Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate how knowledge is currently being collected, distributed, managed and the perspective of knowledge management's (KM) strategic significance to performance within a broad range of Hong Kong organizations.

A questionnaire was administered to a broad cross‐section of Hong Kong business organizations to elicit input regarding current KM practices within the organization, their perspective on its value to organizational performance and competitive advantages.

The results indicate a fuzziness exists concerning KM's potential benefits. Majority of respondents felt a KM policy existed, while a smaller number did not and even less did not know. Findings show a high dependence on personal networks and a high use of information technology tools such as intranet, Groupware, and other decision support tools. Barriers to sharing included power loss, appearing dependent, a basic unwillingness to share with national culture possibly playing a role. Incentives did not appear to encourage sharing with management of KM programs not focused on a particular department or individual. Respondents were evenly divided over strategic benefits but felt the existence of an internal culture that promoted sharing could result in competitive market advantages.

First, it provides a better understanding of KM issues within Hong Kong organizations, the current status of KM's implementation and readiness to accept and adopt best KM practices. Second, the findings also offer business practitioners a better understanding of the internal mechanisms necessary to leverage a firm's specific resources. Finally, the results shed additional clarity on the fuzziness surrounding KM's correlation to being strategically significant to the firm.

Unlike previous studies, the paper uses a holistic approach as opposed to best practices firms. The findings contribute to previous research and provide insights into current practices which identified differences and gaps; recognized areas of improvement; and should help stimulate use of KM and provided an understanding of internal mechanisms necessary to leverage internal resources.

Research on strategic decision making has over‐emphasized the importance of cognitive conflict because of its potential benefits. Recent research documented that, apart from the benefits, cognitive conflict leads to affective conflict. Taking information processing perspective, the present study seeks to argue that the benefits of cognitive conflict can be stimulated by the cognition‐based trust, while the interplay between cognitive conflict and affective conflict can be influenced by affect‐based trust. The present study therefore aims to demonstrate the divergent roles of the perceived trustworthiness as potential moderators in strategic decision‐making teams.

Using structured survey instrument, multi‐informant data was collected from CEOs and senior executives of 109 US hospitals. After performing confirmatory factor analysis of the measures used, the data was analyzed using hierarchical regression techniques to analyze divergent roles of cognition‐ and affect‐based trust as moderators in the relationship between conflict and decision outcomes.

Results showed that cognition‐based trust is the key to fortify the benefits of cognitive conflict while affect‐based trust is the panacea for the ills of cognitive conflict.

The sample consisted of hospitals in healthcare industry only. Self‐report measures may have some inherent social desirability bias.

This study contributes to both practicing managers as well as to strategic management literature. This study suggests that trust between the executives involved in strategic decision‐making process plays an important role in enhancing decision quality. It is therefore suggested that CEOs and administrators engage the executives who have both cognition‐ and affect‐based trust with each other to have successful decision outcomes.

Though the sample in the present study focuses only on healthcare industry, to the extent strategic decision‐making process is similar in other industries, the findings can be generalizable across other industries.

This article aims to identify the capabilities supporting the development of collaborative innovation within knowledge‐intensive environments.

Re‐considering the history of the ARPANET project as a vivid example of collaborative innovation, the article presents qualitative research from a historical case.

Within this framework, the article shows that benefiting from collaboration in innovation entails that the innovative organisation is capable of achieving (at least) the following tasks: to leverage complementarities between internal and external sources of innovation (design capability); to codify, capitalise and disseminate knowledge outcomes (knowledge management capability); and to align product and organisations in a dynamic way (adaptive governance capability).

This contribution is limited by looking at a single case. On the premise that model generalization depends on extensive empirical data, the current article should be considered as preliminary/exploratory research that aims at identifying the capabilities supporting collaborative innovation within knowledge‐intensive environments.

The originality of this article is to look at a historical case to elaborate on a typology of collaborative innovation capabilities.

Research and development (R&D) plays a significant role in creating and sustaining technological leadership. This paper aims to look at the extent to which R&D interventions stimulate innovation engagement.

This paper examines, in the main, secondary data sources from Honda to assess the extent to which R&D‐enabled plants enjoy both enhanced innovatory potential and employee engagement.

Initial indications point to a positive correlation between R&D and associated plant performance. Ongoing research suggests that there is a clear link between interventions and enhanced employee engagement. In addition, there appears to be evidence that monoculture outperform multicultural establishments.

The research was exploratory in nature and relied, in the main, on secondary data sources. However, access to the secondary sources was extensive which hopefully compensates for the limited primary data.

Practitioners and academics interested in the relationship between engagement, value add knowledge transfer, R&D and innovation should find this paper of interest.

This study examines how budgetary support (BS), teamwork, and organizational commitment to employees (OCE) affect firm performance across two countries, Malaysia and the United States. By surveying senior managers of 165 small and medium enterprises, this study finds that teamwork and BS each has a direct effect on OCE and firm performance. Further, results indicate that OCE mediates the relationship between BS, teamwork, and firm performance. In Malaysia, but not in the United States, we find that teamwork affects performance directly. In the United States, but not in Malaysia, we find that BS affects performance, and there is an interaction effect between BS and management influence. We attribute the effects to the different national cultures and social-exchange relations and highlight the contributions to the budgeting research, organizational commitment literature, and to practice.

Reviews the general literature of management relevant to the information and library professions, and that of the management of information, knowledge‐based and library services published in 2002. Themes emerging at major conferences are noted and issues of growing concern are identified.

This paper draws from more than 25 years of research with aspiring and practicing educational leaders to present six strategies for building a culture of feedback in schools, teams, districts, professional learning opportunities, and other educational settings. These strategies reflect key elements of the authors’ new, developmental approach to feedback. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Through the lens of adult developmental theory, the authors highlight foundational learnings from open-ended survey research with 14 educational leaders about their experiences giving and receiving feedback, and prior qualitative, mixed-method, and longitudinal research with principals, assistant principals, teachers, superintendents, and other educational leaders.

The authors share six developmentally oriented strategies for establishing trust and building conditions for authentic, generative feedback: finding value in mistakes, modeling vulnerability, caring for the (inter)personal, clarifying expectations, sharing developmental ideas, and building an infrastructure for collaboration.

This work has implications for leadership and leadership preparation, especially given contemporary emphases on collaboration and high-stakes evaluations as tools for ongoing improvement, enhancing professional capital, and internal, individual, and system-wide capacity building.

Because a developmental perspective has been noticeably missing from the wider feedback literature and leadership preparation curricula, this work extends and enhances tenets from different fields (e.g. business, developmental psychology, educational leadership and educational leadership preparation), while also addressing urgent calls for educational reform; leadership preparation, development, and practice; and professional capital building.

The purpose of the paper is to report a study of knowledge sharing practices in the clinical research organization in a major pharmaceutical company. While knowledge sharing and knowledge transfer is often conceived of in terms of codification and storage in databases accessed through information technology, there is less experience in industry from working with knowledge sharing in face‐to‐face communication settings.

A collaborative research methodology including academic researchers, consultants and company representatives was used to examine and develop a knowledge‐sharing model. Interview and participative observations were used as data collection methods.

The study suggests that the use of so‐called knowledge facilitators, organizing and leading knowledge sharing seminars among clinical research teams, needs to develop the capacity to interrelate heedfully, that is, the dispositions to act with attentiveness, alertness, and care, to fully explore the insights, experiences, and know‐how generated in the clinical research teams. Heed precedes successful sharing of knowledge.

It is concluded that the literature on knowledge sharing needs to pay closer attention to the practices on the micro level in knowledge sharing, in the day‐to‐day collaborations between different professional groups.

The paper applies the concept of “heedful interrelation” in a practical knowledge management project in a major pharmaceutical company.

The purpose of this paper is to examine and synthesize Argyris and Schön's Theory of Action and Kegan and Lahey's theory of Immunity to Change in order to produce an integrated model.

Literature discussing Argyris and Schön's Theory of Action (Model I and Model II), single and double‐loop learning, espoused theory and theory‐in‐use; and Kegan and Lahey's theory of Immunity to Change was examined. The two theories were then summarized, analyzed, compared and synthesized into an integrated model.

Within Kegan and Lahey's model of an immunity system, the Argyris and Schön Model I Unilateral Control Model should be considered a competing commitment. Kegan and Lahey's theory identifies a critical causal element (underlying assumption) not previously identified by the Argyris and Schön Theory of Action, thus opening the potential for expanded effectiveness by practioners of Argyris and Schön's theory.

Little attention has been given in the literature to comparing or integrating these two theories. The synthesis of the two theories opens the possibility of overcoming limitations experienced by practitioners promoting double‐loop learning in organizations.