forknowledgetransfer.Throughacasestudyexaminingthe knowl-edge transfer practicein two small businesses in Vietnam,the overallaimofthisstudyistodevelopanincreased understand-ingoftheroleo
Trang 1International Journal of Information Management 34 (2014) 416–421
ContentslistsavailableatScienceDirect
j o u r n a l ho me p ag e:w w w e l s e v i e r c o m / lo c a t e / i j i n f o m g t
Case Study
Vietnam
a r t i c l e i n f o
Keywords:
ICT
Vietnam
a b s t r a c t
Smallbusinessesfacenumerousissuesinregardtothemanagementoftheirknowledge,including poten-tiallossofknowledgeduetohighemployeeturnoverandthewillingnessandabilityofemployeesto sharetheirknowledge.ThiscasestudyexaminestwosmallICTcompaniesinVietnamtodetermine howknowledgetransferwasconductedwithandwithouttheuseofICT.Aknowledgetransfer frame-workforsmallbusinesseswasusedasalenstoanalysetheresults.Thefindingsshoweddifferencesin knowledgetransferapproachesinbothcases.Itwasobservedthatemployeeswhosejobsrequiredless flexibilityneededmoreexplicitknowledge,butiftheirworkingproceduresweremoreflexibletheywere morelikelytoneedtacitknowledge.Tacitknowledgewasmainlytransferredbynon-ICTmethods,with explicitknowledgebeingtransferredviaacombinationofmethods.Thecasesdifferedinregardtothe existenceofknowledgetransferguidelines–aswellasthewillingnessandabilityofemployeestoshare knowledgewithothersinthebusiness.Bothcasebusinesseslackedappropriatemeasurestodetermine thelevelofsuccessofknowledgetransferactivities
©2014ElsevierLtd.Allrightsreserved
1 Introduction
Knowledgetransferisseenasanincreasinglyimportantprocess
ofknowledgemanagementduetoitsabilitytoassistthe
organi-sationtobenefitfromindividualknowledge.Knowledgetransfer
canberegardedasthemostimportantprocessofknowledge
man-agement(Al-Alawi,Al-Marzooqi,&Mohammed,2007).Although
interestin knowledgetransfer researchhasincreasedin recent
years,thereareonlyafewstudiesofknowledgemanagement,
par-ticularlyknowledgetransfer,inthesmallbusinessenvironment
Smallbusinesses alsoencounter issuessuchas thedifficultyof
recruitingskilledpeople,willingnessofemployeestoshare
knowl-edge,andexistenceof theskillsnecessarytoshareand receive
knowledge (Wong &Aspinwall, 2004) Thereis a need to
fur-therdevelopaproperunderstandingofknowledgetransferinthe
smallbusinesscontextastheyaredifferentfromlarge
organisa-tions(Burgess,Sellitto,&Karanasios,2009)anareawhereprevious
researchhastypicallybeentargeted
Antonova, Anikó, and Marchev (2011) point out that
infor-mationand communication technology(ICT) canplay a role in
effectiveknowledgetransfer.ICTcanbeseenasacrucialenabler
Stephen.Burgess@vu.edu.au (S Burgess).
forknowledgetransfer.Throughacasestudyexaminingthe knowl-edge transfer practicein two small businesses in Vietnam,the overallaimofthisstudyistodevelopanincreased understand-ingoftheroleofICTintheknowledgetransferprocessinsmall businesses
2 Literaturereview Knowledgemanagement is a processinvolvingsetof activi-tiescentredaroundcreating,storing/retrieving,transferringand applyingknowledge(Alavi&Leidner,2001).Knowledgetransfer
isdefinedasaprocessthroughwhichknowledgemovesbetween
a source and a recipient and where knowledge is applied and used(Szulanski,2000).Withinanorganisation,knowledgecanbe transferredamongstindividuals, betweendifferentlevelsinthe organisationalhierarchyandbetweendifferentunitsand depart-ments(Argote&Ingram,2000)
Theprocessofknowledgetransferhasbeendescribedbymany researchers(Argote&Ingram,2000).Abasicapproach is Shan-nonandWeaver’scommunicationmodel.Inthismodel,knowledge transferisrepresentedinasimple mannerbymeansoftransfer
ofa‘message’froma‘sender’toa‘receiver’.Anyinterruptionsto thisprocessareknownas‘noise’.Thissimplisticrepresentationhas beencriticisedbyresearchers(referSzulanski,2000)asthemodel
isobviouslylinear,assumingthattheknowledgetransferoccurs http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.02.009
Trang 2Fig 1 A framework for the transfer of knowledge in small businesses.
onaone-way pathfromthesourcetodestination.Thetransfer
directioncannotbereversedandthereisnoinformationfeedback
fromthereceivertothesendertoevaluateifthetransferprocess
hasbeensuccessful.Further,thismodelonlyrepresentsasingle
snapshotoftransferring knowledgebetweentwoindividuals at
onepointoftime,whilstintra-organisationalknowledgetransfer
shouldberegardedasacontinuousprocessamongstdifferent
indi-viduals/groupswithinanorganisation(VanWijk,Jansen,&Lyles,
2008).Also,theknowledgetransferprocessunderthis
represen-tationassumesthatboththesendersandreceiversareactiveand
willingtosend/receiveknowledge.Likewise,thismodeldoesnot
takeintoconsiderationtherelationshipbetweenthesender(s)and
receivers,typesofknowledgebeingtransferred,andthecontext
wheretheknowledgetransferhappens(LiHong,2007).Nguyen
(2013)proposedamorecomplexframeworktorepresentthe
trans-ferofknowledgeinsmallbusinesses(referFig.1)
InBox1(Fig.1 theknowledgetransferprocessissimplifiedto
examinehowknowledgeistransferredwithinthecontextofsmall
businesses.Knowledgeissentbythesender(s)tothereceiver(s)
byusingdifferentmethods.Furthermore,theknowledgetransfer
processhappensnotonlybetweenindividualsinthesamegroup
butalsoacrosstheorganisationinmanysituations(representedas
Situation1 n)
Knowledgecanbeclassifiedintoeitherexplicitortacit
knowl-edge.Explicitknowledgeisthecomponentthatcanbecodifiedand
transmittedinsystematicandformallanguages.Tacitknowledge
ispersonal,contextspecificknowledgethatisdifficulttoformalise,
record,orarticulate.Itisstoredinthe‘heads’ofpeople(Nonaka&
Takeuchi,1995).Thistypeofknowledgetendstobelocal,andnot
foundinbooks,manuals,filesordatabases.Tacitknowledgeis
diffi-culttocaptureanddiffuse.However,ittypicallycontributesmore
valuetotheorganisationwhencomparedtoexplicitknowledge
(ChinWei,SiongChoy,&GeokChew,2011)
Themethodsusedforthetransferprocessarechosenbythe
senders and receiversdepending upon thetypes of knowledge
beingtransferred.Thesemethodsaregenerallygroupedintotwo
differentcategories,non-ICTbasedandICT-basedmethods(Young,
2010).Withnon-ICT based methods,small businessemployees
cansharetheirexperienceviadailyface-to-facemeetingsormore
formallyviapeersupportedworkpractices.Informalgatherings viacoffeebreaks,lunchesandothersimilaractivitiesarealso ben-eficialforthemintransferringandreceivingknowledge(Young,
2010).ICTbasedmethodsarecarriedoutwiththeexistenceofICT systems,varyingfromthesimplesttechnologysuchasvoicevia telephonetomoreadvancedtechnologysuchasknowledgeportals
orcollaborativevirtualworkspaces
The knowledge transfer process is affected bymany factors whichareeitherorganisationrelatedortechnology(ICT)related Box 2 of the framework depicts the unique characteristics of small businesses.Small businessesare characterised bylimited financial and human resources (Burgess et al., 2009) Further-more,smallbusinesseshavesimpleandlesscomplexstructures (Wong&Aspinwall,2004)andaremanagedinmostcasesbytheir owners,withflexibleandadaptablebusinessprocesses.Aswell, theemployeesare typicallyunder close,directsupervision and influenceoftheowner/manager(Wong&Aspinwall,2004) Box 3oftheframework depictstheICT factorsaffectingthe knowledge transferprocess ICT policyrefersto anywrittenor unwrittenrules,regulations,proceduresandwaysofdoing busi-nessinanenterprise(Alberghini,Cricelli,&Grimaldi,2010).ICT infrastructurereferstoICTdevicesandservicessuchas:servers, PCs,laptopsandsoforth(Alberghinietal.,2010).ICTapplications generallyrefertoapplicationsoftwarewhichchangestheprocesses andwaysofdoingbusiness,especiallytransferringknowledgevia email,documentmanagementsystems,knowledgeportalsandso forth(Fei,2011).ICThumanresourcesrefertotherelativeskill lev-elsofemployees(Burgessetal.,2009)andtheirwillingnesstoshare knowledge
Whenassessing thebenefitsofpractices suchasknowledge transfer,smallbusinessbenefitscanbeviewedfromdifferent per-spectives.Forinstance,knowledge managementpractices could contributeto:
•Improvedfinancialposition(Lee&Choi,2003)
•Improved customer satisfaction, customer retention and/or increasedmarketshare(Edvinsson&Malone,1997)
•Improvedemployeesatisfaction(Edvinsson&Malone,1997)
Trang 3418 T Nguyen, S Burgess / International Journal of Information Management 34 (2014) 416–421
Case1 (45 employees – 8 interviews)
1 Owner/Manager
2 Middle manager/Accountant
3 Middle manager/Sales
4 Middle manager/Technical (IT)
5 Staff/Sales
6 Staff/Technician (IT)
7 Staff/Administrator
8 Staff/Accountant
Case2 (12 employees – 4 interviews)
1 Owner/Manager
2 Middle manager/Sales
3 Staff/Administrator
4 Staff/Technician (IT)
The relationshipsbetween these areas are indicated by the
relevantarrowsin theframework.For example,theknowledge
transferprocessisaffectedbyorganisationrelatedfactors(arrow
A1 ofFig 1)or technologyrelated factors(arrow A2).In
addi-tion,theuniquefeaturesofsmallbusinessesplayamajorrolein
shapingtheuseofICTforknowledgetransfer(arrowA3).Hence,
itisexpectedthat theinteractionamongst thesegroupsof
fac-torsimpactstheknowledgetransferprocessandthusaffectsthe
benefitsofknowledgemanagementtosmallorganisations(arrow
A5).Theoutcomesoftheknowledgetransferprocessshouldbe
evaluatedto provide inputs for modifying/formulating ongoing
knowledgetransferstrategies(arrowA4)
3 Casestudy
3.1 Caseselection
Thiscasestudyexaminestwosmallbusinesses(cases)fromthe
ICTretailerindustryinVietnamtogainanin-depthunderstanding
oftheirknowledgetransferactivities.Theaimwastoidentify
busi-nessesthatdifferedinsizetounderstandthedifferentchallenges
facedbysuchbusinesses.Anauthorofthisarticlehasbeen
work-inginthisindustrysince2001,whichassistedingainingaccessto
businessesforthedatacollection
Multiple forms of data collection (which occurred in early
2013)wereused,includingsemi-structuredinterviews,company
documents analysis and a review of ICT artefacts In order to
reachsaturationofdataforeachcase,Guest,Bunce,andJohnson
(2006)suggest to analyse atleast twelve interviews.However,
thisapproachwasnotpracticalforsmallbusinesses(forinstance,
those with a small number of employees), and needed to be
scaleddownaccordingly.Hence,dependingonthecompanysize,
fourand eightsemi-structuredinterviewswereconductedwith
owners/managers,headsofdepartmentandotherrelevantstaff
Open ended questions were employed in the interviews(Veal,
2005).DetailsoftheintervieweesarelistedinTable1.Thedata
werecollectedundertheauspicesofauniversityethics
commit-teeapprovalandthusactualnamesofparticipantbusinessesand
employeesarenotused
3.2 Cases
Thissection describes each case, including background, and
knowledgetransferactivitiesasinformedbytheNguyen(2013)
framework:smallbusinesscharacteristics;ICTpoliciesand
pro-cedures;knowledge transfer processes and knowledge transfer
evaluation
3.2.1 Case1 3.2.1.1 Background Foundedin1997,Case1’smainbusinessisto provideICTproducts/solutionstocustomersdirectlyorindirectly viaitsdistributingnetwork throughoutVietnam.Having 45full timestaff,itwascategorisedasasmallandmediumsizedbusiness TherewereeightparticipantsfromCase1inthisstudy
Inmanagingthecompany,Case1’sownerindicatedthathe nor-mallydidnotdirectlytakepartinthedailyactivitiesofhisstaff However,itwasperceiveddifferentlybyemployees.Thesales man-agerofCase1commentedthat“Thebossmanagesourdailyactivities, especiallythesalesmanagersandsalessupervisors.Incertain impor-tantsalessituations,heintervenesdirectly”.Inotherfunctionalteams suchasadministration/accounting andtechnicalareas,the rele-vantmanagersmademostoftheimportantdecisions.Case1did notseemtohaveresourcescarcityinregardtoeitherfinancialor humanresources.Case1wasacompanywithalowdegreeof stan-dardisationandformalisationinrulesandproceduresgoverning theactivitiesofemployees.Therewererulesandregulations,“but manyofthemarestillonpaper,notyetappliedinreality.Onceapplied,
ifneeded,thesecanbeflexiblychanged”(accountant).Solelyowned, thebusinesscultureisaffectedandshapedbytheowner’s person-alityandoutlook.“Wearelike‘oneextendedfamily”’wasatypical responsefromalloftheintervieweeswhenaskedabouttheglue thatheldtheircompanytogether
3.2.1.2 Thepracticeofknowledgetransfer Whilsttherewere writ-ten guidelines on working procedures which the employees followed,therewerefewwrittendocumentsrepresentingaspecific knowledgetransferpolicy.Furthermore,noguidelinesontheuseof ICTornon-ICTtoolsforknowledgetransferwerefound.Similarly, therewasnoevidenceofmotivationalaidsforsharingknowledge Theownerstated“sofar,Ihaven’tthoughtofanywaytomotivate stafftoshareknowledge”
Case1generallydealtwithbothtacitandexplicitknowledge Thismainlyinvolvedcompanyrelatedknowledge(suchasrules andregulations, announcementsand companycontact informa-tion),productknowledge(suchasspecificationsandprinciplesof operation),individual/specialisedknowledge(suchasbookkeeping skillsorpriorexperienceintroubleshooting)andcustomerrelated knowledge(suchashowtoidentifypotentialcustomersandhandle difficultcustomers)
TheknowledgeinCase1wastransferredamongststaffusing differentmethods.Dependingonthetypeofknowledge,certain methods(eitherICT-basedornon-ICTbased)wereused.Itisalso worthnotingthatemployeesusedthesemethodsinbothformal ways(thatis,withinthecompanyenvironment)andininformal ways(eitherforbusinessorindividualpurposes,outsidethe com-pany–suchasagroupofemployeesgatheringatweekendsfora lunchanddiscussingcompanyrelatedissues).Althoughnoformal knowledgetransferstrategy existed,employeesutiliseda num-berofdifferentmethodstofacilitatetheprocessofsharingand receivingtheknowledgetheyrequired
Face-to-face gatherings, mobile phones and email were the methodsthatweremostlyusedforknowledgetransfer.The knowl-edge transfer activities in the sales groups were based mainly
onnon-ICTmethods.IfusingICT,theyusedessentialtoolssuch
asmobilemessaging.Incontrast,moreICTbasedmethodswere appliedbythetechnicalstaff,whoalsousedbasictoolssuchas emailandmessagingbutadditionallysetupaforumforsharing technicalknowledgeandutilisedtechnologybasedtoolssuchas Teamviewer(software forremote support and onlinemeetings overtheInternet),SkypeandComputerBasedTrainingfor train-ingandsupportingpeersindailyactivities.Additionally,document librarieswhichleadtoadocumentmanagementsystemwereset
upandwereinuse
Trang 4servicemanualsandsoforthwerestoredelectronicallyandwere
accessibletoemployeesviathecompanyintranet.Thetechnicians
werealsoabletousee-learningwebsitesprovidedbytheir
sup-pliersforself-study.Totransfertacitknowledge,non-ICTmethods
wereusedmorethanICTbasedmethods.Thepreferredmethodof
transferforthistypeofknowledgewasface-to-facemeetingswith
theuseofstory-tellingorquestionandanswersessions.Technical
staffalsousedhands-onpracticesordemonstrationstosharetacit
knowledge
3.2.1.3 Difficulties Withregardtoindividualrelated difficulties,
thesalesmanagernotedthattheknowledgesharingactivitieswere
“allindividualbased”.Itwasuptoreceiverstodetermineifthey
believedinthesendersand/ortheknowledgebeingtransferred
Thesalesmanagersaid“therearepeoplewhodonotbelieve(the
informationthatisshared),theythinkthatthesendersjustshowoff
whattheyknow”.Asalesstaffmembercommentedthatwithtacit
knowledge(forexample:skillstoidentifywhomightbe
prospec-tivecustomers),helimitedthesharingofhisknowledgeonlytoa
fewcolleagues.Thiswasbecauseheexperiencedseveralinstances
wherethereceiversdidnotvaluewhatwasbeingshared
Addi-tionally,thereceiversmight notknowifthesharedknowledge
wasusefultothemincarryingouttheirtasks.Evenifthereceivers
trustedboththesharersandthetransferredknowledge,the
suc-cessofthetransferprocesswasalsoaffectedbytheabilitiesofthe
salesstafftoreceiveandeffectivelyusetheknowledge
Thesalesmanagercommentedontheabilityofthereceiversto
askappropriatequestions.Ifthey“don’tknowhowtoaskformore
information,thenthesharersdon’tshareit”.Hence,itwas
impor-tantforreceiverstoletsendersknowwhatknowledgetheywere
reallyinneedof.Thesalesmanageralsosuggestedthatreceivers
shouldgiveaclearsignaltomotivatethesenderstoshare.Hence,
theability ofthereceiverstoprovideappropriate feedbackwas
alsoimportantinmaintainingthecontinuationoftheknowledge
transferprocess
In addition, the practice of knowledge transfer was mainly
affectedbytherelationshipbetweenthereceiversandthesenders
Thesalesemployeeexplainedthat“IonlysharewiththepersonI
havecloserelationshipswith,ormyclosestafffortheperformanceof
myteam”
Inregardtotheconfidentialityofinformation,thesalesmanager
notedthatthesalesemployeesdidnotwishtoshareknowledge
withpeoplewhomtheythoughtwereirrelevantordirectly
com-petedwiththemin thesameorganisation.Hecommentedthat
“mostofthesalespeopleareafraidoflosinginformation.Hence,they
normallyhideorpretendthattheydon’tknow”.Tosecuretheirown
jobs,salespeoplesimplyjustwantedtoholdbackknowledge.In
otherwords,asexplainedbyboththeownerandthesales
man-ager,thesenderswouldbewillingtosharetheirknowledgetotheir
peersiftheseactivitiesdidnotaffectthesharers’futurecareerpath
inthecompany
Anotherissuewasthatthesenderswere“afraidof
responsibil-ities”(accountant).Thismighthappeninthecaseofsensitiveor
importantbusinessproblemsinwhichtheywereaskedtoprovide
informationtohelpsolvethoseissues.Theaccountantaddedthat
“therearesomecasesofleakingourinternalinformationtoour
com-petitorsbysomeemployees”
Inrelationtoorganisationrelateddifficultieswiththe
knowl-edgetransferprocess, thesalesmanagermentioned thelackof
clearguidelinestosupporttheknowledgesharingactivitiesinthe
salesteam.ThescarcityofskilledemployeesatCase1wasalso
men-tionedasanotherdifficulty.Furthermore,boththesalesmanager
andsalesemployeenotedtheneedformotivationalaidsto
stimu-lateemployeestoexchangetheirknowledgewithothers.Thesales
manager alsomentioned theneedtohave appropriateways of measuringthebenefitsoftheknowledgetransferprocess
IntermsofICTrelateddifficulties,therewasnoclearpolicyfor ICTatCase1.Intervieweesacrosssales,administration/accounting andthetechnicalteamindicatedthatCase1didnothaveaspecific budgetforICT.IftherewereanyICTrelatedrequirementsneeded, thedecisionsweremade“onthespotbytheowner”(accountant)
In theadministration/accounting team,theaccountingmanager andaccountantcomplainedthat“wehaveinvested inaccounting software,CRM,HRM,etc.buttheyareallindependent,fromdifferent suppliers.Staffcomplainedtheyaretooslowanddifficulttoconnectto fromoutside”.However,theITmanagerandITstaffmember indi-catedsatisfactionwiththeircurrentICTapplications,especiallythe servicemanagementsoftwareforsupportingtheiractivities.The reasonforthiswastheparticipationoftheITmanagerfromthe beginningstagesofdevelopingtheapplications
3.2.2 Case2 3.2.2.1 Background Founded in 2005, Case2’s main business focusedonsupplyingitsownICTsolutions:Intelligentvehicle man-agementsystems.Ofitstwelveemployees,fourparticipatedinthe study
Case2followedaprofessionalwayofstructuringandrunning theorganisation,basedontheISO9001:2008standard(although notcertifiedatthetimeofinterviews),withclearrulesand regula-tions.DifferentfromCase1,therulesatCase2were“developedfrom theactualactivitiesofthecompanyandcontinuallyrevisedtoensure effectivenessandflexibility”(salesmanager).Intermsofresources, theownercommentedthat“ oneofthebiggestdisadvantagesis thefinancialresource”.However,humanresourceswereperceived
asthestrengthofCase2:“wearenotstronginworkingcapital,but benefitfromourskilledstaff”(owner).Case2hadaflexibleworking environmentwherethestaffandmanagersseemedtofreelyshare workingexperienceamongst them.Theownercommentedthat Case2’s companyculturewaspeopleoriented.Respect amongst employeesandpersonalrelationshipswereregardedasstrengths Theworkingenvironmentwaspredominantlyinfluencedbythe owner,whohadaclearstrategyinguidingthebusinessoperations 3.2.2.2 The practice of knowledge transfer Policies related to knowledge transfer activities were much clearer at Case2than
atCase1.Theknowledgetransferpoliciesweresupportedbythe visionoftheowner/managerwhounderstoodthevalueof knowl-edgeaswellasthebenefitsthattheknowledgetransferprocess mightprovidetothebusiness.Inaddition,employeesalsoactively engagedintheknowledgesharingactivitieswithinthe organisa-tion.Theowner’sviewonknowledgetransferwasthat“themore peoplewhoknowthebetter”.Hence,ifemployeeswerefacing“any problems,theyjustaskanyexperiencedstaffmembers,theywill han-dleitstraightaway”(owner).Inaddition,theknowledgetransfer practicewassupportedbytheorganisationalculturewhere the employees “basically motivateand support each other” and “the workingenvironmentisveryconvenientforsharingknowledge”(sales manager)
Case2 conducted business in the same ICT business areaas Case1.However,Case2positioneditselfinnichesegmentswhere
it tailoreditssolutions tospecificcustomerrequirements Sales employeesofCase2wererequiredtohavemorein-depth knowl-edgeabouttechnicalaspectsoftheproducts/solutionswhichthey providedtocustomers
TheknowledgesharingactivitiesatCase2werecarriedoutby differentmethods,supportedbytheuseofdifferentICTtools Infor-mationinCase2wasmostlydigitisedandkeptinelectronicform Thedata werestored eitheronsharedfolders onthecompany intranet,onlineonthecompanywebsite,internal forums, solu-tionforumsorthecompanyFacebookpage.Althoughtherewasno
Trang 5420 T Nguyen, S Burgess / International Journal of Information Management 34 (2014) 416–421
DocumentManagementSystemassuch,documentlibrariesexisted
atC3.Thecompany’sinternalonlinesolutionforumalsoactedas
aneffectiveonlinecommunityofpracticewhereemployeeswere
freetogetand shareinformation,either usingtheiridentityor
anonymously.Theemployees,especiallythetechnicalstaff,also
tookadvantageofanumberofICTequipment/solutionsavailableto
themtoenablethetransferofknowledgeeffectively.Oneexample
wasthattheyusedtheirsmartphonestorecordvideosofhowthey
would‘troubleshoot’aparticularinstallation–anduploadedthese
ontoaYouTubeservicefor theirpeerstoaccess.Also,technical
staffcapturedeverysteptheydidincertainprocessesandshared
theseintheonlineforum.Itwascompulsorytohaveminutesof
meetingssharedaftereverymeeting.Therewerealsoemployees
assignedespeciallyforupdatingthecompanywebsite,Facebook
pageandonlineforums
3.2.2.3 Difficulties AllintervieweesofCase2indicatedthatthey
did not face any problems in regard to senders of
knowl-edgebeingafraidtosharetheirknowledge.Furthermore,Case2
utilisedICT applicationsfor documenting, storing and
transfer-ringinformation Thus, as reported bythe owner,theproblem
ofinformation confidentialitydidnotexist.Further,the
knowl-edgesharingcultureatCase2alsopartlyeliminatedthedifficulties
arisingfromthesenders-receiversrelationshipsinthesalesteam
However,inthetechnicalteam,thisdifficultydidexist.For
tech-nicians, especially with regard totroubleshooting activities: “it
(the sharing behaviour) is all individual based, if you are
con-fident with your knowledge, if you trust others to share your
knowledge If they are not the ones who have related benefits
(thatis,working inthesame team,orbeingaleader),the quality
of knowledgethey sharewill depend on the relationship between
them” (IT staff member) This highlights another issue
impact-ing on the knowledge sharing activities, whether or not both
thesharersandreceiverswereworkinginthesameteam.They
werewilling toshare with theirteammates or theirown staff
to contribute to their team performance If the senders and
receiverswerenot onthe sameteam, thesenders onlyshared
knowledgeif theytrusted or had a closerelationship withthe
receiver
At the organisation level, with the exception of financial
resources, Case2 benefitted from its skilled and experienced
employees There were guidelines in relation to the
knowl-edge transfer practices to guide employees in using necessary
methods/tools in exchanging knowledge within the
organisa-tion.Withthestrongvisionofsharingknowledge,aknowledge
sharing culture existed at Case2 to facilitate the
knowl-edge transfer practice However, there were also no specific
motivational aids to trigger employees to share their
knowl-edge
Interms ofICT, theadministrationemployeesuggested that
there was a need for the company and ICT application
deve-lopers to work together closely for ICT solutions tailored to
Case2’s needs However, it seemed that this type of difficulty
(for general ICT applications) did not bother the technicians
at Case2 The IT staff member commented that he was happy
withthe current ICT applications for carrying out tasks
How-ever, he was also aware of the need to have specialised ICT
applications to support the knowledge transfer activities In
general, the owner did not pay much attention to ICT
poli-cies
3.2.3 Summaryofcases
Despitethetwocasebusinesseshavingdifferentlevelsofformal
processesandproceduresin regardtoknowledge transfer,they
bothexhibitedsomequitesophisticatedapproachestoknowledge
transfer–ifsomewhatinconsistentlythroughoutthebusinesses Thislevelofsophisticationislikelytobeduetothefactthatthe twobusinesseswereICT-focussed
Theresultssuggest thatemployeeswhosejobsrequiredless flexibility needed to have and handle more explicit types of knowledge.Alternatively,employeesrequiredmoretacittypesof knowledgeiftheirworkingproceduresweremoreflexible.In addi-tion,tacitknowledgewasmainlytransferredbynon-ICTmethods, withexplicitknowledgebeingtransferredvia acombination of ICTandnon-ICTmethods.Typically,thesendersandreceiversof knowledgeselected themethods which weremostsuitable for them
WhilstCase2hadsomeformsofknowledgetransferguidelines foritsemployeestoperformbasicactivitiessuchasdocumenting, searching,storingandtransferringknowledge,therewasalmost
nowrittenknowledgetransferstrategy.Withregardtosupporting strategiesforsharingknowledge,Case2wasperceivedto experi-encegreaterbenefitsthanCase1.Inaddition,moremethods(both non-ICTbasedandICTbasedmethods)wereusedbyemployeesat Case2
Theoutcomeoftheknowledgetransferprocesswasaffected
bytheactivitiesofbothsendersandreceivers.Itisthesenders’ decisionsonwhatknowledgetotransfer,iftheywanttotransfer (activelyorpassivelyparticipateinthetransferprocess);towhom theytransfer,whichmethodsareusedtotransfer,and finallyif theyareskilfulenoughtotransferknowledgeeffectively.Business cultureaffectedemployees’willingnesstoshareknowledgeand choiceastowhoitissharedwith.Similarly,thetransferprocess dependedonthereceiversinregardtowhatand whichtypeof knowledgetheyrequired,fromwhomtheyreceivedknowledge,in whatways,iftheywerecapableenoughtoabsorbandapplyitand theirabilitytoprovideappropriatefeedbacktothesenders The interviewees, especially the owners/managers, all men-tionedthattheywereinneedofanassessmentmethodtoevaluate theperformanceoftheknowledgetransferpracticeattheir orga-nisations
4 Lessonslearned Smallbusinessowners/managersandemployeescantakethe following points into consideration when participating in the knowledgetransferprocess
Knowledgeistransferredbetweenindividuals.However, indi-vidualsarealldifferent.Inadditiontothesenders‘volunteering’to activelyengageinknowledgetransferactivities,itisalsoimportant forreceiverstounderstandallaspectsoftheknowledgeprocess andthebenefitstobegainedfromactivelyengaginginknowledge transferactivities.Theprocessusedtodeterminebenefitsneedsto
besimpleforsmallbusinessestoapply.Thisistoprovidenecessary feedbackofthesuccessoftheirknowledgetransferactivities.This feedbackcanthenbeusedasinputstorevise/improveknowledge transferpractices
Furthermore,smallbusinessowners/managersneedto under-standtheircrucialrolesinprovidingtheappropriateknowledge transferenvironmentstotheiremployees.Itisimportanttoensure thatadocumentedknowledgetransferpolicyexistsforbothICT andnon-ICTknowledgetransfer.Inadditiontohavingunderstood thebenefitswhichtheknowledgetransferprocessprovidestotheir organisations,owner/managersareexpectedtotakeintoaccount thefactorsaffectingtheoutcomesoftheprocess.Thisisespecially
inregardtoidentifyingthosefactorsthatcanpositivelyinfluence theknowledgetransferprocess.Theycaninfluencethecreation
ofanenvironmentwhereemployeesareencouragedtosharedata usingICTandnon-ICTbasedmethods
Trang 65 Conclusion
Thisarticle hasexaminedthepracticeofknowledgetransfer
activitiesthroughacasestudyinvolvingtwosmallICTretailersin
Vietnam.Guidedbyaknowledgetransferframeworkdeveloped
forsmallbusinesses,thisstudyinvestigatedthecommontypesof
knowledge,non-ICTandICTbasedmethodsusedfortransferring
knowledgeandthedifficultiesassociatedwithknowledgetransfer
activities.Thefindingsshoweddifferencesintheknowledge
trans-ferprocessesofthecasesandreflectedthemajorchallengesbeing
facedbysmallbusinessesinregardtoknowledgetransfer.Whilst
theresultssuggestedquitesophisticatedknowledgemanagement
activitiesinbothcasebusinesses,itistoberememberedthatthe
businessesbothoperatedintheICTarena.Othersmallbusinesses
wouldnottypicallyhavethislevelofactivityforknowledge
trans-fer.Also,whilsttheactivitiesweresophisticated,therewerestill
obviousgapsintheknowledgetransferprocess(suchasalackof
evaluationofknowledgetransferactivities,asuitable,documented
knowledgetransferpolicyandaneedtoaddresstheknowledge
transferculture)thatprovidesbothbusinesseswithplentyofscope
toimprovetheirknowledgetransferprocesses
References
and knowledge sharing: Critical success factors Journal of Knowledge
Manage-ment, 11, 22–42.
knowl-edge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues MIS
Quarterly, 25, 30.
man-agement through IT opportunities: Definition of a theoretical model based on
tools and processes classification In Proceedings of the European Conference on
Intellectual Capital (pp 21–33).
organizations for transferring and sharing knowledge IUP Journal of Knowledge
Management, 9, 37–56.
advantage in firms Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82,
150–169.
small businesses: Strategies for successful implementation Hershey, PA:
Informa-tion Science Reference.
transfer needs among small and medium enterprises Library Review, 60, 37–52.
true value by finding its hidden brainpower New York: HarperBusiness.
knowledge transfer in the shipping industry Maritime Policy & Management, 38, 347–367.
Methods, 18, 59–82.
organi-zational performance: An integrative view and empirical examination Journal
of Management Information Systems, 20, 179–228.
of knowledge transfer model In International Conference on Wireless Commu-nications, Networking and Mobile Computing, 2007 WiCom 2007 (pp 5439– 5442).
In 27th ANZAM Conference Hobart, Australia, December 4–6.
companies create the dynamics of innovation New York: Oxford University Press.
stickiness Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 9–27.
knowledge transfer: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its antecedents and consequences Journal of Management Studies, 45, 830–853.
Melbourne: Pearson Addison Wesley.
the small business environment Journal of Knowledge Management, 8, 44– 61.
Productivity Organization.
Vietnam.
Management.