Large bodies of work and research exist on the topics of organizational culture, knowledge creation, commitment, and knowledge sharing. Among these, there are agreements and disagreements around the different concepts, definitions and classification of these constructs. This chapter will define the concepts of the variables that will be used for this study. The purpose to provide a better understanding of the focus of the study. Today’s most relevant theories around the mentioned topics will be presented.
University Culture The Concept of University Culture
Organizational culture is a set of values and beliefs that are shared by the members of the organization. They are powerful forces for organizational effectiveness or organizational failure. In learning institutions, organizational culture describes the collective perceptions, beliefs and values of students (Debowsky, 2006). Authors have argued that individuals learn about the organizational culture since their first day in a new workplace.
Park et al. (as cited in Al-Alawi, Al-Marzooqi, & Mohammed, 2007) defined organizational culture as: “the shared, basic assumptions that an organization learnt while coping with the environment and solving problems of external adaptation and internal integration that are thought to new members as the correct way to solve those problems”
(p.24).
11
Denison, in his “Denison Organizational Culture Survey: Facilitator guide” refers to organizational culture as the fundamental values, beliefs, and principles that function as a foundation for an organization’s management system, as well as the set of management practices and behaviors that both illustrate and strengthen those basic principles (Denison
& Neale, 1999).
We can define organizational culture as the values and beliefs that are shared by the members of the organization.
Definitions of Organizational Culture
Different researchers have provided similar definitions of organizational culture.
Most of them coincide that organizational culture is a set of values and beliefs that are shared by the members of an organization. These values and beliefs are considered as powerful forces that will determine organizational success or failure (Sashkin &
Rosenbach, 2002).
Organizational culture is also defined in (Delobbe, Haccoun, & Vanderberghe, 2015) as a set of cognitions shared by members of a social unit. It could also be considered as a structure of common values and beliefs that results in norms and behaviors and create an organizational way of living.
Dimensions of Organizational Culture
To measure the variables of this study, four core dimensions of organizational culture elaborated by Dr. Talcott Parsons will be used. The four dimensions are:
managing change, achieving goals, coordinating teamwork, and building a strong culture.
12
Dr. Parsons argued that these four dimensions are fundamental functions for all organizations if they are to subsist for any significant length of time.
Managing change.
Managing change points to how well the organization is able to adapt and effectively deal with changes in its environment (Sashkin & Rosenbach, 2002).
Achieving goals.
Achieving goals is defined as the accomplishment of the goals and objectives of the organization (Sashkin & Rosenbach, 2002). Organizations with a clear focus on explicit goals have proven to have a strong relationship with successful achievements.
Coordinated teamwork.
An important factor for the long-term organizational survival is the coordinated teamwork. It is important for the long-term survival of the organization that the efforts of individuals and groups within the organization are tied together so that people’s work efforts effectively fit together (Sashkin & Rosenbach, 2002).
Cultural strength.
A strong culture in the organization is defined by Sashkin and Rosenbach (2002) as when a certain group of values and beliefs are strongly shared by most of the organization’s members.
13
Knowledge Sharing The Concept of Knowledge Sharing
Knowledge is defined in Nonaka (1996) as a “meaningful set of information that constitutes a justified true belief and/or and embodied technical skill” (Nonaka, Umemoto
& Senoo, 1996). Knowledge sharing can occur through different situations and media such as meetings, conversations, databases etc. Knowledge sharing can also be referred to as the delivery of task information and know-how to help others and to collaborate with others to develop new ideas, solve problems, etc. (Wang & Noe, 2010). There is no specific consensus on whether knowledge sharing and knowledge transfer are the same, however, many researchers use them interchangeably. Furthermore, researchers have also noted that the intention to share the knowledge is derived from the willingness to share (Oye, Mazleena, & Noorminshah, 2011).
Knowledge sharing is the willingness to interchange information with the other members of one’s organization. Knowledge exists and its shared at different levels in the organization (Ipe, 2003).
Knowledge internalization refers to the degree to which a recipient obtains ownership of, commitment to, and satisfaction with the transferred knowledge (Cummings, 2003). Commitment is an important aspect of knowledge internalization.
The strength of an individual’s identification and ongoing involvement with the knowledge can influence the degree to which the recipient puts the knowledge into use.
Achieving knowledge commitment is another important element in knowledge internalization. Once individuals develop knowledge commitment they will recognize the
14
value of the knowledge, develop competency in using the knowledge and be willing to make an extra effort to work with the knowledge.
Definition of Knowledge sharing
Sethumadhavan (2007) as cited in (Faisal, Rasheedb, Habibac, & Shahzad, 2013) defines knowledge sharing as “a systematic process to create, acquire, synthesize, learn, share and use knowledge and experience to achieve organizational goal. All this knowledge can be found in people`s mind or stored in paper in cabinets and/or stored in electronic form”. Students in universities have a wide range of sources from where they can find and access knowledge, most notably professors, peers, books and electronic databases and websites. Many discussions on whether knowledge sharing and knowledge transfer definitions overlap exist and the terms are often used interchangeably (Paulin &
Suneson, 2012).
Researchers have argued that knowledge sharing is unnatural, meaning that people will not share their knowledge just because they think their information is important and valuable. Therefore, it is paramount that rather than just encouraging and mandating knowledge sharing professors in universities should foster the student’s motivation to share the knowledge (Bock & Kim, 2001). Other studies also suggest that when the highest priority is given to the interests of the organization and of their community people tend to shy away from contributing knowledge. In contrast to this, when knowledge is viewed as a public good in the organization, knowledge will flow easily (Ardichvili, Page
& Wentling, 2003). Bock et al. (2005) also suggested that attitudes toward and subjective
15
norms with regard to knowledge sharing as well as organizational climate affects individuals intentions to share knowledge.
Table 2.1.
Definitions of Knowledge Sharing
Definition Source Year
The exchange of knowledge between and among individuals, and within and among teams,
organizational units, and organizations.
Paulin and Suneson
2012, p. 83
The relative strength of an individual’s identification with, and involvement in a particular organization.
Mowday et al.
1979, p. 226
Knowledge sharing is “a process, in which
knowledge is being transferred through a medium, from a knowledge contributor to a knowledge consumer”
De Jong 2010, p.xiii
Another definition of knowledge sharing is “a process, in which knowledge is being transferred through a medium, from a knowledge contributor to a knowledge consumer”
(de Jong, 2010). This process can be initiated by either the knowledge contributor or the knowledge consumer (Mowday, Steers, & Porter, 1979).
Al-Alawi, Al-Marzooqi, & Mohammed (2007) emphasized:
“While traditional knowledge management emphasis was placed on technology or the ability to build systems that efficiently process and
16
leverage knowledge, the new model of knowledge management involves people and actions. It aims at creating an environment where power equals sharing knowledge rather than keeping it” (p.24).
People need to actively share, discuss their practices and see leaders who act as role models by sharing their knowledge (Debowsky, 2006). Therefore, university staff, professors, and students must display a culture of knowledge sharing and be role models of knowledge sharing for other students in their learning institutions. Knowledge sharing activities seem to be useful only when all employees need to work with and apply at least most of the knowledge they receive (Riege, 2005). Other studies also suggest that knowledge sharing is influenced by the commitment to the organization (Van den Hooff
& de Rider, 2004); however in this study we will test the influence of knowledge sharing on the commitment to the organization.
Dimensions of Knowledge Sharing
Several dimension of knowledge sharing will be measured in this study. After the literature review, the authors chose 6 dimensions which are: a culture of trust, a culture of collaboration, a team culture, a cooperation culture, and a culture of mutual concern.
This six dimensions fit the educational context well and are defined as follows:
Culture of trust.
Most of the literature suggests that people working together for a long period of time encourages and fosters knowledge sharing (Levin, Cross, Abraham, & Lesser, 2016).
Many researchers point out that strong ties between people also help to facilitate
17
knowledge sharing. Together with this, a study from the IMB Institute for Knowledge-Based Organizations showed that trust is the link between this strong ties and knowledge sharing. People who have been working together for a long time but at the same time trust each other are more likely to share knowledge between them. In the case of students, since they sometimes do not have the opportunity to spend long time working together, it is vital that professors aid in creating and encouraging a culture of trust among students to promote more effective knowledge sharing. Trust is defined as a psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based upon positive expectations of the intentions or behavior of another (Oye, Mazleena, & Noorminshah, 2011).
Trust is also defined as a set of positive expectations that people have about the competence and reliability of fellow peers as well as within an organization (Augustine, 2013). Yet another definition is “one’s expectations, assumptions or beliefs about the likelihood that another’s future actions will be beneficial, favorable or at least not detrimental to one’s interest” (Robinson, 1996). Related to this, some researchers consider lack of trust to be detrimental to the knowledge sharing processes in an organization.
Culture of collaboration.
A collaborative culture fosters trust within the workplace, encourages knowledge sharing not only in words but also actions, promotes creativity, and develops innovative thinking (Augustine, 2013). Collaboration also helps to improve and to open communication channels throughout the organization. Collaboration is defined by Lee &
18
Choi, (2003) as the degree to which people in a group actively help each other in the workplace.
Team culture.
Team culture is important for knowledge sharing in an organization. (Hu, Horng, &
Sun, 2009) refers to team culture as a simplified set of rules, norms, expectations, and roles that members from a team share inside their organization.
Culture of cooperation.
Cooperation is defined as the willingness of the members of an organization to contribute to the successful completion of the different tasks in the organization (Chatman
& Barsade, 1995). Cooperation is the members’ willful attitude towards working with another member even when this is not a requirement. Cooperation is beneficial for the knowledge sharing inside the university and any organization because it involves a collective use of knowledge shared in the organization to achieve the common goals (Khanna & Gulatu, 1998).
Culture of mutual concern.
Communities or cultures are considered to be established for sharing resources, establishing relationships and trading goods or services (Augustine, 2013). A culture of mutual concern is defined as the intention of one person to care about the others well-being (Anderson & Narus, 1990). As there must be willingness and motivation to share knowledge, it is important to have a culture of mutual concerns. It is believed that only those who are concerned about the others will be willing to share knowledge.
19 Culture of asking questions.
Learning institutions should provide its members the opportunity to expand their competency and reach desired outcomes (Augustine, 2013). A culture of asking questions is significant in this study due to its importance in the expansion of an organization’s capacity to create its future. Asking questions are described as people’s gain of productive reasoning skills to express their views, and capacity to listen and inquire into others’ point of view.
Knowledge Creation The Concept of Knowledge Creation
Schools are recognized as knowledge-building communities in which teachers and students work to build new knowledge and understanding (Paavola & Hakkarainen, 2005).
The knowledge creation approach becomes practically relevant when specific tools that help individuals and their communities jointly work for the advancement of their knowledge are available. Practices of working innovatively with knowledge become accessible to school children when they are given advanced tools for creating and building knowledge based on the new information and communication technologies.
An important characteristic of all models of knowledge creation is that the agent of knowledge creation is not an isolated individual but is either an individual embedded in a community or the community itself.
20
Definitions of Knowledge Creation
The literature proposes that knowledge creation has emerged from different contexts and communities. The organizational knowledge creation model (Nonaka, Byosiere, Borucki, & Kono, 1994) proposes that there are four types of knowledge creation modes:
socialization, externalization, combination and internalization. These will constitute the focus areas of this study. Nonaka’s theory of knowledge creation is considered one of the most influential models in knowledge strategy literature (Yang, Fang, & Lin, 2010).
Table 2.2.
Definitions of Knowledge Creation
Definition Source Year
Knowledge creation is a dynamic human process of justifying a personal belief toward the truth and/or embodying a technical skill through practice.
Nonaka, Umemoto and Senoo
1996, p.205
Organizational knowledge creation is the capability of a company to create new knowledge, spread it throughout the organizations and embody it in products, services, and systems.
Yang, Fang and Lin
2010, p.
231
Knowledge creation is a continuous, self-transcending process through which one transcends the boundary of the old self into a new self by acquiring a new context, a new view of the world and new knowledge.
Nonaka, Toyama and Konno
2000, p. 8
21
Knowledge creation is an important part of the education agenda. The conversion of late advancement in the information economy and in learning sciences focuses on the criticality of increasing learning creation capability among the young in setting them up to be self-confident and contributing nationals of tomorrow.
The process of organizational knowledge creation involves the sharing of experiences and ideas from coworkers, organizing ideas and transferring knowledge through actions.
Chee Tan, So and Yeo argue that to transform an educational institution into a knowledge-building organization, vertical transformation is required, which entails knowledge creation practices that pervade throughout various levels of the organization.
Knowledge-building communities in learning institution require not only efforts from students, but also a deep involvement of teachers and staff.
Dimensions of Knowledge Creation
The process of knowledge conversion has four modes that are called the SECI model of knowledge creation: Socialization, Externalization, Combination and Internalization.
In this study they will be used as the indicators for measuring knowledge creation. They are defined as follows:
Socialization.
Socialization is recognized a process where common tacit knowledge is created through shared experiences. It’s a process of converting the new tacit knowledge through shared experiences (García-Muiña, Martín de Castro, & López Sáez, 2002).
22 Externalization.
Externalization is a process in which tacit knowledge is articulated into such explicit knowledge as concepts and/or diagrams. This process often uses metaphors, analogies, and sketches.
Combination.
The process of assembling the new and existing explicit knowledge into a systemic knowledge is known as the combination process. It’s in this mode that newly-created knowledge should be combined with existing explicit knowledge to become something tangible.
Internalization.
The internalization process is where explicit knowledge is embodied into tacit, operational knowledge such as know-how.
The knowledge spiral
The knowledge spiral is a process in which the organizational knowledge is created by a spiral that goes across the four modes of knowledge conversion. In this process the knowledge spiral usually starts from the socialization mode, though it can also start from any other mode. The knowledge spiral can also be visualized from other dimensions across the levels of knowledge creating entities such as individuals, groups, an organization, and collaborating organizations. For this study, the knowledge spiral will be applied to students, which will be evaluated as individuals and as groups.
23
The belief that knowledge is created and transformed ‘spirally’ from the individual level to the organizational level and finally between organizations is widely accepted and recognized by many researchers, because this proposition focuses on activities surrounding the creation of knowledge and not only on knowledge itself (Nonaka &
Takeuchi, 1995).
Figure 2.1. The knowledge spiral. Adapted from “The Knowledge Creating Company:
How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation”, by Nonaka, I., &
Takeuchi, H., 1995, New York: Oxford University Press, p. 71. Copyright 1995 by Oxford University Press, Inc.
24
Commitment The concept of Commitment
Organizational commitment has been a topic of increasing interest for researchers since the 1970’s. Until now there are no signs that the interest is diminishing. Meyer and Allen are considered pioneers in the field, however, other researchers have also made important contributions to the understanding of this topic (Mowday R.T., 1998).
Porter and Smith defined the concept of commitment as the strong desire of a person to remain as a member of a particular organization, with a willingness to exert high levels of efforts on behalf of the organization, and with a definite belief in the acceptance of the values of the organization.
Mowday, Porter, and Dubin (1974) found that highly committed employees are more likely to perform better than employees who are not committed. That, and other recent studies, suggest that commitment is a better predictor of performance than satisfaction.
Since commitment can be considered to better determine the performance of students and better predict students’ dropping out of university, it will be a focus area of this thesis.
However, since this study is focused on educational, we will change the term organizational commitment to commitment, to have it fit the study context better.
Commitment is also described by Becker (1960) as a disposition to maintain membership in the organization as a result of an accumulation of activities that are of value that the individual has invested in the organization and that can be lost if the individual discontinues in the organization.
25
The term commitment has also been used to describe different situations as an affective attachment to the organization which is not linked to the purely instrumental worth of the relationship (Buchanan, 1974).
Definition of Commitment
Early in 1979, Porter defined commitment as “the relative strength of an individual`s identification with and involvement in a particular organization”.
The model of organizational commitment proposed by Meyer in 2002 is one of the models that dominates organizational commitment research. He argued that commitment is experienced by the employee by three simultaneous mindsets encompassing affective commitment, normative commitment and continuance commitment (Jaros, 2007).
Commitment is also referred to as the loyalty and integrity to an organization, related to the acceptance of the goals and values of the organization, the employees’ job satisfaction with the organization or the inclination to cooperate with the organization (Nosratabadi, Khedry, & Parvaneh, 2015). For the purposes of this study, commitment of students will be defined as the loyalty and integrity to the institution (university, school) which is related to the acceptance of the goals and values of the institution, the students’
satisfaction with their university and their desire to cooperate with the institution. The concept of commitment will be derived from the concept of organizational commitment.
There is a relationship between some factors of student satisfaction and student loyalty. School administration, academic activities, interpersonal relationships and physical facilities have a positive influence on student loyalty, being school