Knowledge sharing

Knowledge sharing is an activity through which knowledge (namely, information, skills, or expertise) is exchanged among people, friends, peers, families, communities (for example, Wikipedia), or within or between organizations.[1][2] It bridges the individual and organizational knowledge, improving the absorptive and innovation capacity and thus leading to sustained competitive advantage of companies as well as individuals.[3] Knowledge sharing is part of the knowledge management process.[4]

Not to be confused with Information sharing or Collective intelligence.

Apart from traditional face-to-face knowledge sharing, social media is a good tool because it is convenient, efficient, and widely used.[5] Organizations have recognized that knowledge constitutes a valuable intangible asset for creating and sustaining competitive advantages.[6] However, technology constitutes only one of the many factors that affect the sharing of knowledge in organizations, such as organizational culture, trust, and incentives.[7] The sharing of knowledge constitutes a major challenge in the field of knowledge management because some employees tend to resist sharing their knowledge with the rest of the organization.[8]

In the digital world, websites and mobile applications enable knowledge or talent sharing between individuals and/or within teams. The individuals can easily reach the people who want to learn and share their talent to get rewarded.

Knowledge sharing as flow or transfer

Although knowledge is commonly treated as an object, Dave Snowden has argued it is more appropriate to teach it as both a flow and a thing.[9] Knowledge as a flow can be related to the concept of tacit knowledge.[10][11][12] While the difficulty of sharing knowledge is in transferring knowledge from one entity to another,[13][14] it may prove profitable for organizations to acknowledge the difficulties of knowledge transfer and adopt new knowledge management strategies accordingly.[9]

Knowledge sharing levels

Knowledge can be shared in different ways and levels. The following segmentation sheds light on the essence of sharing.

Explicit knowledge

Explicit knowledge sharing occurs when explicit knowledge is made available to be shared between entities. Explicit knowledge sharing can happen successfully when the following criteria are met:

  • Articulation: the knowledge provider can describe the information.[1]
  • Awareness: the recipient must be aware that knowledge is available.[1]
  • Access: the knowledge recipient can access the knowledge provider.[1]
  • Guidance: the body of knowledge must be defined and differentiated into different topics or domains so as to avoid information overload, and to provide easy access to appropriate material. Knowledge managers are often considered key figures in the creation of an effective knowledge sharing system.[1][15]
  • Completeness: the holistic approach to knowledge sharing in the form of both centrally managed and self-published knowledge.

Tacit knowledge

Tacit knowledge sharing occurs through different types of socialization. Although tacit knowledge is difficult to identify and codify, relevant factors that influence tacit knowledge sharing include:

  • Informal networks such as daily interactions between people within a defined environment (work, school, home, etc.). These networks span hierarchies and functions.[15]
  • The provision of space where people can engage in unstructured or unmonitored discussions, thereby fostering informal networks.[15]
  • Unstructured, less-structured or experimental work practices that encourage creative problem solving, and the development of social networks.[15]
  • An organizational culture which is based on trust. This encourages employees to share their knowledge.[16]
  • Employees' strong organizational commitment and loyalty to their employers supports tacit knowledge sharing.[17]

Embedded knowledge

Embedded knowledge sharing occurs when knowledge is shared through clearly delineated products, processes, routines, etc. This knowledge can be shared in different ways, such as:

  • Scenario planning and debriefing: providing a structured space to create possible scenarios, followed by a discussion of what happened, and how it could have been different.[18]
  • Management training.
  • Knowledge transfer: deliberately integrating systems, processes, routines, etc., to combine and share relevant knowledge.

Methods

There are several methods both formal and informal that have claims to enable knowledge sharing in organisations. These include, but are not limited to:

  • Communities of practice: a group of people who share a craft or a profession; usually takes the form of cross organizational or inter-organizational workgroups, in physical, virtual or blended forms[19]
  • Communities of interest: Informal and voluntary gathering of individuals discussing on a regular basis, in many cases through defined digital channel[20]
  • Workgroups: Task-oriented groups that may include project teams or employees from various departments, working and sharing knowledge together towards a specific goal such as product development or production[21]
  • Knowledge cafe: a methodology to conduct knowledge sharing sessions using a combination of a large assembly and of small discussion groups of 3–5 persons, usually around small tables[22]
  • Lessons learned techniques: techniques to learn from what has happened before and what could be done better the next time.[23]
  • Mentoring: a way to share a wide range of knowledge from technical values to technical and operational skills. Via mentoring programs, it is possible to share tacit norms of behaviour and cultural values.[23]
  • Chats: Informal sharing, using instant messaging platforms. The knowledge is accessible mainly in the present or by search.[24]
  • Wikis: digital spaces to gather and share knowledge on specific topics. While discussion groups and chats are time-based. Wikis are topic-based. Wiki pages and topics link to form an intuitive network of accumulated knowledge. Categories are also used as a means to organize and present topics in wiki pages.[25]
  • Storytelling: an informal way to share knowledge, where knowledge owner shares real life stories to other.[26]
  • Shared Knowledge Bases: Shared organized content, containing information and knowledge. Can be formed as websites, intranets databases, file drives, comprehensive models based on probabilistic-causal relationships.[27][28] or any other form that enables the access to content by the various individuals.[29]
  • Expert Maps: Organized lists or network of experts and corresponding expertise. Enables indirect access to the knowledge (via the expert).[30]

Connection to adjacent disciplines

Information technology systems

Information technology (IT) systems are common tools that help facilitate knowledge sharing and knowledge management.[31] The main role of IT systems is to help people share knowledge through common platforms and electronic storage to help make access simpler, encouraging economic reuse of knowledge. IT systems can provide codification, personalization, electronic repositories for information and can help people locate each other to communicate directly. With appropriate training and education, IT systems can make it easier for organizations to acquire, store or disseminate knowledge.[31]

Economic theory

In economic theory, knowledge sharing has been studied in the field of industrial organization and in the field of contract theory. In industrial organization, Bhattacharya, Glazer, and Sappington (1992) have emphasized the importance of knowledge sharing in research joint ventures in a context of imperfect competition.[32] In the theory of incomplete contracts, Rosenkranz and Schmitz (1999, 2003) have used the Grossman-Hart-Moore property rights approach to study how knowledge sharing is affected by the underlying ownership structure.[33][34]

Importance to organizations

Knowledge is transferred in organizations whether it is a managed process or not since everyday knowledge transfer is a key part of organizational life. However, finding the best expert to share their knowledge in a specific matter could be hard, especially in larger organizations. Therefore, a structured strategy for knowledge transfer is required for the organization to thrive.[15] Larger companies have a higher tendency to invest more on knowledge management processes, although competitive benefits are gained regardless of organization size.[35]

In an organizational context, tacit knowledge refers to a kind of knowledge that human beings develop by the experience they gain over years.[36] At present the employees' experience and knowledge can be seen as the most important and most valuable source that organizations have to protect.[37] Knowledge constitutes a valuable, intangible asset for creating and sustaining competitive advantages within organizations.[6] Several factors affect knowledge sharing in organizations, such as organizational culture, trust, incentives, and technology.[7] In an organization, five distinct conditions of the organizational culture have a positive effect on knowledge-sharing: communication and coordination between groups, trust, top management support, the reward system, and openness.[4] Concerning the communication and coordination between groups condition, the organizations that are centralized with a bureaucratic management style can hinder the creation of new knowledge whereas a flexible decentralized organizational structure encourages knowledge-sharing.[38] Also, internationalization is crucial for compliance or conformity. Dalkir (2005) says that internationalization is believing that the "behavior dictated by the norm truly the right and proper way to behave".[4] If the norm is to communicate and collaborate between teams, it will be much easier for members of the group to internalize these values and act accordingly.

Drivers for knowledge sharing are connected to both human resources and software.[39] Knowledge sharing activities are commonly supported by knowledge management systems, a form of information technology (IT) that facilitates and organizes information within a company or organization.[31] Knowledge sharing in knowledge management systems can be driven by accountability-inducing management practices. The combination of evaluation and reward as an accountability-inducing management practice has been presented as and effective way for enhancing knowledge sharing.[40]

Challenges

Knowledge sharing can sometimes constitute a major challenge in the field of knowledge management.[11] The difficulty of knowledge sharing resides in the transference of knowledge from one entity to another,[14][13] and as shown by Van Houten consists of various complicating aspects such as the nature of knowledge, social and organisational structures, and individual elements like discretion and agency.[41] Some employees and team leaders tend to resist sharing their knowledge for (inter)personal matters,[11][42][43] for instance because of the notion that knowledge is one's property; ownership, therefore, becomes very important.[44] Leaders and supervisors tend to hoard information in order to demonstrate power and supremacy over their employees.[42]

In order to counteract this, individuals must be reassured that they will receive some type of incentive for what they create.[44] Supervisors and managers have a key role in this – they need to create a work culture which encourages employees to share their knowledge.[45] However, Dalkir (2005) demonstrated that individuals are most commonly rewarded for what they know, not what they share.[44] Negative consequences, such as isolation and resistance to ideas, occur when knowledge sharing is impeded.[31]

Sometimes the problem is that a part of an employee's knowledge can be subconscious and therefore it may be difficult to share information.[46] To promote knowledge sharing and remove knowledge sharing obstacles, the organizational culture of an entity should encourage discovery and innovation.[44] Members who trust each other are willing to exchange knowledge and at the same time want to embrace knowledge from other members as well.[47] National culture is also one of the common barriers of knowledge sharing because culture has a huge effect on how people tend to share knowledge between each other.[42] In some cultures, people share everything, in other cultures people share when asked, and in some cultures, people do not share even if it would help to achieve common goals.[42]

The political scientist Hélène Hatzfeld has pointed out that people who have knowledge can be reluctant to share that knowledge when they are not confident in their own expertise, so to facilitate knowledge sharing, structures can be designed to elevate everyone to the status of a potential expert and make them more comfortable contributing; one example of such a system, to which Hatzfeld attributes mixed success in this regard, is Wikipedia.[48]

Pinho et al. (2012) have made a comprehensive literature review of knowledge management barriers and facilitators.[49] Barriers are considered to be obstacles that hinder knowledge acquisition, creation, sharing and transfer in and between organizations based on individual, socio-organizational or technological reasons. Respectively facilitators are seen as enabling factors that improve, stimulate or promote the flow of knowledge. According to Maier et al. (2002) understanding of the process supporting knowledge management enables further consideration of the obstacles and facilitating factors.[50]

See also

References
  1. Bukowitz, Wendi R.; Williams, Ruth L. (1999). The Knowledge Management Fieldbook. FT Press. ISBN 978-0273638827.
  2. Serban, Andreea M.; Luan, Jing (2002). "An Overview of Knowledge Management" (PDF). University of Kentucky. Retrieved 17 April 2013.
  3. Ipe, M. (2003), "Knowledge sharing on organizations: a conceptual framework", Human Resource Development Review, Vol. 2 No. 4, p.341
  4. Dalkir, Kimiz (2005). Knowledge management in theory and practice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. ISBN 9780262036870.
  5. Yao et al. (2021) Construction Safety Knowledge Sharing on Twitter: A Social Network Analysis, Safety Science, 143, 105411, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353546913_Safety_knowledge_sharing_on_Twitter_A_social_network_analysis
  6. Miller, D.; Shamsie, J. (1996). "The resource-based view of the firm in two environments: The Hollywood film studios from 1936 to 1965". Academy of Management Journal. 39 (5): 519–543. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.598.9250. doi:10.2307/256654. JSTOR 256654.
  7. Cabrera, A.; Cabrera, E. F. (2002). "Knowledge-sharing Dilemmas". Organization Studies. 23 (5): 687–710. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.192.4368. doi:10.1177/0170840602235001. S2CID 14998234.
  8. Ciborra, C.U.; Patriota, G. (1998). "Groupware and teamwork in R&D: limits to learning and innovation". R&D Management. 28 (1): 1–10.
  9. Snowden, D. (2002). "Complex acts of knowing: paradox and descriptive self-awareness". Journal of Knowledge Management. 6 (2): 100–111. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.126.4537. doi:10.1108/13673270210424639.
  10. Polanyi, M. (2003) [1958]. Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. CRC Press. p. 428. ISBN 978-0-203-44215-9.
  11. Nonaka, I. (1994). "A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation". Organization Science. 5 (1): 14–37. doi:10.1287/orsc.5.1.14. hdl:10983/15625. JSTOR 2635068. S2CID 17219859.
  12. Nonaka, I. (2009). "Tacit Knowledge and Knowledge Conversion: Controversy and Advancement in Organizational Knowledge Creation Theory" (PDF). Organization Science. 20 (3): 635–652. doi:10.1287/orsc.1080.0412. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-11-22.
  13. Argote, L.; Ingram, P. (2000). "Knowledge Transfer: A Basis for Competitive Advantage in Firms". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 82 (1): 150–169. doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2893. S2CID 7893124.
  14. Fan, Y. (1998). "The Transfer of Western Management to China: Context, Content and Constraints". Management Learning. 29 (2): 201–221. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.427.1879. doi:10.1177/1350507698292005. S2CID 31172513.
  15. Prusak, Lawrence; Davenport, Thomas H. (2000). Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know, 2nd Edition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. ISBN 978-1-57851-301-7.
  16. Curado, Carla; Vieira, Sílvia (2019-09-02). "Trust, knowledge sharing and organizational commitment in SMEs". Personnel Review. 48 (6): 1449–1468. doi:10.1108/pr-03-2018-0094. ISSN 0048-3486. S2CID 197749637.
  17. Hislop, Donald (April 2003). "Linking human resource management and knowledge management via commitment: A review and research agenda". Employee Relations. 25 (2): 182–202. doi:10.1108/01425450310456479. ISSN 0142-5455.
  18. Serban, Andreea M.; Luan, Jing (2002). "Corporate Strategy Model: Scenario Planning" (PDF). University of Kentucky. Retrieved 17 April 2013.
  19. Wenger, E. C., & Snyder, W. M. (2000). Communities of practice: The organizational frontier. Harvard business review, 78(1), 139–146.
  20. Fischer, G. (2001, August). Communities of interest: Learning through the interaction of multiple knowledge systems. In Proceedings of the 24th IRIS Conference (Vol. 1, pp. 1–13). Department of Information Science, Bergen.
  21. Kozlowski, S. W., & Bell, B. S. (2012). Work groups and teams in organizations. Handbook of Psychology, Second Edition, 12.
  22. Gurteen, D. (2015). Knowledge cafe. Inside Knowledge, 13(3), 8–13.
  23. DeLong, David W. (2004-09-16). Lost Knowledge. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195170979.001.0001. ISBN 978-0-19-517097-9.
  24. Stein, D. S., Wanstreet, C. E., Glazer, H. R., Engle, C. L., Harris, R. A., Johnston, S. M., ... & Trinko, L. A. (2007). Creating shared understanding through chats in a community of inquiry. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(2), 103–115.
  25. Wagner, C. (2004). Wiki: A technology for conversational knowledge management and group collaboration. Communications of the association for information systems, 13(1), 19.
  26. Kitimbo, Irene; Dalkir, Kimiz (2013). "Learning from Project Experience: Creating, Capturing and Sharing Knowledge". Knowledge Management. 12 (4): 59–74. doi:10.18848/2327-7998/cgp/v12i04/50810. ISSN 2327-7998.
  27. Cardenas, IC; Al-Jibouri, SHS; Halman, JIM; van Tol, FA (2014). "Modeling Risk-Related Knowledge in Tunneling Projects". Risk Analysis. 34 (2): 323–339. doi:10.1111/risa.12094. PMID 23865765. S2CID 20588849.
  28. Cardenas, IC; Al-Jibouri, SHS; Halman, JIM; van de Linde, W; Kaalberg, F (2014). "Using Prior Risk-Related Knowledge to Support Risk Management Decisions: Lessons Learnt from a Tunneling Project". Risk Analysis. 34 (8): 1923–1943. doi:10.1111/risa.12213. PMID 24842516. S2CID 1719179.
  29. Levesque, H. J., & Lakemeyer, G. (2001). The logic of knowledge bases. MIT Press.
  30. Huang, Z., Chen, H., Guo, F., Xu, J. J., Wu, S., & Chen, W. H. (2004, January). Visualizing the expertise space. In 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the (pp. 9-pp). IEEE.
  31. Gurteen, David (February 1999). "Creating a knowledge sharing culture". Knowledge Management Magazine. 2 (5).
  32. Bhattacharya, Sudipto; Glazer, Jacob; Sappington, David E.M (1992). "Licensing and the sharing of knowledge in research joint ventures" (PDF). Journal of Economic Theory. 56 (1): 43–69. doi:10.1016/0022-0531(92)90068-s. ISSN 0022-0531.
  33. Rosenkranz, Stephanie; Schmitz, Patrick W. (1999). "Know-how disclosure and incomplete contracts". Economics Letters. 63 (2): 181–185. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.587.5766. doi:10.1016/s0165-1765(99)00038-5. ISSN 0165-1765. S2CID 154562354.
  34. Rosenkranz, Stephanie; Schmitz, Patrick W. (2003). "Optimal allocation of ownership rights in dynamic R&D alliances". Games and Economic Behavior. 43 (1): 153–173. doi:10.1016/s0899-8256(02)00553-5. ISSN 0899-8256. S2CID 36045445.
  35. Soniewicki, Marcin; Paliszkiewicz, Joanna (2019). "The Importance of Knowledge Management Processes for the Creation of Competitive Advantage by Companies of Varying Size, Entrepreneurial Business and Economics review". Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review. 7. doi:10.15678/EBER.2019.070303.
  36. Ribeiro, Rodrigo (22 January 2012). "Tacit knowledge management". Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences. 12 (2): 337–366. doi:10.1007/s11097-011-9251-x. S2CID 143715299.
  37. Urbancová, Hana; Urbanec, Jiří (January 2011). "The survey of tacit knowledge sharing in organization" (PDF). pp. 220–230. Retrieved 14 November 2019.
  38. Titi Amayah, Angela (2013). "Determinants of knowledge sharing in a public sector organization". Journal of Knowledge Management. 17 (3): 454–471. doi:10.1108/JKM-11-2012-0369. ProQuest 1365807770.
  39. Donnelly, Rory (2019). "Aligning knowledge sharing interventions with the promotion of firm success: The need for SHRM to balance tensions and challenges". Journal of Business Research. 94: 344-352. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.02.007. S2CID 53962018.
  40. Wang, Sheng; Noe, Raymond, A.; Wang, Zhong-Ming (May 2014). "Motivating Knowledge Sharing in Knowledge Management Systems: A Quasi–Field Experiment". Journal of Management. 40 (4): 978-1009. doi:10.1177/0149206311412192. S2CID 146351521.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  41. van Houten, Maarten Matheus (2023-08-01). "Professional tacit knowledge sharing in practice. Agency, boundaries, and commitment". Journal of Workplace Learning. 35 (9): 197–217. doi:10.1108/JWL-02-2023-0025. ISSN 1366-5626.
  42. ROSEN, BENSON; FURST, STACIE; BLACKBURN, RICHARD (January 2007). "Overcoming Barriers to Knowledge Sharing in Virtual Teams". Organizational Dynamics. 36 (3): 259–273. doi:10.1016/j.orgdyn.2007.04.007. ISSN 0090-2616.
  43. van Houten, Maarten M. (2022-12-15). "Interpersonal issues in knowledge sharing: the impact of professional discretion in knowledge sharing and learning communities". Teacher Development. 27: 116–132. doi:10.1080/13664530.2022.2156590. ISSN 1366-4530. S2CID 254769033.
  44. Dalkir, K. (2005). Knowledge Management In Theory And Practice. Oxford: Elsevier Inc: Jordan Hill. pp. 132–133.
  45. Holste, J. Scott; Fields, Dail (2010-02-23). "Trust and tacit knowledge sharing and use". Journal of Knowledge Management. 14 (1): 128–140. doi:10.1108/13673271011015615. ISSN 1367-3270.
  46. Reboul, Cyril (2006). "Managing Knowledge Workers: The KWP Matrix". Proceedings of the 6th International Conference MOMAN 06: 261–275.
  47. Levin, D.Z. & Cross, R. (2004). The Strength of Weak Ties You Can Trust: The Mediating Role of Trust in Effective Knowledge Transfer. Management Science, Vol. 50, No. 11.
  48. Hatzfeld, Hélène (2013). "Partager les savoirs: quelle légitimité ?". Le sujet dans la cité (in French). 2 (4): 45–55. doi:10.3917/lsdlc.004.0045.
  49. Pinho, Isabel (November 2011). "Improving knowledge management processes: a hybrid positive approach". Journal of Knowledge Management. 16 (2): 215–242. doi:10.1108/13673271211218834.
  50. Maier, Ronald (2002). "Defining process-oriented knowledge management strategies". Knowledge and Process Management. 9 (2): 103–118. doi:10.1002/kpm.136.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.