Exploring knowledge transfer mechanisms: The case of a UK-based group within a high-tech global corporation

Knowledge transfer constitutes a strategic area of knowledge management research. However, little is known about the circumstances under which one particular mechanism is the most appropriate and the other one is not. To address these issues, the present study reports the result from a large multinational corporation involved in software development. This paper yields some very interesting findings concerning knowledge transfer mechanisms in a real-world setting, investigating why its software engineers employ one mechanism than the other. The findings imply that the three key variables, namely status, personal ties, and proximity, act as a powerful force in exploring an appropriate knowledge transfer mechanism, which based on case evidence leads to an interesting decision tree of media user for different transfer situations.

[1]  G. Day,et al.  Managerial Representations of Competitive Advantage , 1994 .

[2]  L. Argote,et al.  KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER: A BASIS FOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE IN FIRMS , 2000 .

[3]  Alice Lam.  Embedded Firms, Embedded Knowledge: Problems of Collaboration and Knowledge Transfer in Global Cooperative Ventures , 1997 .

[4]  I. Nonaka,et al.  Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge , 2003 .

[5]  S. Kiesler,et al.  The kindness of strangers: on the usefulness of electronic weak ties for technical advice , 1996 .

[6]  David L. Deeds,et al.  The impact of stocks and flows of organizational knowledge on firm performance: an empirical investigation of the biotechnology industry , 1999 .

[7]  Richard L. Daft,et al.  Message Equivocality, Media Selection, and Manager Performance: Implications for Information Systems , 1987, MIS Q..

[8]  Michael H. Zack,et al.  Developing a Knowledge Strategy , 1999 .

[9]  Alice Lam.  Tacit Knowledge, Organizational Learning and Societal Institutions: An Integrated Framework , 2000 .

[10]  R. Grant,et al.  A Knowledge Accessing Theory of Strategic Alliances , 2004 .

[11]  Isabelle Bouty.  Interpersonal and Interaction Influences on Informal Resource Exchanges Between R&D Researchers Across Organizational Boundaries , 2000 .

[12]  N. Carbonara.  Information and communication technology and geographical clusters: opportunities and spread , 2005 .

[13]  Bruce Roberts,et al.  Charlotte, North Carolina , 1958 .

[14]  R. Yin.  Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[15]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital and Value Creation: The Role of Intrafirm Networks , 1998 .

[16]  Andrew Parker,et al.  Knowing What We Know: Supporting Knowledge Creation and Sharing in Social Networks , 2001 .

[17]  N. A. D. Connell,et al.  It's tacit knowledge but not as we know it: redirecting the search for knowledge , 2003, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[18]  Jon-Arild Johannessen,et al.  Knowledge management and sustainable competitive advantages: The impact of dynamic contextual training , 2003, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[19]  H. Scarbrough.  Knowledge as Work: Conflicts in the Management of Knowledge Workers , 1999 .

[20]  Morten T. Hansen,et al.  The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits , 1999 .

[21]  Graeme Hutcheson,et al.  Advances in Doctoral Research in Management , 2008 .

[22]  Sajjad M. Jasimuddin.  KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER: A REVIEW TO EXPLORE CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS AND RESEARCH AGENDA , 2006 .

[23]  Morten T. Hansen,et al.  What's your strategy for managing knowledge? , 1999, Harvard business review.

[24]  V. Albino,et al.  KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER AND INTER-FIRM RELATIONSHIPS IN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS : THE ROLE OF THE LEADER FIRM , 1998 .

[25]  Thomas H. Davenport,et al.  Book review:Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Thomas H. Davenport and Laurence Prusak. Harvard Business School Press, 1998. $29.95US. ISBN 0‐87584‐655‐6 , 1998 .

[26]  Tua Haldin-Herrgård,et al.  Difficulties in diffusion of tacit knowledge in organizations , 2000 .