No abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The use of knowledge in organizations is largely a discretionary behavior that can be encouraged but not demanded. As such, the firm can only attempt to provide the right conditions for employees to endorse the role of knowledge workers. The purpose of this paper is to examine how the organization of the firm affects knowledge management.Design/methodology/approach -This research proposes a new framework showing the prescriptive role of organizational characteristics onto knowledge management (KM) initiatives. Based on this framework, data were generated from nine semi-structured interviews conducted in the American, British and Japanese offices of a major Japanese pharmaceutical company, using a Boolean approach and qualitative content analysis.Findings -Organizational characteristics, specifically -structure, membership, relationship, and strategy affect KM, namely -knowledge acquisition, storage, diffusion, and application respectively.Research limitations/implications -Even though the departments of each local office under study were matched in terms of activity, the size of their own domestic market made comparisons sometimes challenging.Practical implications -This research suggests that practitioners can increase the yield of KM when integrated upstream into the elementary business processes rather than when left voluntary.Originality/value -This paper uncovers a possible link between the firm's organizational characteristics and KM, and the new practical framework can be useful to both scholars and practitioners.

No abstract

Purpose-The purpose of this paper is to confirm quantitatively the previous finding that organizational characteristics influence knowledge management, and to assess whether the national culture of knowledge workers equally affects the management of knowledge. Design/methodology/approach-Based on data gathered from a questionnaire survey of a Japanese pharmaceutical company's 14 foreign subsidiaries, the effects of organizational characteristics and national culture on knowledge management were tested using multiple regression analysis. Findings-Although organizational characteristics and national culture were found to affect knowledge management, the data showed organizational characteristics to be a stronger prescriptive factor compared with national culture. Research limitations/implications-Because this research centered on a single company in the pharmaceutical industry, future research should attempt to confirm the validity of this framework in other industries. Practical implications-Changes in organizational characteristics, such as structure and relationship in particular, rather than adjustments in the composition of employees' nationalities, will have a stronger impact on the resulting knowledge management. Originality/value-This framework linking organizational characteristics and national culture to knowledge management had received a first justification using a case study approach with a qualitative comparative method and has now been confirmed with a quantitative approach. Among the predictors of knowledge management beyond the realm of deliberate measures within the firm, the data show that organizational characteristics exert a stronger influence than national culture.

Knowledge has been long cited as a strategic asset and a source of competitive advantage for organizations. However, the creation of knowledge is a complex process that is influenced by several factors beyond the typical practice of knowledge management (KM). In this research, we assess the effects of leadership, Ba (shared context in motion), organizational culture, organizational control, and work style on KM defined in terms of the SECI process of socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization. On the basis of data gathered from a questionnaire survey of a Japanese pharmaceutical company and its subsidiaries in the United States, France, and China, we compare how the aforementioned organizational factors influence the processes of KM in these organizations. The results show that organizational factors affect KM practices differently in each of the targeted countries, and suggest that KM activities need to be tailored to the organizational idiosyncrasies of each local office, without betraying the global vision of the corporation.

Knowledge has been long cited as a strategic asset and a source of competitive advantage for organizations. However, the creation of knowledge is a complex process that is influenced by several factors beyond the typical practice of knowledge management. In this research, we assess the effects of leadership, Ba (shared context in motion), organizational culture, organizational control and work style on knowledge management defined in terms of the SECI process of socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization. Based on data gathered from a questionnaire survey of a Japanese pharmaceutical company and its subsidiaries in the United States, France, and China, we compare how the aforementioned organizational factors influence the processes of knowledge management in these organizations. The results show that organizational factors affect knowledge management practices differently in each of the targeted countries, and suggest that knowledge management activities need to be tailored to the organizational idiosyncrasies of each local office, without betraying the global vision of the corporation.

PurposeThis paper intends to propose an “ontological shift SECI model” as a tool to diagnose organizations in the context of knowledge creation, and thereby support the management of knowledge creation‐related projects.Design/methodology/approachThis research's hypothesis is based on existing knowledge creation theories and is tested using a case study methodology. The authors first examine the model in a completed project in order to test its validity and second, apply it in Company A's software project to demonstrate its feasibility and usefulness.FindingsIn any given project, knowledge creation activities occur in various ontological entities – individual, group, organization or social‐network. The diagnosis tool, which proved to be useful in this paper, traces such ontological shifts and makes visible all key activities of a knowledge creation project. These activities form an “ontological shift model” and trace an “activity map” which exposes underlying enablers and barriers, and provides viable solutions for improvement.Research limitations/implicationsTo carry out the analysis, the key activities identified in the knowledge creation‐related project have to be described in detail according to their ontological and epistemological dimensions. However, such description is complex and requires specialized expertise in knowledge creation and rich knowledge of the ongoing project.Practical implicationsThe tool proved useful for supporting project managers in diagnosing their project's knowledge creation shortcomings. When knowledge creation breakdowns occur in a project, the tool can act as a navigator and uncover alternatives to continue the knowledge‐creating spiral.Originality/valueKnowledge creation process is difficult to manage because of its cause ambiguity and intangibility. What is a knowledge creation activity? And why? This model makes explicit experienced managers' tacit solutions to knowledge creation problems. It can make organizational knowledge creation activities visible and therefore manageable for junior staff, outside consultants and even future software modeling.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to provide an example of how an apparently incongruent combination of organizational variables can have a positive effect on innovation through knowledge creation.Design/methodology/approachBased on previous theory, four original hypotheses were developed and later tested with empirical data collected from 125 research and development organizations in Japan, using analysis of variance and regression analysis.FindingsManagerial influences and resources can significantly interact to generate a combined impact on the knowledge creation capability of organizations, which in turn is positively associated with their innovation performance. In particular, long‐term managerial influences were found to have a greater impact on knowledge creation when combined with knowledge‐exploitation resources. Synthesizing short‐term managerial influences with knowledge‐exploitation resources is not better than combining them with exploration resources. This holds true especially for organizations of small and medium size.Research limitations/implicationsThis study only evaluates one case of many possibilities of seemingly antithetical combinations that can also have a beneficial impact in organizations. A larger and diverse sample, together with enhanced dimensions of managerial influences and organizational resources can make this study's implications much more universal.Practical implicationsAn ingenious and purposeful synthesis of organizational variables conventionally seen as incompatible and contradictory can in reality benefit organizational goals related to knowledge creation and innovation.Originality/valueThis study puts forward a unique framework and perspective highlighting the importance of combinatory effects and the management of duality in organizations.