Assessing the universality of knowledge management practices

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to contribute to the emerging discussion on the contextualization of knowledge-oriented research by examining the universality of knowledge management (KM) practices. Knowledge is a firm’s most valuable resource, and KM, or the ability to leverage knowledge resources, constitutes the base for the firm’s competitive advantages. Design/methodology/approach A theorized ten-fold conceptualization of KM practices is tested on a sample of 622 firms from four countries (Finland, Spain, China and Russia). Confirmatory factor analysis and principal component analysis are used to test the applicability of the concept in various country contexts. Findings The findings provide interesting evidence of variation in the managerial assessment of KM practices among countries. This shows that KM practices are socially embedded phenomena, affected by the managers’ institutional and cultural contexts. Research limitations/implications Researchers and managers are advised to be mindful of the differences in terms of KM practices between the studied countries and to display a certain cultural sensitivity when approaching KM. Originality/value The paper is the first to examine the managerially assessed structure of KM practices in a cross-country context with multi-firm datasets. The results will help to determine the similarity of KM practices in four economically and culturally distinct countries. It also adds to the discussion about the potential national peculiarities of KM and provides a novel concept of KM practices, which is tested in a cross-national context. Thus, this study provides an outline for future KM studies and increases managerial understanding about the variety of value-creating KM practices.

Knowledge, Renewal and Flexibility: Exploratory Research in Family Firms

“…Along this vein, research on strategic renewal has also highlighted the importance of knowledge management (KM), which plays a crucial role in a firm's overall ability to renew its competencies, and, therefore, for adapt to environmental change and sustain competitive advantage (Pérez-Pérez and Hernández-Linares 2020; Lengnick-Hall and Inocencio-Gray 2013; Kianto 2011). KM can be defined as a set of activities, initiatives, and strategies that companies use to generate, store, transfer, and apply knowledge within and between organizations (Hussinki et al 2017;Calvo-Mora et al 2016;Jayasingam et al 2013;Zack et al 2009) under the influence of their history, people, interests, and actions that have been institutionalized in the organizations (Kostova 1999). The newer strategic renewal literature recognizes KM as a synergistic link/capability of strategic flexibility (Lin and Wu 2014; Bamel and Bamel 2018), because cross-functional exchange of knowledge helps organizations quickly understand the changing environment, allowing the firm to plan organizational priorities and actions accordingly (Fernández-Pérez et al 2013).…”

Measuring Knowledge Management Capability Condition on the Support of Marine and Fishery Resources Utilisation

“…For instance, a hierarchical organisational structure may be less efficient in disseminating information compared to cross-functional teams (Hussinki et al, 2017). Empirical studies have shown that supports from senior management, employee empowerment, and power decentralisation are positively correlated to the successful implementation of knowledge management systems (Hussinki et al, 2017;Yang and chen, 2007).…”

“…Knowledge represents a cumulative body of beliefs (Berkes et al, 2007), intellectual development (Hussinki et al, 2017), and cultural evolution (Green and Raygorodetsky, 2010). Knowledge can exists in various forms, including formal, informal, tacit, explicit, local, scientific, etc.…”

“…The following step --design and develop --revolves around determining capacity objective and expected outcomes, assembling elements of exchange, and setting measurement goals. Since knowledge is socially developed and shared, structures that support mutual exchange of information is an enabler to knowledge management practices (Hussinki et al, 2017;Kumar and Leonard, 2012;Mabudafhasi, 2002). The next step --implementation --is concerned with project management and/or fine-tuning of the knowledge management practices and agenda.…”

“…Studies have shown that knowledge management practices are often affected by the cultural and institutional contexts (Hussinki et al, 2017). However, limited work has been done in analysing the knowledge management initiatives in rural Indonesian coastal regions.…”