Organizational Knowledge Management: A Contingency Perspective

Prior research examines several knowledge management processes, considering each as universally appropriate. Instead, we propose that the context influences the suitability of a knowledge management process. We develop a contingency framework, including two attributes of the organizational subunit's tasks: process or content orientation, and focused or broad domain, and links knowledge management processes to them: internalization for focused, process-oriented tasks; externalization for focused, content-oriented tasks; combination for broad, content-oriented tasks; and socialization for broad, process-oriented tasks. The empirical research was done at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), based on several interviews and survey data from 159 individuals across 8 subunits. The results supported the contingency framework. All the knowledge management processes except externalization had a positive impact in the expected cell. At the overall level, combination and externalization, but not internalization and socialization, affect knowledge satisfaction. Some implications for practice and research are identified.

[1]  P. Drucker.  Post-Capitalist Society , 1993 .

[2]  G. Krogh,et al.  Future Research into Knowledge Management , 1998 .

[3]  Rodrigo Magalhaes.  Organizational Knowledge and Learning , 1998 .

[4]  S. Winter,et al.  An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change.by Richard R. Nelson; Sidney G. Winter , 1987 .

[5]  F. Bosch,et al.  Managing Organizational Knowledge Integration in the Emerging Multimedia Complex , 1999 .

[6]  E. L. Cox,et al.  Investigating The Contradictions In Knowledge Management , 1998 .

[7]  James C. Anderson,et al.  STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING IN PRACTICE: A REVIEW AND RECOMMENDED TWO-STEP APPROACH , 1988 .

[8]  Ramkrishnan V. Tenkasi,et al.  P ERSPECTIVE M AKING AND P ERSPECTIVE T AKING IN C OMMUNITIES OF K NOWING , 2000 .

[9]  R. Grant.  Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm,” Strategic Management Journal (17), pp. , 1996 .

[10]  J. Walsh.  Managerial and Organizational Cognition: Notes from a Trip Down Memory Lane , 1995 .

[11]  Dorothy E. Leidner,et al.  Knowledge Management Systems: Issues, Challenges, and Benefits , 1999, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[12]  E. Hippel.  Sticky Information and the Locus of Problem Solving: Implications for Innovation , 1994 .

[13]  C. Prahalad,et al.  The Core Competence of the Corporation , 1990 .

[14]  Amalya L. Oliver,et al.  Social Networks, Learning, and Flexibility: Sourcing Scientific Knowledge in New Biotechnology Firms , 1994 .

[15]  P. Lawrence,et al.  Organization and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration , 1967 .

[16]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage , 1998 .

[17]  K. Weick,et al.  Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. , 1993 .

[18]  C. Fiol.  Consensus, diversity, and learning in organizations. , 1994 .

[19]  P. Bentler,et al.  Significance Tests and Goodness of Fit in the Analysis of Covariance Structures , 1980 .

[20]  C. P. Goodman,et al.  The Tacit Dimension , 2003 .

[21]  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 .

[22]  Eugene F. Stone,et al.  Clarifying some controversial issues surrounding statistical procedures for detecting moderator variables: Empirical evidence and related matters. , 1989 .

[23]  Vivek Choudhury,et al.  Information Specificity and Environmental Scanning: An Economic Perspective , 1997, MIS Q..

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

[25]  I. Nonaka,et al.  The Concept of “Ba”: Building a Foundation for Knowledge Creation , 1998 .

[26]  B. Kogut,et al.  Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology , 1992 .

[27]  H. Tsoukas.  The firm as a distributed knowledge system : A constructionist approach , 1996 .

[28]  I. Nonaka.  A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation , 1994 .

[29]  Michael H. Zack,et al.  Managing Codified Knowledge , 1999 .

[30]  R. Grant.  Chapter 8 – Prospering in Dynamically-Competitive Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration , 1999 .

[31]  J. Spender.  Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm , 1996 .

[32]  G. Krogh,et al.  A perspective on knowledge, competence and strategy , 1995 .

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

[34]  S. Snell,et al.  Strategic Compensation for Integrated Manufacturing: The Moderating Effects of Jobs and Organizational Inertia , 1994 .

[35]  G. Pisano.  Knowledge Integration and the Locus of Learning: An Empirical Analysis , 1994 .

[36]  M. J. Earl,et al.  What Is a Chief Knowledge Officer , 1999 .

[37]  G. Krogh,et al.  Knowing in Firms: Understanding, Managing, and Measuring Knowledge , 1999 .

[38]  I. Nonaka,et al.  Organizational Capabilities in Product Development of Japanese Firms: a Conceptual Framework and Empirical Findings , 1998 .

[39]  Raimo Nurmi,et al.  Knowledge-intensive firms , 1998 .

[40]  James C. Anderson,et al.  Monte Carlo Evaluations of Goodness of Fit Indices for Structural Equation Models , 1992 .

[41]  John R. Anderson,et al.  The Transfer of Cognitive Skill , 1989 .

[42]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  The Effectiveness of Nominal, Delphi, and Interacting Group Decision Making Processes , 1974 .

[43]  M. Braga,et al.  Exploratory Data Analysis , 2018, Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining. 2nd Ed..

[44]  S. Albers,et al.  Crisis Construction and Organizational Learning: Capability Building in Catching-Up at Hyundai Motor , 1998 .

[45]  K. R. Conner,et al.  A Resource-Based Theory of the Firm: Knowledge Versus Opportunism , 1996 .

[46]  Dan Holtshouse.  Knowledge Research Issues , 1998 .