Supporting Technologies and Organizational Practices for the Transfer of Knowledge in Virtual Environments
A field study of a global science/technology company provides evidence of the value of both organizational practices and technology tools for supporting knowledge attainment (the combined tacit and explicit knowledge gained in a focal area – in this study we focus on product knowledge attainment) in virtual environments. We present a three-dimensional typology of knowledge management systems. Method of input, form of content, and how the users accrue the benefit of the knowledge help us to argue that organizational practices and technological tools will have independent positive effects on user knowledge attainment. We find attendance at face-to-face community of practice meetings, use of searchable archives, video-on-demand, and full-text search of video-on-demand all positively predict knowledge attainment. We suggest that organizations develop both organizational practices and technical supports for knowledge transfer. An interview with the video-on-demand vendor gives us the context to discuss issues for the support of tacit knowledge in more virtual environments as well as issues of expertise as it relates to support for formal and informal learning.
KeywordsVirtual work virtual teams knowledge management knowledge transfer video-on-demand communities of practice
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Brown, J. S. and P. Duguid. (1991). “Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation”, Organization Science 2(1), 40–57.Google Scholar
- Brown, J. S. and P. Duguid. (2000). The Social Life of Information. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.Google Scholar
- Cadiz, D., T.L. Griffith, and J.E. Sawyer. (2005). Developing and Validating Field Measurement Scales for Absorptive Capacity and Experienced Community of Practice. (Manuscript under review.)Google Scholar
- Cross, R. and L. Baird. (2000). “Technology is Not Enough: Improving Performance by Building Organizational Memory”, Sloan Management Review 41(3), 69–78.Google Scholar
- Davenport, T. H. and J. Glaser. (2002). “Just-In-Time Delivery Comes to Knowledge Management”, Harvard Business Review July, 5–9.Google Scholar
- Davenport, T. H. and L. Prusak. (1998). Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.Google Scholar
- DeSanctis, G. and M.S. Poole. (1994). “Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory”, Organization Science 5(2), 121–147.Google Scholar
- Finholt, T. A., L. Sproull, and S. Kiesler. (2002). “Outsiders on the Inside: Sharing Know-How Across Space and Time”, In Hinds P., and Kiesler, S. (eds.), Distributed Work. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- Griffith, T. L., E.A. Mannix, and M.A. Neale. (2003a). “Conflict in Virtual Teams”, In Gibson, C. B., and Cohen, S. G. (eds.), Virtual teams that work. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 335–352.Google Scholar
- Griffith, T. L. and M.A. Neale. (2001). “Information Processing in Traditional, Hybrid, and Virtual Teams: From Nascent Knowledge to Transactive Memory”, In Staw, B. M., and Sutton, R. I. (eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior. JAI Press, Stamford, CT, 23, 379–421.Google Scholar
- Griffith, T. L., J.E. Sawyer, and M.A. Neale. (2003b). “Virtualness and Knowledge in Teams: Managing the Love Triangle of Organizations, Individuals, and Information Technology”, MIS Quarterly 27(2), 265–287.Google Scholar
- Hill, E. (2002). “Joint Inquiry Staff Statement, Eleanor Hill, Staff Director.” Retrieved May 20, 2005, from http://www.intelcenter.com/resource/2002/hill101702.pdf.
- IBM. (2005). “From Reengineering to Reinvention: The IBM Journey to Becoming an on Demand Business.” Retrieved May 15, 2005, from http://www-306.ibm.com/software/success/cssdb.nsf/csp/jsts-6aht3u.
- Kankanhalli, A., B.C.Y. Tan, and K. Wei. (2005). “Contributing Knowledge to Electronic Knowledge Repositories: An Empirical Investigation”, MIS Quarterly 29(1), 113–143.Google Scholar
- Leonard, D. and S. Sensiper. (1998). “The Role of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation”, California Management Review 40(3), 112–132.Google Scholar
- Markus, M. L. (2001). “Towards a Theory of Knowledge Reuse: Types of Knowledge Reuse Situations and Factors in Reuse Success”, Journal of Management Information Systems 18(1), 57–93.Google Scholar
- Microsoft. (2005, March 10, 2005). “Microsoft, Groove Networks to Combine Forces to Create Anytime, Anywhere Collaboration.” Retrieved May 11, 2005, from http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2005/ mar05/03-10GrooveQA.asp.
- O'Dell, C. and C.J. Grayson. (1998). “If Only We Knew What We Know: Identification and Transfer of Internal Best Practices”, California Management Review 40(3), 154–174.Google Scholar
- Orr, J. E. (1996). Talking About Machines: An Ethnography of a Modern Job. ILR Press, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
- Polanyi, M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension. Doubleday, New York.Google Scholar
- Ryle, G. (1949). The Concept of Mind. Hutchinson, London.Google Scholar
- Spender, J. C. (1996). “Making Knowledge the Basis of a Dynamic Theory of the Firm”, Strategic Management Journal 17(10), 45–62.Google Scholar
- Wasko, M. M. and S. Faraj. (2005). “Why Should I Share? Examining Social Capital and Knowledge Contribution in Electronic Networks of Practice”, MIS Quarterly 29(1), 35–57.Google Scholar
- Wegner, D. (1986). “Transactive Memory: A Contemporary Analysis of the Group Mind”, In Mullen, G. and Goethals, G. (eds.), Theories of Group Behavior. Springer-Verlag, New York, 185–208.Google Scholar
- Weick, K. E. (1979). The Social Psychology of Organizing. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.Google Scholar
- Wenger, E., R. McDermott, and W.M. Snyder. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.Google Scholar