U. (2007). Contextualizing Research on Social Capital in Regional Clusters. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 31(3), 505-521. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2427.2007.00742.xStock, G. N., Greis, N. P., & Fischer, W. A. (2001). Absorptive capacity and new product development. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 12(1), 77-91. doi:10.1016/s1047-8310(00)00040-7Tallman, S., Jenkins, M., Henry, N., & Pinch, S. (2004). Knowledge, Clusters, and Competitive Advantage. The Academy of Management Review, 29(2), 258. doi:10.2307/20159032Thompson, P., & Fox-Kean, M. (2005). Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: A Reassessment. American Economic Review, 95(1), 450-460. doi:10.1257/0002828053828509Tsai, W. (2001). KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER IN INTRAORGANIZATIONAL NETWORKS: EFFECTS OF NETWORK POSITION AND ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY ON BUSINESS UNIT INNOVATION AND PERFORMANCE. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 996-1004. doi:10.2307/3069443Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). SOCIAL CAPITAL AND VALUE CREATION: THE ROLE OF INTRAFIRM NETWORKS. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464-476. doi:10.2307/257085Tushman, M., & Nadler, D. (1986). Organizing for Innovation. California Management Review, 28(3), 74-92. doi:10.2307/41165203Uzzi, B. (1997). Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35. doi:10.2307/2393808Varaldo, R., & Ferrucci, L. (1996). The evolutionary nature of the firm within industrial districts. European Planning Studies, 4(1), 27-34. doi:10.1080/09654319608720327Waxell, A., & Malmberg, A. (2007). What is global and what is local in knowledge-generating interaction? The case of the biotech cluster in Uppsala, Sweden. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 19(2), 137-159. doi:10.1080/08985620601061184Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E., & Sapienza, H. J. (2001). Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology-based firms. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6-7), 587-613. doi:10.1002/smj.183ZUCKER, L. G., DARBY, M. R., & ARMSTRONG, J. (1998). GEOGRAPHICALLY LOCALIZED KNOWLEDGE: SPILLOVERS OR MARKETS? Economic Inquiry, 36(1), 65-86. doi:10.1111/j.1465-7295.1998.tb01696.

    Sustainability as corporate culture of a brand for superior performance

    Get PDF
    This is the post-print version of the final paper published in the Journal of World Business. The published article is available from the link below. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. Copyright @ 2012 Elsevier B.V.Sustainability research highlights new challenges and opportunities for businesses. This paper reviews the literature to understand the ability of sustainable green initiatives when practiced as a corporate culture to individually create new opportunities for operations, management and marketing. According to current research, business opportunities exclusively available to different functions of a firm can drive its performance. The role of marketing in the achievement of superior performance by virtue of sustainability practices is also explained by the existing literature. Branding literature, however, fails to explain the influence of a brand on sustainability-driven opportunities available to a firm for superior performance. The objective of this study is to explore if a brand can strengthen the ability of sustainability-based green initiatives of managers to drive opportunities available to a firm for superior performance. A conceptual framework grounded in the triple bottom line theory is presented based on the assumption that brand as a stimulating factor can accelerate the conversion of opportunities available to a business into superior performance. Academic and managerial perspectives have been used to draw upon the implications of the model. Both practitioners and academic researchers will benefit from future research on this topic
    corecore