Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 76, Issue 17, pp 17923–17936 | Cite as

How different connectivity patterns of individuals within an organization can speed up organizational learning

  • Somayeh KoohborfardhaghighiEmail author
  • Dae Bum Lee
  • Juntae KimEmail author


Knowledge sharing within a cooperative organization is an important issue since the power of its outcome has been the principal source of competitive advantage over the competitors in the market. However, without a proper collective knowledge management, its utilization as a strategic weapon or competitive advantage becomes difficult and inefficient. From an organizational perspective, the most important aspect of knowledge management is to transfer knowledge. In this regards, organizations must adopt structures that allow them to create and transfer more knowledge. Organizational communication structure affects the nature of human interactions and information flow which in its own turn can lead to a competitive advantage in the knowledge economy. However, in addition to that, social relationships between individuals in an organization can also be utilized to produce positive returns. In this article we emphasize the role of individual structural importance within an organizational informal communication structure as a mechanism for knowledge flow and speeding up organizational learning. Our experimental results indicate the fact that structural position of individuals within their informal communication networks can help the network members to have a better access to ongoing information exchange processes in the organization. The results of our analyses also show that organizational learning through an informal communication network of people in the form of scale-free connectivity pattern is faster comparing to the small-world connectivity style.


Knowledge management system Knowledge sharing Centrality measures Informal communication network topology Organizational learning Agent-based modeling 



This research has been funded by the “Leaders Industry-University Cooperation” Project, supported by the Ministry of Education.


  1. 1.
    Alazmi M, Zairi M (2003) Knowledge management critical success factors. Total Qual Manag Bus Excell 14(2):199–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Argote L, Greve H (2007) A behavioral theory of the firm—40 years and counting: introduction and impact. Organ Sci 18(3):337–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Argyris C, Schön D (1978) Organizational learning: a theory of action perspective. Addison-Wesley, Reading MAGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Axley SR (2000) Communicating change: questions to consider. Indust Manag 42(4):18–22Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barabási A-L, Albert R (1999) Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science 286:509–512MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barua A, Ravindran S, Whinston AB (2007) Enabling information sharing within organizations. Inf Technol Manag 8(1):31–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Berkhin P (2005) A survey on pagerank computing. Internet Math 2(1):73–120MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bonacich P (1972) Factoring and weighting approaches to status scores and clique identification. J Math Sociol 2(1):113–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bonacich P, Lloyd P (2001) Eigenvector-like measures of centrality for asymmetric relations. Soc Networks 23(3):191–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bontis N, Crossan MM, Hulland J (2002) Managing an organizational learning system by aligning stocks and flows. J Manag Stud 39(4):437–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brandes U (2001) A faster algorithm for betweenness centrality*. J Math Sociol 25(2):163–177CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cross RL, Parker A (2004) The hidden power of social networks: Understanding how work really gets done in organizations. Harvard Business PressGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Crosson MM, Bedrow I (2003) Organizational learning and strategic renewal. Strategic Manag J 24:1087–1105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fang C, Lee J, Schilling MA (2010) Balancing exploration and exploitation through structural design: the isolation of subgroups and organizational learning. Organ Sci 21(3):625–642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fleming L (2001) Recombinant uncertainty in technological search. Manag Sci 47(1):117–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Freeman L, Borgatti SP, White DR (1991) Centrality in valued graphs: a measure of betweenness based on network flow. Soc Netw 13(2):141–154MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gupta AK, Smith KG, Shalley CE (2006) The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Acad Manag J 49:693–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Harshman EF, Harshman CL (1999) Communicating with employees: building on an ethical foundation. J Bus Ethics 19(1):3–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hasanali F (2002) Critical success factors of knowledge management. Knowledge Manag AdvanGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hatala JP (2006) Social network analysis in human resource development: a new methodology. Hum Resour Dev Rev 5(1):45–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hatala JP, George Lutta J (2009) Managing information sharing within an organizational setting: a social network perspective. Perform Improv Q 21(4):5–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jansen JJP, Van Den Bosch FAJ, Volberda HW (2006) Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Manag Sci 52(11):1661–1674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Johanson JE (2000) Formal structure and intra-organizational networks. an analysis in a combined social and health organization in Finland. Scand J Manag 16(3):249–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kane GC, Alavi M (2007) Information technology and organizational learning: an investigation of exploration and exploitation processes. Organ Sci 18(5):796–812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kim DH (1998) The link between individual and organizational learning. Sloan ManagGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kleinberg JM (1999) Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. J ACM 46(5):604–632MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Koohborfardhaghighi S, Kim J (2013) Using structural information for distributed recommendation in a social network. Appl Intell 38(2):255–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lee CY (2006) Correlations among centrality measures in complex networks. arXiv preprint physics/0605220Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lewin AY, Long CP, Carroll TN (1999) The coevolution of new organizational forms. Organ Sci 10(5):535–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Liebowitz J (2000) Building organizational intelligence: a knowledge management primer. CRC PressGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    March JG (1988) Decisions and organizations. Basil Backwell, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    March JG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ Sci 2(1):71–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    March JG (1994) Primer on decision making: how decisions happen. SimonandSchuster, ComGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Miller KD, Zhao M, Calantone RJ (2006) Adding interpersonal learning and tacit knowledge to March’s exploration-exploitation model. Acad Manag J 49:709–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Newman ME (2001) Scientific collaboration networks. II. shortest paths, weighted networks, and centrality. Phys Rev E 64(1):016132MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Nonaka I, Takeuchi H (1995) The knowledge creating company. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Page L, Brin S, Motwani R et al. (1999) The PageRank citation ranking: bringing order to the web. Technical Report, Stanford InfoLabGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pedler M, Burgogyne J, Boydell T (1997) The learning company: a strategy for sustainable development, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, LondonGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Senge P (1990) The fifth discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization. Doubleday, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Senge P (1996) Leading learning organizations. Train Dev 50(12):36–4Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Siggelkow N, Rivkin J (2005) Speed and search: designing organizations for turbulence and complexity. Organ Sci 16(2):101–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Warshall S (1962) A theorem on boolean matrices. J ACM (JACM) 9(1):11–12MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wasserman S, Faust K (1994) Social network analysis: methods and applications. Cambridge University Press, New YorkCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Watts DJ, Strogatz SH (1998) Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature 393:440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    White DR, Borgatti SP (1994) Betweenness centrality measures for directed graphs. Soc Netw 16(4):335–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wilensky U (1999) NetLogo: Center for connected learning and computer-based modeling. Northwestern University, Evanston, Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringDongguk UniversitySeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations