To successfully reap the effectiveness of KM, knowledge sharing should be the most important consideration (King et al., 2002; Shin, 2004). Many organizations already acquire such potential benefits through knowledge sharing activities, e.g. Toyota (Dyer and Nobeoka, 2000), Texas Instruments (TI), Dow Chemical (O’Dell et al., 1999; Shin, 2004), and Ford (McDermott and O’Dell, 2001).
Knowledge sharing is depicted as a set of behaviors about knowledge exchange which involve the actors, knowledge content, organizational context, appropriate media, and societal environment (Lee and Suliman, 2002; Shin, 2004). Hendriks (1999) suggested a conceptualized model which consists of two main activities for effective knowledge sharing - namely, transmission and absorption (Davenport and Prusak, 1998). The knowledge owner externalizes his knowledge through the skills of codification, elaboration, and presentation.
Knowledge is subsequently transmitted to the recipient (reconstructor) by the appropriate media or channels, and then the reconstructor internalizes this knowledge through the capabilities of reading, learning, interpreting, and absorbing. Therefore, knowledge sharing involves many complicated and various factors and it is worthy of further research in identifying what factors help foster knowledge sharing.
Lee (2001) proposed two types of knowledge sharing: the explicit knowledge which can be clearly articulated in written documents (e.g. business reports) and the implicit knowledge which is embedded into an individual’s experience (e.g. know-how). In order to demonstrate why knowledge workers participate in knowledge sharing behavior, Bock et al. (2005) integrated the organizational climate construct and TRA (theory of reasoned action) model, which consists of the attitude of knowledge sharing and subjective norm. Ryu et al. (2003) measured the knowledge sharing behavior by combining the aspects of TRA and TPB (theory of planned behavior).
Shin (2004) exhibited a knowledge sharing process that was identified by three integrated perspectives – that is, economic view, agent based, and RBV. For effective knowledge sharing from the organizational perspective, Alavi and Leidner (2001) proposed some research suggestions, including the social, cultural, and technical attributes. The
organizational culture is the most essential issue for an effective knowledge sharing (McDemott and O’Dell, 2001). Knowledge contextual domain, including source/recipient, activities, and relation, is a special viewpoint to explain the important factors in successful knowledge transfer (Cummings and Teng, 2003). Hendriks (1999) depicted the relationship between information technology and knowledge sharing that exist both direct and indirect effects. Wasko and Faraj (2005) and Widen-Wulff and Giman (2004) explained the phenomenon of knowledge sharing through social capital perspective. Combining with the factors of social and technical, Pan and Scarbrough (1998) explored the knowledge sharing system on Buckman Laboratories. Lee (2001) claimed that organizational capability is a research variable to mediate the relationship between outsourcing and knowledge sharing.
With the view of capability-based, Yang and Chen (in press) investigated the knowledge sharing behavior to examine the importance of knowledge capabilities. Different perspectives to explore knowledge sharing are shown in Figure 2.4.
Knowledge
Figure 2.4 The multifaceted perspectives on knowledge sharing
Three subjects have to be incorporated with the development of knowledge sharing (Yang and Wan, 2004). First, social interactions and organizational networks can accelerate the activities of knowledge sharing. Second, technologies can facilitate the communication of knowledge sharing. Third, top managers must provide a sharing context and establish knowledge culture. All of these themes are the composition of knowledge focused strategies.
Lee and Suliman (2002) proposed a knowledge sharing framework which is affected by five
factors – that is, the actors who participate in the activity, the characteristics of shared knowledge, the organizational concerns, the channel which is communicated with others, and the environmental climate. Riege (2005) revealed three dozen barriers for knowledge sharing categorized by individual, organization, and technology view. By investigating 431 U.S. and European organizations, Ruggles (1998) found some important impediments for knowledge sharing: culture (54%), organizational structure (28%), information communication technology (22%), incentive system (19%), and staff turnover (8%).
To explore the multiple factors impacting knowledge sharing from a literature review, we categorize these factors into three dimensions based on Lee and Suliman (2002) and four sub-dimensions at the organizational level based on the socio-technical view (Lee and Choi, 2003;
Pan and Scarbrough, 1998) (see Table 2.5).
Table 2.5 Summary on knowledge sharing factors
Dimension
Sub-dimension Factors References
Culture Sharing culture / Cooperation &
collaboration culture / Knowledge-centered culture / Learning culture
Cummings & Teng (2003); Goh (2002); Janz & Prasarnphanich (2003); Lee & Suliman (2002);
Syed-Ikhsan & Rowland (2004) Structure Incentive and reward / Work design /
Management support / Norm / Political directives
Bock et al. (2005); Hall (2001);
Lee & Suliman (2002); Syed-Ikhsan & Rowland (2004) Organizational
Level
People Arduous relationship / Shared understanding / Similar knowledge frame / Social interaction
Cummings & Teng (2003); Goh (2002); Ko et al. (2005);
Szulanski (1996); Tsai (2002) Technology IT infrastructure / IT system / IT
know-how / IT support Bolisani & Scarso (1999);
Hendriks (1999); Lee &
Suliman (2002); Riege (2005);
Syed-Ikhsan & Rowland (2004);
Individual
Level Motivation / Prior experience / Absorptive capacity / Education levels / Source credibility
Lee & Suliman (2002); Ko et al.
(2005); Riege (2005); Szulanski (1996);
Knowledge
Level
Explicit & tacit knowledge / Causal ambiguity / Knowledge articulability / Knowledge embeddedness
Cummings & Teng (2003); Goh (2002); Lee & Suliman (2002);
Szulanski (1996)
However, this study examines the capability from the perspective of organizational knowledge, which has to foster the creation, acquirement, integration, and dissimilation of organizational knowledge, not from individuals’ viewpoint. For example, prior experience embedded on an individual is hard to be created by an organization. On the other hand, the
characteristics of knowledge level involve the original knowledge presentation and meanings, but they are not the purpose of this study. For example, the causal ambiguity of knowledge cannot be exhibited more clearly by organizational dissimilation. Therefore, we adopt the first dimension which is composed of culture, structure, people, and technology as the important factors in organizational knowledge sharing. The remaining two dimensions, individual and knowledge level, are ignored herein.