Next, in our study, knowledge transfer is assessed by the following constructs:
socialization, externalization, internalization respectfully within the literature.
Frist, we need to understand why knowledge transfer is essential for non-profit organizations. Hume, Pope and Hume (n.d.) paper examines the role of knowledge sharing in non-profit organizations. The researcher finding suggest that non-profit organizations are essential in developing sustainable communities providing many social, environmental, health, and human services required by a vast amount of stakeholders. The researcher’s paper offers a unique view of knowledge sharing, using in-depth interviews by exploring the importance of knowledge planning, capturing and diffusion in non-profit organizations.
Nevertheless, the researchers literature review focuses on fostering a knowledge management framework which involves seeing, touching, experimenting with the understanding and the end–to-end process/ lifecycle of knowledge; “Figure 2.3 Knowledge development cycle within a non-profit community.”
According to Lettieri, Borga and Savoldelli (2004, p. 16) study non-profits are in a “deep renewal process.” The researcher argues that non-profits are required to convey tailored and high-quality amenities in order to overcome complexities and shortage of resources. The researcher investigates the role of knowledge sharing in achieving excellences in the non-profits sector.
Takeuchi and Nonaka (1995) matrix of knowledge transfer provides the most practical illustration of the knowledge sharing implementation plan. The researcher’s model outline a process of knowledge transfer and knowledge creation; depicting it as a process continuum in which knowledge is “amplified’ through the four modes of knowledge development activities:
socialization, internalization, externalization and combination.” See “Figure 2.3. Knowledge development cyle within a non-profit community” which illustrated how knowledge is transformed within the organization at higher levels, moving from individual through the group to organizational levels.
Figure 2.3. Knowledge development cycle within a non-profit community. Adopted from
“Knowledge Management Non-profit Organizations,” by E. Lettieri, F. Borga, & A.
Savoldelli, 2004, Journal of Knowledge Management, 1(1), p.18.
Lettieri, Borga and Savoldelli (2004, p.17) study suggest that non-profits must effectively capture and transfer knowledge within the organization. Therefore, the researchers call for
“reengineering core processes” and organizational paradigms:
Within in non-profit, information is produced and moves through different periods moving towards a wider discussing atmosphere. The first pattern offers with a personal stage, where information is created and utilized by the single person. The second pattern presents the actions of exchange and discussing describes how to move from the person to team stage. Though further initiatives to formalize and dissipate, information is made available to the whole company, while the forth pattern triumphs over the limitations of the NPO to accept the whole team after an effort of incorporation (p.18).
Choi and Lee (2003, p. 174), however, focused on the knowledge transfer of the knowledge management processes. In their research, they pointed out that “among these processes, creation-related activities become important because knowledge creation is a strategic weapon in today’s global marketplace…increasingly… it seems that knowledge creation is gaining much attention as a potential source of competitive advantage” (p. 44). Choi and Lee (2003) have also shown that knowledge transfer can have a direct and indirect influence on
organizational performance. Moreover, Choi, Poon and Davis (2008) recognize knowledge transfer as an important weapon in KM (p.179). The researcher put emphasis on the knowledge transfer process which establishes a strong relationship between knowledge creation and performance, organizational creativity which is incorporated into their model.
The researcher’s model in knowledge management makes their model one of the most complete and well defined constructs among the management literature.
Choi and Lee (2003) used the SECI model to explore knowledge transfer knowledge transfer. This model looks at the continuous conversion between tacit and explicit knowledge at an individual, group and organizational level. It was stated earlier in Chapter one (1) under the definition of terms that the SECI model of processes in made up of the socialization (S), externalization (E), combination (C), and internalization (I).
Nonanka and Takeuchi explain how information transformation occurs through an repetitive and manage process of … SECI – as an effective means of making individuals’ tacit information available to the wider company to make new information and then apply this new information within their business procedures towards accomplishing the company's perspective, goals and performance requirements (Oxford University Press, 1995).
Researchers Lee and Choi (2003, p. 17) believe that Nonaka’s concept for knowledge spiral;
organizational knowledge is created through, the following:
Ongoing conversion [transfer] between tacit and explicit information. The procedure is a never-ending control of tacit and explicit information through four ways of information transformation, i.e. socialization (from tacit to tacit), externalization (from tacit to explicit), combination (from explicit to explicit), and internalization (from explicit to tacit); and this manage procedure can be spread out from individual, group, business to inter-organizational stage. Hence, if the information manage can effectively estimate information development performance in organization, then at group stage, the information manage should be able to estimate information development performance as well. A diagram of the SECI model is shown in “Figure 2.4. SECI.”
Figure 2.4 The SECI model. Adopted from “SECI, Ba and Leadership: A Unified Model of Dynamic Knowledge Creation,” by I.Nonaka, R. Toyama, & N. Konno, 2000, Long Range Planning, 33(1), p.5-34.
Therefore, it is the opinion of this researcher that if the knowledge spiral can predict knowledge transfer both at team level and organization level (Nonaka, 1991; Takeuchi &
Nonaka, 1995); this study has no reason to believe otherwise, that knowledge transfer has no effect on the survival and competitive of organization. Therefore it adopt Lee and Choi (2003, p. 18) definition for knowledge creation and transfer. Hence, we would expect the following relationship to hold true.