Organizational Design for Knowledge Exchange: The Hau-Ba Model

Chapter
Part of the Knowledge and Space book series (KNAS, volume 6)

Abstract

Knowledge transfer, especially its intrinsic nature, is central to research. A key concept for such inquiry has been ba (Japanese roughly meaning “place” in English), which in terms of knowledge transfer can be thought of as a shared space for knowledge creation. As defined by Nonaka and Konno (Calif Manag Rev, 40(3):40–54, 1998), ba underscores the importance of achieving dynamic interaction, but they do not analytically explain the modalities involved. The authors of this chapter outline an analytical framework for comprehending the sequence of knowledge transfer between members of professional communities and ask whether a system of global organizational knowledge exchange exists. This new topic in knowledge management raises the issue of organizational design and governance, with knowledge management possibly requiring the ability to provide appropriate spaces and animate communities of actors joined by a common spirit and identity. To link these dimensions, the authors develop a theoretical model, the hau-ba theory (Bounfour, Systèmes d’Information et Manag, 5(2):12–40, 2000; Connaissance, reconnaissance et “communautalisme” [Knowledge, recognition and “communautalism”]. In: Bounfour A (ed) Capital immatériel, connaissance et performance. L’Harmattan, Paris, pp 167–194, 2006), and explore its application to the foundry of a large aluminum company.

Keywords

Knowledge Transfer Tacit Knowledge Knowledge Exchange Psychological Contract Collective Memory 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Adams, J. S. (1963). Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 267–300.Google Scholar
  2. Alter, N. (2006). Sociologie du monde du travail [Sociology of the world of work]. Paris: Presse Universitaire de France.Google Scholar
  3. Balkin, D. B., & Richebé, N. (2007). A gift exchange perspective on organizational training. Human Resource Management Review, 17, 52–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berthon, B. (2003). Pour une approche globale du transfert de connaissance: une illustration empirique à l’intra-organisationnel [A global approach to knowledge transfer: An empirical intraorganizational case]. Actes de Congrès de la XIIème Conférence de l’A.I.M.S., 3−6 June, Les Côtes de Carthage.Google Scholar
  5. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Bounfour, A. (2000). Gestion de la connaissance et systèmes d’incitation: entre théorie du Hau et théorie du Ba [Knowledge management and incentive systems: Between the hau theory and the ba theory]. Systèmes d’Information et Management, 5(2), 12–40.Google Scholar
  7. Bounfour, A. (2005). Modeling intangibles: Transaction regime versus community regime. In A. Bounfour & L. Edvinsson (Eds.), Intellectual capital for communities: Nations, regions and cities (pp. 3–18). Burlington, MA: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bounfour, A. (2006). Connaissance, reconnaissance et “communautalisme” [Knowledge, recognition and “communautalism”]. In A. Bounfour (Ed.), Capital immatériel, connaissance et performance (pp. 167–194). Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  9. Bounfour, A., & Grefe, G. (2009). Designing sequences for knowledge exchange: The hau-ba model. In A. Bounfour (Ed.), Organisational capital: Modelling, measuring, contextualising (pp. 76–108). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Caillé, A. (2007). La quête de reconnaissance, nouveau phénomène social total [The search for recognition, a new total social phenomenon]. Paris: Editions La Découverte.Google Scholar
  11. Caillé, A., Tarot, C., Dewitte, J., Rospabe, P., Larcebeau, J., Godbout, J., et al. (1996). L’obligation de donner, la découverte sociologique capitale de Marcel Mauss [The obligation to give, the fundamental sociological discovery of Marcel Mauss]. La revue du M.A.U.S.S., 8(2), 12–59.Google Scholar
  12. Callon, M., & Latour, B. (1991). La science telle qu’elle se fait: anthologie de la sociologie des sciences de langue anglaise [Science as a dynamic process: An anthology of the sociology of sciences of the English language]. Paris: Editions La Découverte.Google Scholar
  13. Boisserolles de Saint Julien, D. (2005). Les survivants, vers une gestion différenciée des ressources humaines [The survivors: Toward differentiated human resource management]. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  14. Delobbe, N., Herrbach, O., Lacaze, D., & Mignonac, K. (2005). Comportement organisationnel: Vol. 1. Contrat psychologique, émotions au travail et socialisation organisationnelle [Organizational behavior: Vol. 1. Psychological contract, emotion at the workplace, and organizational socialization]. Brussels, Belgium: De Boeck.Google Scholar
  15. Erden, Z., von Krogh, G., & Nonaka, I. (2008). The quality of group tacit knowledge. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 17, 4–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ermine, J. L. (2000). Les systèmes de connaissances [Information systems]. Paris: Hermès Sciences.Google Scholar
  17. Fayard, P. M. (2003). Strategic communities for knowledge creation: A Western proposal for the Japanese concept of ba. Journal of Knowledge Management, 7(5), 25–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ferrary, M. (2003). The gift exchange in the social networks of Silicon Valley. California Management Review, 45(4), 120–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Girod-Séville, M. (1995). Mémoire et organisation [Memory and organization]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Université Paris-Dauphine, Paris.Google Scholar
  20. Girod-Séville M. (1996). La mémoire des organisations [The memory of organizations]. Paris, Éditions L’Harmattan, collection Logiques de gestion.Google Scholar
  21. Godbout, J. T. (2007). Ce qui circule entre nous [What circulates between us]. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
  22. Grefe, G. (2010). Les systèmes d’incitation à l’échange de connaissances au sein de communautés métiers de l’aluminium: essai d’explication d’un modèle [Incentive systems for knowledge-sharing in communities of metalworking: Attempt to explain a model]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Université Paris-Sud 11, Paris.Google Scholar
  23. Habib, J. (2008). Les processus de connaissance et d’apprentissage dans les projets d’innovation: une approche par les systèmes adaptatifs complexes [Processes of knowledge and learning in innovation projects: A complex adaptive systems approach]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Université d’Aix en Provence, France: Marseille.Google Scholar
  24. Honneth, A. (1996). The struggle for recognition: The moral grammar of social conflict. (J. Anderson, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  25. Maffesoli, M. (2005). Les mémoires des tribus et le réanchantement du monde [The memories of the tribes and the re-enchantment of the world]. In F. Casalegno (Ed.), Mémoire quotidienne, communautés et communication à l’ère des réseaux (pp. 129–146). Laval, Canada: Presses Universitaires de Laval.Google Scholar
  26. Mauss, M. (1950). Sociologie et Anthropologie [Sociology and anthropology]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  27. Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (2003). Analyses des données qualitatives [Qualitative data analysis] (2nd ed.). Paris: De BoeckGoogle Scholar
  28. Monnier-Sénicourt, L. (2005). Utilisation d’un système de gestion des connaissances et capitalisation; l’influence des caractéristiques professionnelles dans les métiers du conseil [Use of a system for managing and capitalizing on knowledge: The influence of professional characteristics in consulting]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Université de Nantes, Nantes, France.Google Scholar
  29. Nishida, K. (1990). An inquiry into the good (M. Abe & C. Ives, Trans.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. (Original work published 1921)Google Scholar
  30. Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5, 14–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998). The concept of ba: Building a foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Osty, F. (2003). Le désir de métier, engagement, identité et reconnaissance au travail [Occupational desire, commitment, identity and recognition at the workplace]. Rennes, France: Sociétés, Presses Universitaires de Rennes.Google Scholar
  34. Osty, F. (2005). Identités au travail et accès à la reconnaissance [Labor identity and access to recognition]. In G. Minguet & C. Thuderoz (Eds.), Travail, entreprise et ingénierie. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  35. Osty, F., & Dahan-Seltzer, G. (2006). Le pari du métier face à l’anomie [The power of occupational activities against anomy]. Nouvelle revue de Psychologie, 2, 91–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Poitou, J. P. (1997). La gestion collective des connaissances et la mémoire individuelle [Collective knowledge management and individual memory]. Paris: CREPCO-CNRS.Google Scholar
  37. Polanyi, M. (1983). The tacit dimension. Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith.Google Scholar
  38. Ricœur, P. (2005). Parcours de la reconnaissance [The course of recognition]. Paris: Folio, Essais.Google Scholar
  39. Sainsaulieu, R. (1985). L’identité au travail: Les effets culturels de l’organisation [Identity at work: The cultural effects of the organization] (rev. & exp. 2nd ed.). Paris: Presses de la FNSP.Google Scholar
  40. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  41. Tönnies, F. (1977). Communauté et Société, Catégories fondamentales de la sociologie pure: Introduction et traduction de J. LEIF [Community and Society: Fundamental concepts in pure sociology (J. Leif, Trans.)]. Paris: Retz-C.E.P.L. (Original German work, Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft, published 1887)Google Scholar
  42. Wilkins, A. L., & Ouchi, W. G. (1983). Efficient cultures: Exploring the relationship between culture and organizational performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 468–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Winter, S. G. (1987). Knowledge and competence as strategic assets. In D. Teece (Ed.), The competitive challenge: Strategies for industrial innovation and renewal (pp. 159–184). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht. 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.European Chair on Intellectual Capital Management & PESORUniversité Paris-Sud54, Boulevard DesgrangesFrance
  2. 2.Granem (Groupe de recherches angevin en économie et management)Université AngersAngers Cedex 01France

Personalised recommendations