Revisiting knowledge transfer: Effects of knowledge characteristics on organizational effort for knowledge transfer

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.05.072Get rights and content

Abstract

This study analyzes the effects of knowledge characteristics on the extent of organizational effort for knowledge transfer. In this paper, three knowledge characteristics that affect organizational behavior for knowledge transfer are identified based on knowledge-based views and organizational learning theory: tacitness, difficulty, and the importance of knowledge. We establish three hypotheses on the effects of these three knowledge characteristics on the extent of effort for knowledge transfer (i.e., the frequency of contact with knowledge source), and provide empirical tests employing the dataset from project teams in a multinational consulting firm via the OLS model. Results show that tacitness, difficulty, and importance have positive effects on the frequency of contact with knowledge sources. This implies that firms exert more effort to acquire the knowledge when the knowledge is tacit, difficult, or important.

Introduction

Knowledge is a critical resource for organizations’ competitive advantage (Grant, 1996a, Kogut and Zander, 1992). Organizations have to create new knowledge continuously to maintain their competitive advantage in rapidly changing environments. However, knowledge creation is not a process that necessarily creates completely new knowledge but an operation that recombines and reorganizes existing knowledge. The knowledge that transfers from knowledge sources becomes the raw material in knowledge creation for a recipient organization, and successful knowledge transfer is an important driving force in knowledge creation.

With the emphasis on the importance of knowledge transfer for knowledge creation and sustainable competitive advantage, various research topics have been explored such as knowledge sourcing, methods of knowledge transfer, and the effect of knowledge transfer on innovation (Grant, 1996a, Grant, 1996b, Lane and Lubatkin, 1998, Lord and Ranft, 1998, Powell et al., 1996, Szulanski, 1996, Zander and Kogut, 1995). In particular, the effects of knowledge characteristics on knowledge transfer has been studied extensively (Inkpen and Dinur, 1998, Lord and Ranft, 1998, Zander and Kogut, 1995).

However, previous research on the relationships between knowledge characteristics and knowledge transfer focuses on the topics that analyze the effects of knowledge characteristics on the speed or performance of knowledge transfer. The effects of knowledge characteristics on organizational effort have not been sufficiently explored despite their theoretical and practical importance. Therefore, the present study analyzes the effects of knowledge characteristics on the extent of organizational effort to achieve knowledge transfer.

In this study, we suggest that the frequency of contact with a knowledge source represents the extent of organizational effort required for knowledge transfer. We empirically analyze the effects of important knowledge characteristics such as tacitness, difficulty, and importance on the frequency of contact with knowledge sources. This study employs the survey dataset gathered through face-to-face interviews with project managers in a large multinational consulting firm with many business divisions.

This paper aims to overcome the limitations of previous research which only analyzed the effects of knowledge characteristics on the speed or performance of knowledge transfer and this paper provides a deeper insight into the effects of knowledge characteristics on organizations’ behavior. Strategic implications are also provided to firms to help them manage the knowledge transfer process.

Section snippets

Knowledge characteristics and knowledge transfer

Knowledge is the most important strategic resource to a firm and has enormous effects on organizations’ competitive advantage. Thus acquiring, integrating, storing, and sharing knowledge are critical capabilities to sustain an organization’s competitive advantage (Grant, 1996b, Kogut and Zander, 1992, Penrose, 1959, Spender, 1994, Teece et al., 1997, Winter, 1987, Zack, 1999). In particular, the ability to transfer knowledge from external knowledge sources to a recipient’s organizational

Data collection and research site

Data for this study were gathered through personal interviews based on responses to a structured survey. Project managers of a multi-departmental consulting firm based in the United States were interviewed to answer questions regarding knowledge characteristics, and the frequency of contact with knowledge sources. Prior to the interviews, pre-tests were given to a smaller sample within the population. Then the survey was revised and interview technique refined based on the pre-test results. The

Results

Table 1 contains descriptive statistics and correlations. Because the correlation values between independent and control variables are very low, there is no multicollinearity problem. Correlation between the DIFFICULTY and IMPORTANCE variables is relatively high compared with other relationships. This implies that important knowledge is more likely to be difficult. Correlation between the DURATION and the SIZE variables is also relatively high. This implies that it requires a long time to

Discussion

The result shows that the hypothesis asserting that the tacitness of knowledge has a positive effect on the effort for knowledge transfer is weakly supported. Because tacit knowledge is unique and relatively less mobile, it becomes the basis of organizations’ competitive advantage (Grant, 1996a). It is difficult to imitate and transfer tacit knowledge and thus hard to transfer and acquire. However, if organizations successfully transfer the tacit knowledge once through sufficient effort, then

Conclusions

Knowledge can be copied and reproduced without a loss in value, and knowledge transfer is a device to maximize the benefit from knowledge. Although to some organizations, knowledge may be of little value or even rendered useless, it can be valuable to other organizations. Thus, knowledge transfer plays an important role in creating value from knowledge. Because innovations are generated by a recombination of knowledge, it can be a driving force of innovation to acquire new knowledge from

References (49)

  • D.J. Teece

    Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy

    Research Policy

    (1986)
  • Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Knowledge management systems: Issues, challenges, and benefits. Communications of...
  • R. Amit et al.

    Strategic assets and organizational rent

    Strategic Management Journal

    (1993)
  • N. Athanassiou et al.

    The impact of US company internationalization on top management team advice networks: A tacit knowledge perspective

    Strategic Management Journal

    (1999)
  • F. Blackler

    Knowledge, knowledge work and organizations: An overview and interpretation

    Organization Studies

    (1995)
  • S.L. Brown et al.

    Competing on the edge – Strategy as structured chaos

    (1998)
  • P.R. Carlile

    Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries

    Organization Science

    (2004)
  • H.W. Chesbrough

    Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology

    (2003)
  • K. Corcoran et al.

    Measures for clinical practice: A sourcebook

    (1987)
  • L.J. Cronbach

    Essentials of psychological testing

    (1984)
  • P. Diesing

    Patterns of discovery in the social sciences

    (1972)
  • K.M. Eisenhardt et al.

    Coevolving: At last, a way to make synergies work

    Harvard Business Review

    (2000)
  • K.M. Eisenhardt et al.

    Knowledge-based view: A new theory of strategy

  • C.S. Galbraith

    Transferring core manufacturing technologies in high technology firms

    California Management Review

    (1990)
  • R.M. Grant

    Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm

    Strategic Management Journal

    (1996)
  • R.M. Grant

    Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: Organizational capability as knowledge integration

    Organization Science

    (1996)
  • A.K. Gupta et al.

    Knowledge flow within multinational corporations

    Strategic Management Journal

    (2000)
  • M.T. Hansen

    The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organizational subunits

    Administrative Science Quarterly

    (1999)
  • R. Henderson et al.

    Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research

    Strategic Management Journal

    (1994)
  • R. Henderson et al.

    Scale, scope, and spillovers: The determinants of research productivity in drug discovery

    RAND Journal of Economics

    (1996)
  • A.C. Inkpen et al.

    Knowledge management processes and international joint-ventures

    Organization Science

    (1998)
  • R. Katila et al.

    Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product development

    Academy of Management Journal

    (2002)
  • T. Keil

    External corporate venturing: Strategic renewal in rapidly changing industries

    (2002)
  • B. Kogut et al.

    Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology

    Organization Science

    (1992)
  • Cited by (61)

    • Positivity and higher alertness levels facilitate discovery: Longitudinal sentiment analysis of emotions on Twitter

      2023, Technovation
      Citation Excerpt :

      Cardon et al. (2013) stress that the development of theories related to emotions into precise strategies for empirical research has faced challenges, which has resulted in a lack of solid evidence. For instance, previous research efforts that examined the complexity of entrepreneurial alertness were limited by scanty empirical investigations (Kang et al., 2010). Although several scholars have formulated theories related to entrepreneurial alertness (Ardichvili et al., 2003; Valliere, 2013), we provide empirical evidence for these theories.

    • Knowledge transfer methods for expressing product design information and organization

      2021, Journal of Manufacturing Systems
      Citation Excerpt :

      Organizations that transfer knowledge effectively from one unit to another are both more productive and more likely to survive than those that are less adept at knowledge transfer [13]. In the relevant literature, several studies have examined various factors for knowledge transfer [14–17]. Intensive communication between workers [18], social networks [19], mobility, daily routines [20], and communication technologies potentially mediate knowledge transfer across organizations or units [21].

    • Supplier cluster characteristics and innovation outcomes

      2020, Journal of Business Research
      Citation Excerpt :

      Song and Thieme (2009) highlight the important role of suppliers in gathering information helpful to developing radical innovations. Proximity to supplier clusters also reduces the efforts and costs of engaging in frequent face-to-face interactions and increases chance encounters with suppliers in the cluster, which are especially critical to acquire tacit knowledge (Boschma, 2005; Kang, Rhee, & Kang, 2010; Storper & Venables, 2004; Thomas, 2013). Taken together, both the RBV and TCE lend support to our proposition that proximity to supplier clusters improves the chances of focal firms creating radical innovations.

    • Out-in, in-out buyer quality innovation pathways for new product outcome: Empirical evidence from the Chinese consumer goods industry

      2019, International Journal of Production Economics
      Citation Excerpt :

      Supplier IP can be demonstrated through the level and quality of interventions as well as the technological capability the supplier is willing to contribute toward the success of the NPD collaboration. Supplier innovation and passion are key factors influencing buyer-supplier relationships (Kang et al., 2010; Du et al., 2012). As a result of their limited size and resources, SMEs’ innovation and creativity are essentially based on non-R&D and patents activities (Venckuviene et al., 2014).

    • Repatriate knowledge transfer: Antecedents and boundary conditions of a dyadic process

      2018, Journal of World Business
      Citation Excerpt :

      The respective items were “There are effective formal opportunities (e.g., meetings) for interaction between me and the repatriate”, and “There are effective formal opportunities (e.g., meetings) for interaction between me and the recipient.” Studies on knowledge transfer have successfully applied single-item measures to collect data on interaction variables (e.g., Joshi, Sarker, & Sarker, 2006; Kang, Rhee, & Kang, 2010). We averaged the ratings of repatriates and recipients to obtain a more robust measure, as formal opportunities for interaction represent unambiguous facts that should be perceived similarly by both dyad members.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    1

    Tel.: +1 808 956 7610.

    2

    Tel.: +82 2 880 1380.

    View full text