Preventing identity theft

Abstract

This document may differ from the final, published version of the research and has been made available online in accordance with publisher policies. To read and/or cite from the published version of the research, please visit the publisher's website (a subscription may be required.)Preventing identity theft: identifying major barriers to knowledge-sharing in online retail organisations Abstract Purpose -Knowledge-sharing (KS) for preventing identity theft has become a major challenge for organisations. The purpose of this paper is to fill a gap in the literature by investigating barriers to effective KS in preventing identity theft in online retail organisations. Design/methodology/approach -A framework was proposed based on a reconceptualisation and extension of the KS enablers framework (Chong et al., 2011). A qualitative case study research method was used for the data collection. Thirty-four semi-structured interviews were conducted in three online retail organisations in the UK. Findings -The findings suggest that the major barriers to effective KS for preventing identify theft in online retail organisations are: lack of leadership support; lack of employee willingness to share knowledge; lack of employee awareness of KS; inadequate learning opportunities; lack of trust in colleagues; insufficient information-sourcing opportunities and information and communications technology (ICT) infrastructure; a weak KS culture; lack of feedback on performance; and lack of job rotation. Practical implications -The research provides solutions for removing existing barriers to KS in preventing identity theft. This is important to reduce the number of cases of identity theft in the UK. Originality/value -This research extends knowledge of KS in a new context: preventing identity theft in online retail organisations. The proposed framework extends the KS enablers framework by identifying major barriers to KS in the context of preventing identity theft.

Conceptualisation of the Three-Dimensional Matrix of Collaborative Knowledge Barriers

“…Moreover, Yih-Tong et al [6] also point to at this level, the fear about the knowledge being inadequate or unimpressive. Maitlo et al [37] found in their study that the lack of opportunity for employees to learn about CK was one of the major barriers. In addition, job rotation is vital for the enhancing the knowledge of individuals [103] specially in jobs that involve dealing with changing conditions in a turbulent environment [37].…”

“…Trust [29,37] Fear, disbelief, apprehension, scepticism, copy and imitation, inflexibility and complexity Therefore, the main purpose of the present paper is to identify and frame the most significant barriers in the process of CKM in networked enterprises by using three aspects (i) perspectives in the CKM process; (ii) levels of CKM, including extra-CK level as an innovative concept, and (iii) barrier blocks that obstruct the CKM process.…”

“…The desire to save face can constitute a significant barrier to active participation in a CK process [7,77]. Moreover, the lack of awareness of knowledge management strategies and instruments [2] and the lack of employee willingness to share knowledge [37] are also important barriers to be considered, as Thoben et al [2] declare that only few companies have an explicit knowledge management strategy implemented, nor determined corresponding responsibilities.…”

“…This will lead to a complex management of the collaborative process. Moreover, the lack of executive support [4,10] and a weak CK culture [37] have been also identified as an important aspect that hinders the collaboration at this level.…”

“…The problems at the extra-collaborative level are very similar to the previous level, although confusing interests between supply chains and entities, and between some supply chains and others, will hinder collaboration from progressing in knowledge management. Moreover, the lack of feedback about the CK process results' performance has been identified as a critical barrier [37]. Feedback promotes critical reflection and brings new approaches [79] and although this barrier has been considered relevant in the Delphi study at this level, it is worth mentioning that this also affects to all the three dimensional matrix levels.…”