In this chapter, the researcher provides the conclusions and recommendations. There are three sections in this chapter. First, the conclusion from the study is proposed. Secondly, both theoretical and practical implications of this study are elaborated. In the third section, the recommendations for the future research on this topic is demonstrated.
Research Conclusions
In the new epoch of knowledge economy, organizations have experienced ever-rising intense competition. Knowledge is the major determinant of organizational competitive advantage and sustained grow, while knowledge management plays a key role in enhancing the competitiveness of the organization. The purpose of this study was to explore the relationships between trust, knowledge sharing, customer relationship management, and innovation capabilities in human resource industry in Taiwan, Pan Asia, by using an integrated model.
TKICC model was developed for the purpose of providing insights for the various variables and their relationships. TKICC model has high validity and reliability values, therefore it is adequate for measuring four variables. The empirical findings of this research proved that trust can improve knowledge sharing which can also improve customer relationship management and innovation capabilities. The findings provided better insights of knowledge management in Pan Asia for developing better strategies in the future.
Research Implications
The objective of this study was to explore the relations between trust, knowledge sharing, customer relationship management, and innovation capabilities of human resource industry in Taiwan by using an integrated model, TKICC model. The research findings are as follow:
78
Implications from Research Finding 1
Trust has a positive and significant impact on knowledge sharing.
Theoretical implications.
This result supports all the previous studies that there is a positive relation between trust and knowledge sharing (Abrams et al., 2003; J. H. Cheng et al., 2008; Chow & Chan, 2008;
Staples & Webster, 2008; Usoro et al., 2007; W. L. Wu et al., 2009).Within all the PLS findings of this research, they all showed that trust has the highest path coefficient towards knowledge sharing among other paths. Trust become the key factor that affects knowledge sharing, customer relationship management, and innovation capabilities. Therefore, it can be implied that the higher trust Pan Asia has, can not only lead to better knowledge sharing, but also better customer relationship management as well as innovation capabilities in Pan Asia.
Moreover, focus on the variable, trust in peers is the dominant factor of trust. It is to say that better trust in peers can facilitate knowledge sharing of Pan Asia.
Practical implications.
The findings can help Pan Asia to develop the best strategies to enhance its knowledge sharing by emphasizing the strong factor. Pan Asia needs to focus on improving employees trust relationship by means of strengthening internal communication and interaction.
Implications from Research Finding 2
Knowledge sharing has a positive and significant impact on customer relationship management.
Theoretical implications.
This study intends to explore the relations of knowledge sharing towards customer relationship management as whole. One of the contributions of this study is to learn about the relationship between knowledge sharing and customer relationship management since the
79
previous literature has limited research in regards to this part. The result shows that knowledge sharing indeed can positively influence customer relationship management. As a result, the better knowledge sharing Pan Asia can do, it will lead to the better customer relationship management in terms of win-back management, production/ service customization, customer information management, referrals management, expansion management, and termination management. However, in this study knowledge sharing only covers 32.4% of customer relationship management aspects, and it indicated that there are still other factors which may influence customer relationship management as whole.
Moreover, the findings also indicated that intra-group knowledge sharing is the dominant factor of knowledge sharing. Accordingly, the greater intra-group knowledge sharing, the better customer information management can be achieved in Pan Asia.
Practical implications.
Pan Asia may promote knowledge-sharing culture as well as establish the value of knowledge sharing in each department.
Implications from Research Finding 3
Knowledge sharing has a positive and significant impact on innovation capabilities.
Theoretical implications.
This study also intends to further explore the relations of knowledge sharing towards innovation capabilities as whole. This result supports the previous studies that there is a positive relation between knowledge sharing and innovation capabilities (Aulawi et al., 2009; Sáenz, Aramburu, & Blanco, 2012; Taminiau, Smit, & de Lange, 2009). The fact that knowledge sharing has a higher influence on innovation capabilities compare to its effect on customer information management, confirmed that for the purpose of improve innovation capabilities, Pan Asia needs to focus on their knowledge sharing. Moreover, focus on the variable, the
80
dominant factor of innovation capabilities is process innovation, and this is what Pan Asia should put emphasis on process innovation.
Practical implications.
With regards to innovation capabilities, Pan Asia needs to focus on process innovation.
By making good use of interactive platform of the organization to stimulate wide range of innovation, especially on the process part. Also, Pan Asia can encourage their employees to have creative think, and even provide some training to inspire their creativity.
Implications from Research Finding 4
Intra-groups is the dominant factor of knowledge sharing in group A while inter-groups is the dominant factor of knowledge sharing in group B.
Theoretical implications.
Comparing the findings of different departments of Pan Asia, there is a slight difference between group A (department of Dispatching Services, Foreign Workers Services, and Head-hunting) and group B (department of Corporate Training, Education, and Pan-Asia headquarter). Employees in group A considered intra-groups knowledge sharing as the most important way of knowledge sharing. On the other hand, employees in group B perceived inter-groups knowledge sharing as the most important way of knowledge sharing.
Practical implications.
Pan Asia also needs to put special attention to the difference on the ways of knowledge sharing in the different departments. For the employees in the department of Dispatching Services, Foreign Workers Services, and Head-hunting, Pan Asia should promote knowledge-sharing culture as well as establish the value of knowledge knowledge-sharing in each work team. And for the employees in the department of Corporate Training, Education, and Pan-Asia headquarter,
81
Pan Asia should encourage knowledge sharing activities in different work teams and department.
Recommendations for Future Research
This exploratory empirical study is one of the preliminary studies to explore and assess the serial link of trust with knowledge management impact on human resource industry. Based on the limitations of this research, here are the recommendations for future research. First of all, since this study only used one company in Taiwan to be the focus of the research, future research could use two or more organizations in the same field to compare the level of knowledge sharing, customer relationship management and innovation capabilities, as well as to determine where could make improvement. Besides, future research could also attempt to determine whether or not the TKICC model could be applied to do the measurement in other industries.
Second, this is a quantitative research which gathered numerical data for analyzing the relationship between the variables. Therefore, for future research, a qualitative research is recommended, and can compare and contrast with other findings of quantitative studied.
Third, for avoiding multicollinearity appears only in main study, sample distribution of both pilot study and main study should be taken into consideration. As long as multicollinearity appears in pilot study, drop the most intercorrelated variables from analysis.
Finally, this research compared the different results among department levels. For this reason, a multilevel empirical analysis of different positions to determine whether there is relationship between variables and different positions is recommended for future research.
82
REFERENCES
Abrams, L. C., Cross, R., Lesser, E., & Levin, D. Z. (2003). Nurturing interpersonal trust in knowledge-sharing networks. Academy of Management Executive, 17(4), 64-77.
Adler, P. S., & Shenhar, A. (1990). Adapting your technological base: The organizational challenge. Sloan Management Review, 32(1), 25-37.
Akman, G., & Yilmaz, C. (2008). Innovative capability, innovation strategy and market orientation: An empirical analysis in Turkish software industry. International Journal of Innovation Management, 12(1), 69-111.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411-423.
Aulawi, H., Sudirman, I., Suryadi, K., & Govindaraju, R. (2009). Knowledge sharing behaviour, antecedent and their impact on the individual innovation capability.
Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 5(12), 2238-2245.
Becerra-Fernandez, I., & Sabherwal, R. (2010). Knowledge management: Systems and processes. New York: ME Sharpe.
Bose, R. (2002). Customer relationship management: Key components for IT success.
Industrial Management and Data Systems, 102(12), 89-97.
Bose, R., & Sugumaran, V. (2003). Application of knowledge management technology in customer relationship management. Knowledge and Process Management, 10(1), 3-17.
Boulding, W., Staelin, R., Ehret, M., & Johnston, W. J. (2005). A customer relationship management roadmap: What is known, potential pitfalls, and where to go. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 155-166. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.2005.69.4.155
Cabrita, M. D. R., & Bontis, N. (2008). Intellectual capital and business performance in the Portuguese banking industry. International Journal of Technology Management, 43(1), 212-237.
Cameron, A. C., & Windmeijer, F. A. (1996). R-squared measures for count data regression models with applications to health-care utilization. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 14(2), 209-220.
Cheng, J. H., Yeh, C. H., & Tu, C. W. (2008). Trust and knowledge sharing in green supply chains. Supply Chain Management, 13(4), 283-295.
Cheng, L. Y., Yang, C. C., & Teng, H. M. (2013). An integrated model for customer relationship management: An analysis and empirical study. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 23(5), 462-481. doi: 10.1002/hfm.20343
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In G.
A. Marcoulides (Eds), Modern methods for business research (pp. 295-336). NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
83
Chow, W. S., & Chan, L. S. (2008). Social network, social trust and shared goals in
organizational knowledge sharing. Information and Management, 45(7), 458-465.
Croteau, A. M., & Li, P. (2003). Critical success factors of CRM technological initiatives.
Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 20(1), 21-34.
Cummings, J. N. (2004). Work groups, structural diversity, and knowledge sharing in a global organization. Management Science, 50(3), 352-364.
Doney, P. M., & Cannon, J. P. (1997). An examination of the nature of trust in buyer-seller relationships. The Journal of Marketing, 61(2), 35-51.
Drucker, P. F. (1993). Post-capitalist society. New York: Butterworth Heineman.
Elmquist, M., & Le Masson, P. (2009). The value of a 'failed' R&D project: An emerging evaluation framework for building innovative capabilities. R and D Management, 39(2), 136-152.
Fan, Y. W., & Ku, E. (2010). Customer focus, service process fit and customer relationship management profitability: The effect of knowledge sharing. Service Industries Journal, 30(2), 203-223. doi: 10.1080/02642060802120141
Fang, Y. H., & Chiu, C. M. (2010). In justice we trust: Exploring knowledge-sharing continuance intentions in virtual communities of practice. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 235-246.
Faraj, S., & Sproull, L. (2000). Coordinating expertise in software development teams.
Management Science, 46(12), 1554-1568.
Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: The Free Press.
Glazer, R. (1997). Strategy and structure in information-intensive markets: The relationship between marketing and IT. Journal of Market-Focused Management, 2(1), 65-81.
Grandison, T., & Sloman, M. (2003). Trust management tools for internet applications. Trust Management (pp. 91-107). Greece: Springer.
Guan, J., & Ma, N. (2003). Innovative capability and export performance of Chinese firms.
Technovation, 23(9), 737-747.
Gurkov, I. (2011). Innovative actions and innovation incapabilities of Russian industrial companies: A further extension of observations. Post-Communist Economies, 23(4), 507-516.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Factor analysis. Fifth ed.
Multivariate Data Analysis (pp. 87-138). New Jersey, U.S.A: Prentice Hall.
Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing
knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82-111.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C., & Sinkovics, R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path
modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing (AIM), 20,
84
277-320.
Hislop, D. (2002). Mission impossible? Communicating and sharing knowledge via information technology. Journal of Information Technology, 17(3), 165-177.
Ho, L. A., Kuo, T. H., & Lin, B. (2012). How social identification and trust influence organizational online knowledge sharing. Internet Research, 22(1), 4-28.
Hobby, J. (1999). Looking after the one who matters. Accountancy Age, 28-30.
Holste, J. S., & Fields, D. (2010). Trust and tacit knowledge sharing and use. Journal of Knowledge Management, 14(1), 128-140.
Hsieh, M. H. (2009). A case of managing customer relationship management systems:
Empirical insights and lessons learned. International Journal of Information Management, 29(5), 416-419. doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2009.06.008
Hsu, M. H., & Chang, C. M. (2012). Examining interpersonal trust as a facilitator and uncertainty as an inhibitor of intra-organisational knowledge sharing. Information Systems Journal, 24(2), 119-142
Hsu, M. H., Ju, T. L., Yen, C. H., & Chang, C. M. (2007). Knowledge sharing behavior in virtual communities: The relationship between trust, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 65(2), 153-169.
Huang, Y., & Wang, J. (2009). Services-oriented CRM system and enabling technologies for insurance enterprises. The Second International Workshop on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Moscow, 737-740.
Hung, S. Y., Hung, W. H., Tsai, C. A., & Jiang, S. C. (2010). Critical factors of hospital adoption on CRM system: Organizational and information system perspectives.
Decision Support Systems, 48(4), 592-603. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2009.11.009
Hurley, R. F., & Hult, G. T. M. (1998). Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: An integration and empirical examination. Journal of Marketing, 62(3), 42-54.
Ingram, P., & Simons, T. (2002). The transfer of experience in groups of organizations:
Implications for performance and competition. Management Science, 48(12), 1517-1533.
Jackie, K. (2000). CRM, ERM, one-to-one decoding relationship management theory and technology. Trusts & Estates, 139(4), 49-53.
Jensen, C. D., & Connell, P. O. (2006) Trust-based route selection in dynamic source routing.
Trust Management, 3986, 150-163.
Kincaid, J. W. (2003). Customer relationship management: Getting it right! India: Pearson Education.
Koc, T., & Ceylan, C. (2007). Factors impacting the innovative capacity in large-scale companies. Technovation, 27(3), 105-114.
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the
85
replication of technology. Organization Science, 3(3), 383-397.
Kramer, R. M. (1999). Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 569-598.
Lall, S. (1992). Technological capabilities and industrialization. World development, 20(2), 165-186.
Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Organization and environment: Managing differentation and integration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lee, C. H., Huang, S. Y., Barnes, F. B., & Kao, L. (2010). Business performance and
customer relationship management: The effect of IT, organisational contingency and business process on Taiwanese manufacturers. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 21(1), 43-65. doi: 10.1080/14783360903492595
Lee, S. Y., Kim, H. W., & Gupta, S. (2009). Measuring open source software success. Omega, 37(2), 426-438.
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, 50(11), 1477-1490.
Li, W. (2010). Virtual knowledge sharing in a cross-cultural context. Journal of Knowledge Management, 14(1), 38-50.
Liao, S. H., Fei, W. C., & Chen, C. C. (2007). Knowledge sharing, absorptive capacity, and innovation capability: An empirical study of Taiwan's knowledge-intensive industries.
Journal of Information Science, 33(3), 340-359.
Lin, H. F. (2007). Knowledge sharing and firm innovation capability: An empirical study.
International Journal of Manpower, 28(34), 315-332.
Lin, H. F. (2007). Effects of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation on employee knowledge sharing intentions. Journal of Information Science, 33(2), 135-149.
Lisboa, A., Skarmeas, D., & Lages, C. (2011). Innovative capabilities: Their drivers and effects on current and future performance. Journal of Business Research, 64(11), 1157-1161.
Liu, Y., & Phillips, J. S. (2011). Examining the antecedents of knowledge sharing in
facilitating team innovativeness from a multilevel perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 31(1), 44-52.
Liu, Z. G., & Cui, J. (2012). Improve technological innovation capability of enterprises through tacit knowledge sharing. Procedia Engineering, 29, 2072-2076.
Luna-Reyes, L. F., Black, L. J., Cresswell, A. M., & Pardo, T. A. (2008). Knowledge sharing and trust in collaborative requirements analysis. System Dynamics Review, 24(3), 265-297.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709-734.
Mooradian, T., Renzl, B., & Matzler, K. (2006). Who trusts? Personality, trust and knowledge
86
sharing. Management Learning, 37(4), 523-540.
Mowen, J. C., & Minor, M. (1998). Consumer behavior. 5th ed. NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. NY: Oxford University Press.
Nunnally, J. C. (2010). Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
O'Leary, D. E. (1998). Enterprise knowledge management. Computer, 31(3), 54-61.
Ö ztaysi, B., Sezgin, S., & Ö zok, A. F. (2011). A measurement tool for customer relationship management processes. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 111(6), 943-960.
doi: 10.1108/02635571111144982
Parvatiyar, A., & Sheth, J. N. (2001). Conceptual framework of customer relationship management. Customer Relationship Management–Emerging Concepts, Tools and Applications, 3-25.
Payne, A., & Frow, P. (2005). A strategic framework for customer relationship management.
Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 167-176.
Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79-91.
Rababah, K., Mohd, H., & Ibrahim, H. (2011). A unified definition of CRM towards the successful adoption and implementation. Academic Research International, 1(1), 220-228.
Rababah, K., Mohd, H., & Ibrahim, H. (2011). Customer relationship management (CRM) process from theory to practice: The preimplementation plan of CRM system.
Internatonal Journal of e-Education, e-Business, e-Management and e-Learning, 1(1), 22-27.
Renzl, B. (2008). Trust in management and knowledge sharing: The mediating effects of fear and knowledge documentation. Omega, 36(2), 206-220.
Rulke, D. L., & Galaskiewicz, J. (2000). Distribution of knowledge, group network structure, and group performance. Management Science, 46(5), 612-625.
Ryals, L., & Knox, S. (2001). Cross-functional issues in the implementation of relationship marketing through customer relationship management. European Management Journal, 19(5), 534-542. doi: 10.1016/S0263-2373(01)00067-6
Ryals, L., & Payne, A. (2001). Customer relationship management in financial services:
Towards information-enabled relationship marketing. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 9(1), 3-27.
Sáenz, J., Aramburu, N., & Blanco, C. E. (2012). Knowledge sharing and innovation in Spanish and Colombian high-tech firms. Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(6), 919-933.
Samson, D. (1991). Manufacturing and Operations Strategy. Melbourne: Prentice Hall.
Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (2007). An integrative model of
87
organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 344-354.
Sher, P. J., & Yang, P. Y. (2005). The effects of innovative capabilities and R&D clustering on firm performance: The evidence of Taiwan's semiconductor industry. Technovation, 25(1), 33-43.
Siakas, K. V., & Georgiadou, E. (2006). Knowledge sharing: Cultural dynamics. Proceedings of 7th European Conference of Knowledge Management, UK, 505-513.
Srivastava, R. K., Shervani, T. A., & Fahey, L. (1999). Marketing, business processes, and shareholder value: An organizationally embedded view of marketing activities and the discipline of marketing. Journal of Marketing, 63, 168-179.
Staples, D. S., & Webster, J. (2008). Exploring the effects of trust, task interdependence and virtualness on knowledge sharing in teams. Information Systems Journal, 18(6), 617-640.
Swift, R. S. (2001). Accelerating customer relationships: Using CRM and relationship technologies. NJ: Prentice Hall Professional.
Taminiau, Y., Smit, W., & De Lange, A. (2009). Innovation in management consulting firms through informal knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(1), 42-55.
Tarokh, M. J., & Ghahremanloo, H. (2007). Intelligence CRM: A contact center model.
International Conference on Service Operations and Logistics, and Informatics, USA, 1-6.
Teece, D., & Pisano, G. (1998). The dynamic capabilities of firms: An introduction.
Technology, Organization and Competitiveness, 193-212.
Tsai, C. T., Huang, K. L., & Kao, C. F. (2001). The relationships among organizational factors, creativity of organizational members and innovation capability. Journal of Management, 18, 527-66.
Urbanskiene, R., Žostautiene, D., & Chreptavičiene, V. (2008). The model of creation of customer relationship management (CRM) system. Ryšiu{ogonek} Su Klientas Valdymo (CRM) Sistemos Kūrimo Modelis, 3(58), 51-59.
Usoro, A., Sharratt, M. W., Tsui, E., & Shekhar, S. (2007). Trust as an antecedent to knowledge sharing in virtual communities of practice. Knowledge Management Research and Practice, 5(3), 199-212.
Wu, I. L., & Wu, K. W. (2005). A hybrid technology acceptance approach for exploring e-CRM adoption in organizations. Behaviour and Information Technology, 24(4), 303-316. doi: 10.1080/0144929042000320027
Wu, W. L., Lin, C. H., Hsu, B. F., & Yeh, R. S. (2009). Interpersonal trust and knowledge sharing: Moderating effects of individual altruism and a social interaction
environment. Social Behavior and Personality, 37(1), 83-94.
88
Wu, W. Y., & Sukoco, B. M. (2010). Why should I share? Examining consumers' motives and trust on knowledge sharing. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 50(4), 11-19.
Wu, Y. C., Lin, B. W., & Chen, C. J. (2013). How do internal openness and external openness affect innovation capabilities and firm performance? IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management, 60(4), 704-716.
Yi, J., Wang, C., & Kafouros, M. (2013). The effects of innovative capabilities on exporting:
Do institutional forces matter? International Business Review, 22(2), 392-406.
Zablah, A. R., Bellenger, D. N., & Johnston, W. J. (2004). An evaluation of divergent perspectives on customer relationship management: Towards a common
understanding of an emerging phenomenon. Industrial Marketing Management, 33(6), 475-489. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2004.01.006
Zack, M. H. (1999). Developing a knowledge strategy. California Management Review, 41(3), 125-145.
Zheng, Y., Liu, J., & George, G. (2010). The dynamic impact of innovative capability and inter-firm network on firm valuation: A longitudinal study of biotechnology start-ups.
Journal of Business Venturing, 25(6), 593-609.
Zhu, Y., Wang, Y., & Lan, H. (2007). Innovative capabilities in the process of knowledge sharing to firm performance. Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing, USA, 5399-5402
89
APPENDIX A: RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE
敬愛的同仁，您好：
汎亞人力資源集團在面對全球經濟持續衰退的衝擊下，不僅需面對如何持續追求 品質與績效上的卓越，如何能有效運用知識管理，對內可增進創新能力，對外以提升 顧客關係管理，以強化 貴公司在產業中的競爭力，已成為當今公司最重要的議題。
汎亞人力資源集團在面對全球經濟持續衰退的衝擊下，不僅需面對如何持續追求 品質與績效上的卓越，如何能有效運用知識管理，對內可增進創新能力，對外以提升 顧客關係管理，以強化 貴公司在產業中的競爭力，已成為當今公司最重要的議題。