Our hypotheses are largely derived theoretical statements and imperial research made within the literature on knowledge sharing, knowledge transfer, difficulties of knowledge sharing, and organizational performance on knowledge management. We present our hypotheses through the following variables within the literature. In our study, knowledge sharing culture is assessed by the following constructs: trust, collaboration, team, cooperation, mutual concern and asking questions respectfully.
Trust culture.
Trust is defined “as positive expectations, such as integrity, capability, truthfulness, goodwill and ability that employees have about the competence and reliability of fellow employees as well as within the organisation” Ellonen, Blomqvist and Puumalainen(2008, p.
163). Researchers like (Lee & Choi, 2003, p. 16) and (Razi & Karim, 2011, p. 446) have operationally referred to trust as “the degree of reciprocal faith among the colleagues in terms of intention and behavior within the organization.” For that reason, researchers argue that trust has a strong and robust influence that acts as an important force behind the sharing of knowledge among employees (Ling, San, & Hock, 2009). In their research, trust facilitate employees openness to share, encourages the application and development of knowledge, and joint problem solving within teams (Bakker et al., 2006). In addition, the researchers claim that when relationships and conditions in a trusting climate are high employees are willing to collaborate and cooperate with each other which is supported by (Scott, 2000); thus allowing knowledge sharing to be less costly to the organization. However, some researchers maintain that a lack of trust can be very detrimental to the knowledge transfer process and the survival and competitiveness of organization. Others insist that a lack of trust can be very disadvantageous since knowledge resides in the individual’s willingness to share. Therefore,
the feeling of trust.” Therefore, it is assumed that a culture of sharing should consist of trust;
see, “Table 2.7. The Importance of Trust, Reasons why Trust is Important.”
Table 2.7.
The Importance of Trust, and Reasons why Trust is Important
Author(s) Year Classification
Fukuyama 1995, p. 7 Trust facilitates transactions and collaboration.
Nahapiet and Ghoshal 1998, p. 24 Where relationships are high in trust, people are more willing to engage in … cooperative interactions.
Jarvenpaa and Staples 2000, p. 129 Trust as seen by many, could possibly help in facilitating open and substantive knowledge sharing and creation due to the fact that lack of trust is a key issue that needs to be resolved especially in cross-functional or inter-organisational teams.
Lee and Choi 2003, p. 17 the lack of trust can be detrimental to the knowledge creation process
Lucas 2005, p. 87
Trust creates “conditions for increased knowledge transfer and ensures its transferal is in a form that is useful…”
Collaboration culture.
Simons and Sveiby (2002) empirical study refers to collaboration as “collaborative climate”
where the researcher defines collaboration “as behaviors people can observe what people can do around here” (p.420). The researchers finding conclude that collaborative climate tends to improve with age, education level and managerial role. “Figure 2.2. Components of Collaborative Climate” identified by Simons and Sveiby (2001, p. 355) depicts the different levels of a collaborative climate within an organisation. Collaboration is operationally defined in (Lee & Choi, 2003, p.18) as the “degree to which people in a group actively help one another in their work.” Other studies refer to collaboration as “mutually shared norms of behavior” (Yang, 2007, p. 532). Yet, it is important to classify the three levels of collaboration, see Yang (2007) research for more details. The researcher illustrates how Tschannen-Moran (2001) expands on three levels of collaboration: a business unit, an immediate supervisor, and coworkers in a workgroup initiates knowledge sharing in an
organizational culture. While other researchers strongly believe that collaboration maximizes knowledge sharing and transfer only when employees are willing share (Simons & Sveiby 2002, p. 432). Collaborative culture, according to some researchers fosters trust within the workplace, encourages knowledge sharing in actions and not only in words, promotes creativity, and develops innovative thinking. Most importantly, researchers all agree that collaboration improves on open communication channels throughout the organization.
However, some researchers argue among themselves which is more effective for creating value, competition or collaboration? Researchers like Simons and Sveiby (2002) mention that competition has been at the forth front of creating value within organizations. Therefore, we assume that collaboration is essential in knowledge sharing.
Figure 2.2. Components of Collaborative Climate, Composition of Scales: Table adopted from “Collaborative Climate and Effectiveness of knowledge work—An Empirical Study,”
by R. Simons, & K. E. Sveiby, 2002, Journal of Knowledge Management, 6 (5). 420-433.
Team culture.
In Hu, Horng and Sun (2009) study, knowledge sharing and team culture have have an important influence on innovation performance. The researcher’s quantitative findings support team culture’s role in maintaining and moderating the relationship between knowledge sharing and service innovation performance. Team culture is referred to in (Hu,
observe that knowledge sharing and team culture has an important influence on service innovation performance of knowledge and information which results in better performance (Bank & Millward, 2000). The researcher also emphasize Bartol and Srivastava (2002) notion that “employees are able to diffuse relevant information across the organization through knowledge sharing” (p. 65). In addition, team oriented culture provides opportunities for employees to learn from colleagues with expertise who are supportive and willing to help one another through working together. Similarly, teams play a critical role in knowledge transfer in organizations such as creating new ideas through active discussions and dialogues (Nonaka, 1991). However, the presence of a strong team culture is derived from an “overlapping and preexisting characteristic” (Guzzo & Dickson, 1996, p. 307).
within the organization. Therefore, team culture facilitates knowledge exchange through social interaction which enhances teamwork, creativity, and constructive dialogue.
Cooperation culture.
Knowledge being shared for cooperation may be useful for competitive purpose (Ghobadi
& D’Ambra, 2011). The researchers, qualitative analysis is supported by Tsai (2002) suggesting that cooperative culture and competitive culture can benefits a knowledge sharing culture in the organization. Hence, cooperative culture is defined as the “collective use of the shared knowledge in pursuing a common interest” (Khanna & Gulati, 1998, p. 193). The researcher Ghobadi and D’Ambra (2011) are of the opinion that “those who possess specific knowledge can enjoy the same benefits and unique position, which might be lost by sharing knowledge” (p.307). Therefore, knowledge sharing involves a social dilemma which makes employees “hoarder their knowledge” due to its nature and social interaction with the knowledge source as a means of “perceived payoffs” (Von Hippel, 1994, p. 429). As a consequence, the researcher claims that ignorance into mixed characteristics of knowledge culture cooperative and competitive constructs results in ineffective knowledge management strategy for Knowledge sharing and knowledge transfer. According to Ghobadi and D’Ambra (2011) empirical studies indicate “positive levels of interdependence induce cooperative interactions of higher expectations” which is supported by (Jehn, 1994; Lin, 2010). In contract, researchers claim a negative interdependence may result in competitive interactions (Dirks & Ferrin, 2001, p. 450). Therefore, positive or negative forms of cooperation (Bock et al., 2005, p. 87) can influence the creation of knowledge.
On another research conducted by Janz and Prasarnphanich (2003) identifies antecedents of a knowledge-centered culture- those qualities that encourage knowledge creation and dissemination. Their study identifies several existing literature on organizational climate, job characteristics, and organizational learning (in the form of cooperative learning theory) which are linked to knowledge sharing and to develop a theoretical model explaining the levels of cooperative learning that takes place between knowledge workers, and the resulting level of knowledge created and disseminated by team performance and individual satisfaction. It was found that cooperative learning has an effective on work satisfaction and performance;
whereas, autonomy and organization culture has an effect on cooperative learning. Hence, we have no reason to believe otherwise, that cooperative culture has no effect on knowledge sharing culture.
Mutual concern culture.
Casalo, Flavian and Guinaliu (2008) argue the importance of virtual communities based on rational theory to analyze what factors determine consumer’s commitment in a virtual community. The researcher’s conclusions suggest that trust [mutual concern] placed in a virtual community has a positive and significant effect on customer’s commitment in a community. The researcher’s practical implication has shown that managers may foster trust [mutual concern] and commitment towards a virtual community in order to ensure the community’s success and survival in the long term. Within the researcher’s literature, mutual concern is referred to as “one’s intension to care for the other’s well-being” (Casalo et al., 2008, p. 327). In addition, the researcher considers that communities or cultures are established for the sharing resources, establishing relationships and trading goods or services.
The researcher also claims that “rational capital” (Wasko & Faraj, 2005, p 35) focuses on the affective nature of relationships within social groups for social exchange. To understand rational capital, the researcher chooses the concept of trust or mutual concern since it’s associated with the “achievement of long lasting and profitable relationships” (Anderson &
Narus, 1990, p. 42). Despite the researcher’s interest in virtual communities, the researcher firmly considers that virtual communities are “always centered on mutual concern” (p.327).
The researcher maintains that trust or mutual concern has been analyzed into different perspective both as a behavioral component and cognitive component (Geyskens,
taking into account the previous considerations, we proposed that the concept of benevolence placed in virtual communities to be considered as a construct for mutual concern in a sharing culture.
Asking questions culture.
Song and Chermack (2008) proposed a study to assess the validity and reliability of the measurement scores of learning organization culture, the Dimensions of Learning Organization Questionnaire (DLOQ), in a Korean Context. The researcher characterizes the world as turbulent and fierce with competition due to technological advancements in the knowledge-based economy. Thus, the researcher is emphasizing that many organizations strive to have a learning organizational culture of creating, acquiring, and transferring knowledge and to modify its behavior to reflect new knowledge and insight (Garvin, 1993).
The researchers Song and Chermack (2008, p. 88) literature review indicates that a learning organization is an “organization that is continuously expanding its capacity to create its future” this concept is important in defining asking questions culture; however, the researcher considers learning originations as fundamental elements of success for the following reasons: (1) Systems thinking, (2) personal mastery, (3) mental models, (4) shared vision, and (5) team learning. Furthermore, the researcher indicates that the learning organization provides employees with an opportunity to expand their competency to lead desirable outcomes, and where new and expansive patterns of thinking can be nurtured (Song
& Chermack, 2008, p. 89). In light of the previous discussion, this study is primarily concerned with Asking Questions Culture. In Song and Chermack (2008) the researcher identifies Marsick and Watkins Model (1997) the Seven Dimensions of the Learning Organization. There, this researcher studies the dimension of inquire and dialogue which shares similar concept for asking questions culture. The description used for the dimension of inquiry and dialogue claims that “people gain productive reasoning skills to express their views and the capacity to listen and inquire into others views;” by proposing a culture which
“supports questioning, feedback and experimentation” (p. 89). Therefore, we hypnotize that asking questions culture facilitates the creating, acquiring and transferring of knowledge within the organization.
In sum, this study assumes that the following variables-- trust, collaboration, team, cooperation, mutual concern and asking questions between employees will have no effect on knowledge transfer and survival and competitiveness of TaiwanICDF. Therefore, a
knowledge sharing culture should consist of norms and practices that encourage the free flow of knowledge through the variables being discussed among knowledge workers.