59194_knowledge Transfer Opportunities

8/13/2019 59194_knowledge Transfer Opportunities

1/12

THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER COMPONENTS ANDPHASES IN SMALL AND MEDIUM-SCALE ENTERPRISES: A DEVELOPING

NATIONS PERSPECTIVE

INTRODUCTION

In recent times, great attention has been given to the role SMEs play in relation to the economicdevelopment of a nation. The general consensus is that their role is strategic (Hill, 2001), andhence the myriad of policies, seminars, white papers, agencies, and government bodies created toaddress issue(s) pertinent to them. While there may seem to be a bias or undue attention towardsthem, the real business environment has no favorites. The dynamism existent within a givendomain has the same potential effect on all entities within it irrespective of business type.

At the core of survival or growth, irrespective of environmental dynamics, knowledge isfundamental (Ichijo and Nonaka, 2007; Prusak and Matson, 2006; Zheng et al., 2010). Anorganization must ensure that it acquires and effectively manages its knowledge resources(Probst et al., 2000; Prusak and Matson, 2006; Sumita, 2008), renewing or reconfiguring them toensure fit with present realities (Boccardelli and Magnusson, 2006; Raisch et al., 2009; Teece etal., 1997). This could be done outside or inside its boundary (Lichtenthaler and Lichtenthaler,2009) or outside or inside a given unit and it therefore needs to develop the ability to effectivelyand efficiently transfer knowledge in a timely manner, from a given point (or entity) to anotherwhere it is needed (Argote and Ingram, 2000; Bae and Koo, 2008).

Considering the components involved in knowledge transfer, (hereafter referred to as KT), potential bottlenecks may arise. A typical KT process would involve the knowledge to betransferred, the source and the recipients of the knowledge, the context from which it is comingfrom and that to which it is going to and the medium/channel that connects the process (Argoteand Ingram, 2000; Spraggon and Bodolica, 2012). The success of any KT process is howevercontingent to any of the characteristics of these components (Brookes, 2014) and moreimportantly the interplay between them and the perceived outcome at each stage of the process(Szulanski, 2000).

The extant literature that identifies the implication of the intrinsic attributes of the individualcomponents of KT on the transfer process did so without considering the potential effect of theirinterrelationship. They also failed in helping to understand the role that the outcome of each

phase of the KT process plays in changing the direction of the flow of the process (Szulanski etal., 2004), in bringing it to a halt or in informing decisions as regards when to proceed orterminate a phase (Figure 1). The likelihood of the identified gaps were slightly hinted on inArgote and Ingrams (2000 , pg 152) work on knowledge repositories when in explaining the dualrole repositories play, they said they are changed when knowledge transfer occur s on one


2/12

hand, and their current state affects the processes and outcomes of knowledge transfer on theother.

The majority of the studies in the field likewise were carried out from a developed nationcontext. When a developing nation context is used, it is mostly an Asian perspective (majorly

China). While there may be similarities across cultures or context in developing nations, therestill exist potential differences with strategic implication on KT assumptions. As regards toAfrica, the continent of focus for this study, the knowledge-related challenges that firms in thecontinent face would include brain-drain, infrastructure inadequacies, low regards for intellectual

property rights, corruption, poor educational facilities and falling education standards amongothers. Following that knowledge is argued to be context dependent or a social contextualconstruction (Paulin and Suneson, 2012), the implication of these factors on the KT processwould be expected to vary significantly from that experienced in China.

As such, to improve the existent literature on knowledge transfer, it is imperative to look into the

African perspective to identify areas of similarity and differences in regards to KT challenges soas to be able to ascertain the universality of the application of present research findings. Also, bylooking into the peculiarities of the interrelationship among constituent parts of the process under

prevailing conditions, there is the possibility of capturing entrepreneurial actions taken by firmsoperating in the domain in their bid to ensure successful KT and which individual attribute orcombination would most likely determine the success of the KT process under given conditions.A perfect understanding of the interconnections and the nature of their complexities is the only

by which firms can anticipate to further develop their capabilities (Easterby-Smith et al., 2008).

Adopting a Critical Realist tradition, this study endeavors to examine KT opportunities and

processes in relation to SMEs to identify the underlying mechanisms that inhibit or enable thesuccess of the process, with a view of determining which one(s) is/are significant or prevalent inthe African context. The study intends to see how the firms take advantage of the KTopportunities within their reach, how they manage and balance internal and external KT, andhow it explains their growth path or present state. While contributing to literature in the field,the findings from this research hopes to also be able to help inform policy drafting and strategicactions needed to ensure that the sustainability and economic benefit of SMEs to the growth ofthe region is realized.

The study therefore tries to answer the following questions;

1. What are the factors that make firms take advantage of (or ignore) opportunities for KT?(Motivation)

2. How do they undergo KT? - Internal KT challenges (Push) and External KT challenges(Pull). (Process)

3. What role has KT played in the development and make-up of the firm? (Effect)


3/12

4. Which interactions between KT constituent components are existent and most prevalent?

5. How do they progress across each process phase and determine when to stop the process?

All this would be looked at in relation to how the firms undergo value exploration, value creation

and value delivery.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Knowledge has been termed as a unique source of competitive advantage for a firm and theability for a firm to transfer it represents yet a distin ct source of competitive advantage [for it]over other institutional arrangements such as markets (Reagans and McEvily, 2003, pg 240;word in parenthesis added). Since SMEs inherent liabilities such as size and financialconstraints impacts their potential for strategic market control (Thorpe et al., 2005), it is

imperative that they thrive well in transferring knowledge from outside and within the firm.However, irrespective of promised benefit, transferring knowledge comes with its own difficulty(Argote et al., 2000; Easterby-Smith et al., 2008; Szulanski, 1996). This difficulty hinges on thecost implication of the process which results from the role played by each individual componentthat makes up the KT process.

The cost of transferring knowledge, simply known as transfer cost (Bae and Koo, 2008) is ofgreat concern to SMEs due to the liabilities peculiar to them in comparison to larger firms.These liabilities would moderate the nature or degree to which KT would be possible due to theanticipated potential benefit in relation to the transfer cost which directly affects the motivation

to pursue a particular route or mechanism.

SMEs liability of smallness and newness results in financial and human resource constraints,limited market power and customer base, trust issues arising from limited trading history,dominance of owner(s) in strategic decisions, lack of established routines, among others (Krauset al., 2010). These liabilities whose impact may vary across regions or industry make SMEsmore prone to survival (Levy et al., 2001) particularly at inception than to growth.Subsequently, they determine the necessity or attractiveness of any given KT opportunity androute to the firm.

Whatever the KT route embarked upon and its proven potential benefit, firms, irrespective ofsize are still faced with the problems which mitigate against their efforts to either start the

process, maintain it, complete it or successfully apply the proceeds of the process to realize the potential benefits of the process. Several factors along this chain have been identified andresearched. This has been examined from single level or from a multi-level perspective (Zhaoand Anand, 2009), intra-firm or inter-firm (Tsai, 2001, Letmathe et al., 2012; Spraggon andBodolica, 2012), among others.


4/12

Considering that an organization is not immune to forces inherent in any of the identified factors,the effectiveness of a KT process is not dependent on the eradication of the inhibiting forces in asingle factor alone (Prez-Nordtvedt et al., 2008). Following that certain structures in the realworld could be enduring than others (Norrie, 2010), that is, a particular pattern of event mayexist relatively longer than another, the most probable combination, interplay and resultantinfluence of the identified factors on KT within a given domain per time may differ. There mayalso be differences acro ss regions though that doesnt imply that elements in a given regiondiffer from that in another. What it simply implies is that certain factors may be prone to gounconstrained in one domain while suppressed in another due to differences in contextual

peculiarities, thus heterogeneity of effects is observed (Jashapara, 2004; Sayer, 1998).

For every KT process, individual characteristics of five major components, that is, theknowledge, source, recipient, channel and context needs to be considered (Minbaeva, 2007;Spraggon and Bodolica, 2012; Szulanski, 1996 , 2000). For example, if the knowledges meritcant be ascertained by the recipient, s/he would not be willing to acquire such knowledge (Kane,2010). If the merits are acknowledged, the source may be unwilling to release what s/he knows(Heliot and Riley, 2010; Reagans and McEvily, 2003; Watson and Hewett, 2006). If s/he does,the channels for transfer present in the environment of both parties may hinder the recipient fromaccessing the knowledge (Minbaeva, 2007). If the knowledge gets through to the recipient, s/hemay not have the cognitive capacity to effectively assimilate and apply the knowledge (Letmatheet al., 2012), consequently constraining the final lap of the process. An initial evaluation of the

perceived total cost in relation to the perceived benefit of the outcome may altogether hinder theinitiation of the process (Bae and Koo, 2008).

In real life practice, the above description is a simplistic simulation of what obtains.Hypothetically, and from the perspective of a practitioner, one begins to ponder on the questionthat if equal numbers of constraining and enabling characteristics exist, how can the KT processoutcome be predetermined? This is a strategic question that managers need to be able to thinkthrough with little error tolerance as they try to apportion resources and choose a route to KT inthe face of competing options, resource constraint and bounded rationality (Szulanski, 1996).Therefore, though the independent effect of the various components is of importance, theresultant effect of their context-dependent interaction is of greater significance (Minbaeva,2007).

There would be no knowledge transfer without knowledge at first. One can then state thatknowledge itself and its characteristics are extremely vital in the KT process. In exemplifyingknowledges significance , Kane (2010), Kang et al. (2010), among other authors have conductedresearch work that showed that knowledge characteristics had a significant impact (negative) onKT. This impact is however short-lived until other factors are factored in (Minbaeva, 2007).

Since knowledge is generated, transferred and received by social beings, they determine to alarge extent the outcome of any KT. Minbaeva (2007) in his work on multinational companies


5/12

discovered that characteristics of recipient (prior knowledge and intensity of effort) amidst otherfactors had the strongest effect, followed by that of the channel (relationship between both

part ies) and then that of the source. This sequence or superiority of recipients characteristicswas however not corroborated by Mu et al. (2010) whose study on intra-organization KT showedthat characteristics of both the first and last component in Minbaev as a rrangement (absorptivecapacity and disseminative capacity respectively) were of equal significance.

In a scenario which seem almost totally awkward or unexpected from rational beings, though acaution against a rather simplistic deduction that when knowledge characteristics are positive andsocial beings involved have the necessary knowledge-related capacities, KT would occurunhindered, it showed contrariwise. Recipients were reported to reject acknowledgingknowledge with obvious performance merits from a source on the grounds that the channel(relationship) was plagued with lack of shared social identity (Kane et al., 2005). This impliesthat knowledge from a source that is further away may successfully be transferred than that froma source very close by if the shared social identity, termed as superordinate social identity byKane et al. is lacking. While that seems to be in tandem with the literature on valuing internaland external knowledge by Menon and Pfeffer (2003), which claims that knowledge external to arecipient firm seems to be revered as having more value than that within it, it however provesthat the benefit of a shorter distance between source and recipient as reflected in reduced transfereffort (Kang et al., 2010) may be constrained and not realized even though present in a KT

process.

A probable alternative to address the problem of bias in relation to human knowledge sources toavoid the scenario stated earlier above would be to codify knowledge such that the source isunknown and consequently any potential bias orientated towards him from the recipient isremoved (Argote and Ingram, 2000). Codification has been prescribed even as an option forfirms to leverage existent knowledge (Jasimuddin, 2007) particularly with the hegemonic

presence of ICTs which have been acknowledged to permit quick and easy access to knowledgeand discouraging the need for spatial proximity (Gray, 2006).

The challenge with codification of knowledge, however, when context idiosyncrasies arefactored in, using the context of the intended study is the presence of a multiplicity of language.It should first be stated that irrespective of type of knowledge (tacit or explicit), language is thefundamental medium of symbolizing knowledge. Consequently, for knowledge to bemeaningful, the language in which it is embodied must be shared and make sense to both partiesinvolved (Welch and Welch, 2008).

In the African context, as this study intends to explore, the history of colonialism holds the baggage of languag e of the colonial masters. The colonial masters language is adopted as thenational language due to the amalgamation of different tribes into a single nation. However,level of education determines to a large extent an individuals ability to rea d and comprehendtext written in the language. As is the norm in most nations, the higher the education level, the


6/12

higher the wage of such worker. Unfortunately, SMEs financial constraint exposes them to theuse of cheaper labour. This option translates to workers with little or no education and dependingon the location within the country, a heterogeneity of languages is inevitable. The little or noeducation means there is difficulty in comprehending knowledge codified in the nationallanguage and consequently no single common language. So, in cases where which all otherfactors are put in place, and codifying knowledge is agreed to be the best or the only way oftransferring available knowledge, the language peculiarity of the context makes such optionineffective or impossible. It should be bore in mind that SMEs inherent liabilities are notalways of negative consequence to the firm, sometimes they constitute a source of competitiveadvantage for them (Hill, 2005). Aside the flexibility and responsiveness that their sizelimitations permit (Gray, 2006), in regards to knowledge, it also means little effort is needed indeveloping an effective transactive memory system, that is a system where which who knowswhat or has what or needs what can be quickly identified and accessed (Su et al., 2010) thusreducing the time and effort needed to begin a KT process. Size thus reduces the cost of search

and access to potential knowledge sources.In conclusion, putting together the reflections from the literature on KT as they affect SMEs, theevident contradictions in the findings of respective studies that plague the domain makes itdifficult for managers or practitioners to make meaningful use of them. Having said that, thecontradictions does not necessarily invalidate the legitimacy of the varied research findings. Itonly calls for an integrative perspective, a synergistic work that takes into account thesignificance, under certain given contextual peculiarities, of the interplay of the characteristics ofthe individual components of the KT process and their outcome implications.

Figure 1 below gives an overview of the conceptual framework intended for this research study.


7/12


8/12

Methodology

This research study would adopt a mixed method approach due to the anticipated complexity of

the KT construct using quantitative (structured questionnaire) and qualitative tools (semi-

structured interview) (Bryman and Bell, 2007). The choice of the approach hinges on the

realization that paradigm lenses have set limits inevitably imposed on them by their major

underpinnings which constrain their reach in terms of what they can discover or acknowledge to

be reality (Dobson, 2001). The myriad of elements at work at different levels in an organization

thus makes it difficult for a single paradigmatic approach to provide an adequate overview that

effectively captures the workings of complex phenomena like KT in an organization as this study

intends to look into (Astley and Van de Ven, 1983; Deshpande, 1983; Gioia and Pitre, 1990).

Space constraints would not permit going into the details of the perceived complexities of KT.

However, the aspects of it that are characterized by regularity would be captured usingquantitative methods (Fleetwood and Ackroyd, 2004) while aspects that vary due to contextual

differences would be captured with the use of qualitative methods. The quantitative methods

would permit comparison across sample to examine and identify the frequency of occurrence,

associations or patterns in regards to relevant aspects of the KT construct while the qualitative

methods greater flexibility would be used for unraveling and gaining deeper understanding of

any event or occurrence that may either be complex, unanticipated or completely new (McEvoy

and Richards, 2006).

The adoption of the research methods used reflects the positivist and interpretivist stance of the

study. The intention to undergo this study hinges on the acceptance that reality exists and access

can be made into it. Unlike the social constructionist stance that rebuffs any attempt to classify

anything as objective reality, this study employs a Critical Realist (CR) position which

accommodates the existence of both an objective and a subjective reality. In relation to KT, CR

acknowledges that the experience of actors in regards to the phenomena irrespective of how they

arrive at the conclusions they cite in delineating it does not disprove it as an objective reality but

rather only points to its influence and existence in the real world (Norrie, 2010). This simply put

means that reality precedes and exists independently of actors perception or interpretation of it

(Easton, 2002) although that does not mean it is immune from changes which may result from

contextual elements or the actions of social beings (Archer, 2003; Norrie, 2010). Accepting these


9/12

facts puts CR in a better position than its most compared counterpart, the social constructionism,

to be used for this research work (Alvesson and Skoldberg, 2010; Peters et al., 2013).

The mere thought of undertaking a study into an organizational phenomenon implicitly reflects

the recognition that out there lies a reality that can be discovered (Hales, 2007). Therefore, KT

implications and challenges in an organization irrespective of intensity or lifespan are accepted

to be realities that exist. How long their observed form endure varies from organization to

organization, though as CR argues, all elements that underlay them are present and the same

across all organizations, the difference then being that some of the elements may exist in their

absent form in others (Norrie, 2010). However, concluding from Norrie s explanation of Roy

Bhaskars new critical realism disposition, whether in the present, visible form or in the absent

form, whichever form obtains has causal implications in regards to how KT would be carried out

in an organization.Considering the dynamics of an organization, one can expect that the reality of KT within it is

open to a variety of interpretations. This is dependent on who across management levels is

consulted, the type of knowledge one is addressing, what KT measurement indicator is used or

what time period in the lifecycle of a firm is the focus or is the research carried out (Kostova,

1999; Paulin and Suneson, 2012). These various pathways to the KT phenomenon would

produce outcomes which can be regarded as objective and those that can be regarded as

subjective. The human aspects of the phenomenon would likewise be more skewed to the

subjective continuum than the technical aspects like the technology utilised, instructional

guidelines, among others which could be regarded as residing in the objective circle. Hence, as

highlighted earlier, the positivist position would be used to capture the objective elements and

the interpretivist position would be used to capture the subjective aspect. For the former

position, a questionnaire instrument with structured questions, a five-point likert scale for quick

and easy comparison using statistical analysis and tool and constructs commonly used by authors

within the field would be used while the latter would involve the use of a semi-structured

interview.

One should bear in mind however that using the two adopted research paradigms in their purest

forms would absolutely be impossible as the use of CR as the metatheory for the study with its

own fundamental ontological underpinnings would conflict with certain truths claimed by such

forms. This thus leads to embracing Carpendale and Mullers (2004) prescription, where which


10/12

CR would thus be used as the metatheory for ascertaining and categorizing the research findings

from both paradigm lenses into what is meaningful, meaningless, acceptable or not and that

which can be regarded as vital or tangential to the intended study.

Findings from the instruments employed would be analyzed using SPSS and Nvivo for the

quantitative and qualitative data respectively. Due to difficulty in obtaining an all-inclusive

database of potential respondents and cost implication of their dispersal across the intended

national context, a non-probability sampling method would be adopted for this work. This

method permits an appropriate level of latitude in deciding which respondent to include or not

(Parasuraman et al. , 2004).


11/12

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

This research study carries potential ethical dilemma innate to every phase in the research

continuum which may not be completely envisaged prior to the commencement of the study

(Guillemin and Gillam, 2004). Dealing with social beings and considering the relevance and

importance of their cooperation, the research study would endeavour to ensure that all pertinent

issues such as informed consent, confidentiality, anonymity, right to withdraw at whatever point

in the research process and avoidance of harm in whatsoever form are explicitly and

appropriately addressed. The structured questionnaire would have printed on it the intention of

the study as declaring this on a one-on-one basis due to the intended large sample size in

comparison to the qualitative method is seen as both impossible and ineffective due to time

constraints.

A feminist disposition that emphasizes care and frowns at power domination and marginalizationwould be taken. The research participants would be seen as equals and thus the research study

takes the position that it involves two knowing-subjects as Gunzenhauser (2006) stresses. This

understanding makes it imperative to ensure that the research participants can likewise benefit

from the process (Peled and Leichtentritt, 2002). Therefore, a summary of research findings

written in a format that would be useful for practitioners would be communicated to be made

available to participants who request for results from the research.

The Universitys Code of Ethics would be adhered to , however, as advocates of ethics in

practice, ecological, situational or relational ethics emphasize, this would be to the extent that it

effectively addresses contextual nuances (Ellis, 2007; Robertson et al., 2002; Stutchbury and

Fox, 2009). Under scenarios with emerging ethical dilemmas that the guideline does not provide

practical steps in addressing, such issues would be addressed through reflexivity on the part of

the researcher (Guillemin and Gillam, 2004). By virtue of the inevitability of crossing national

borders, all efforts would be made to ensure that no form of imposition of rules obtainable in one

region is engaged in on people in another, particularly when they obviously conflict. Failure to

avoid this is regarded as a form of imposing harm on others or a form of colonization (Christians,

2007: Sikes and Piper, 2010) and thus would negatively affect the ethicality of the study.


12/12

PLAN OF WORK

Due to space constraints, a Gantt chart indicating necessary milestones for the proposed research

work is presented below.

Documents

59194_knowledge Transfer Opportunities