Search results

Past studies have paid extensive attention to investigate learning issues in individual, organizational and team contexts. Learning activities in the workplace, however, often occur in the interdisciplinary dyadic context. Hence, the purpose of this paper is to clarify what factors make interdisciplinary dyads lead to better learning effects. The authors attempted to clarify two major agendas: What knowledge factors (intellectual capitals) owned by the parties of the dyads can induce better learning effects? What contextual factors (learning tasks) can make better learning effects during the dyadic learning process?

To examine the previous agendas, the authors first conducted in-depth interviews and an exploratory survey so that a four-element dyadic intellectual capital (DIC) architecture was circumscribed: knowledge interdependency, expertise similarity, collaborative routines and mutual trust. Dyadic learning tasks were classified as exploitative and exploratory learning. The authors then sampled 248 respondents for the formal empirical survey to examine the relationship between DIC, dyadic learning tasks and knowledge sharing.

The statistical evidences confirmed the positive relationships between DIC and knowledge sharing, and the results also signified the previous relationships with a mediating effect from exploratory learning, while the effect of exploitative learning was not supported. Thus, only dyads (the two heads) with knowledge interdependency and mutual trust can make the exploratory task better than that of one individual (the one head).

This study provides a new insight into the learning issue with an interdisciplinary dyadic perspective to supplement the existing gap between academic efforts and learning practices in the workplace.

During this current era of the knowledge economy, knowledge activities have greatly impacted manufacturing activities, with knowledge being treated as a critical factor that creates and sustains competitive advantages. Past studies tended to relate knowledge works with organizational tasks and assumed that knowledge workers implement those tasks to achieve organizational goals. Accordingly, the purpose of this paper is to employ the perspective of task domain as the basis to clarify the impact of manufacturing task domains on the manufacturing strategy, as well as the mediating effects of knowledge advantage on such an impact.

The authors follow Becerra-Fernandez and Sabherwal’s (2001) task which focus/task breadth dichotomy as the basis to define market-based task domains, employs Leonard-Barton’s (1995) T-shaped skill as the theoretical base to construct knowledge advantages, i.e., knowledge depth (I-shaped skill), diversity (hyphened skill), and convergence (T-shaped skill), and uses the conventional typology to measure the manufacturing strategy (i.e. cost, quality, flexibility, and delivery). The empirical study is conducted via a questionnaire survey and selects Taiwan’s top 600 manufacturers as the population and accordingly collects 131 effective observations.

The empirical evidence indicates that firms’ priorities on cost and delivery are positively caused by the focus orientation of the tasks, while their priorities on quality and flexibility are positively caused by both focus and diversity orientations of the tasks. The results also signify that knowledge advantages perform complete mediation on the previous relationships. In more detail, knowledge depth presents mediation on focus orientation, and knowledge convergence exhibits mediating effects both on focus and breadth orientations. The statistics point out that knowledge depth has the highest impact on the manufacturing strategy, but knowledge diversity fails to significantly explain the manufacturing strategy.

Literature assumed that knowledge activities are task-driven issue; this study hence examines knowledge advantage based on the task domain perspective to clarify the architecture and contents of knowledge advantages.