Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Intellectual ...

Nurul Indarti
that with respect to acquiring knowledge, small firms are more inclined to approach and interact with
external parties/sources with which <strong>the</strong>y are acquainted (Fann and Smeltzer, 1989).
Table 1: Knowledge domains and interconnectedness
Source
Product
Knowledge on
Process Organizational
Interconnectedness
Buyers 3.37 1.16 1.30 1.70
Suppliers 0.96 1.40 0.54 0.78
Competitors 1.59 1.08 0.97 1.13
Consultants 0.34 0.27 0.43 0.28
Government <strong>of</strong>fices 0.32 0.29 0.56 0.32
Industry associations 0.93 0.77 1.01 0.84
Religious affiliations 0.23 0.19 0.28 0.20
Research institutions/universities 0.26 0.19 0.19 0.19
Exhibitions 2.31 0.99 1.33 1.43
Magazines/newspapers 2.25 1.17 1.21 1.42
Television 1.07 0.59 0.49 0.61
Radio 0.09 0.11 0.12 0.09
Internet 2.11 1.10 1.31 1.42
Note: 5-point Likert scale (0=not at all, 1=very little, 5=very much).
4.2.2 Type <strong>of</strong> external knowledge
Sensory knowledge
Knowledge from buyers (mean=3.79) is <strong>the</strong> most sensory, followed by knowledge from Internet
(mean=3.66) (Table 2). Sensory knowledge is dependent on its context and can only be obtained
through imitation. For example, when buyers order a particular outdoor table made <strong>of</strong> mahogany
wood, <strong>the</strong>y provide <strong>the</strong> company with a detailed description <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> model, including <strong>the</strong> preferred size,
colors, and shape. They may also provide pictures. Based on this information, <strong>the</strong> furniture firm
manufactures <strong>the</strong> product. However, it happens only seldom that <strong>the</strong>se buyers provide information on
how to process <strong>the</strong> raw material (i.e. <strong>the</strong> mahogany wood). This finding may be explained by <strong>the</strong>
nature <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> knowledge provided by <strong>the</strong>se sources. It is generally perceived that this knowledge
provides only little contextual references and clues for imitation.
Table 2: Sensory, coded, and <strong>the</strong>oretical knowledge
Sensory Coded Theoretical
Source <strong>of</strong> knowledge Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Buyers 3.79 0.93 3.90 0.98 3.91 0.88
Suppliers 3.62 1.01 3.88 0.87 3.79 0.97
Competitors 3.22 1.05 3.28 1.04 3.43 0.99
Consultants 3.50 0.97 3.53 1.07 3.71 0.90
Government <strong>of</strong>fices 2.93 0.92 3.25 1.04 3.25 1.16
Industry associations 3.22 1.08 3.50 0.95 3.42 0.97
Religious affiliations 3.38 1.04 3.79 0.80 3.20 0.94
Research institutions/universities 3.13 0.74 3.33 0.98 3.18 1.07
Exhibitions 3.41 0.93 2.69 0.98 3.69 1.08
Magazines/newspapers 3.35 1.00 3.64 1.09 3.66 1.10
Television 2.96 1.11 3.38 1.24 3.41 1.40
Radio 2.13 1.46 2.63 1.60 2.22 1.64
Internet 3.69 0.88 3.89 0.90 3.90 0.87
Note: 5-point Likert scale (1=little sensory/less coded/less <strong>the</strong>oretical; 5=much sensory/more
coded/more <strong>the</strong>oretical)
Surprisingly, <strong>the</strong> external knowledge from <strong>the</strong> radio, government <strong>of</strong>fices, and <strong>the</strong> television is
regarded as <strong>the</strong> least sensory. Knowledge from <strong>the</strong> radio is transferred by sound, while <strong>the</strong> television
sends sounds and images to its receivers (Crisell, 1986). From <strong>the</strong> perspective <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> furniture firms,
<strong>the</strong> knowledge <strong>of</strong>fered by <strong>the</strong>se sources is <strong>the</strong> most accessible compared to that <strong>of</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r providers.
The ubiquitous quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se sources may explain this accessibility. However, in spite <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>
transparency <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> knowledge provided by <strong>the</strong>se sources, this study shows that <strong>the</strong> furniture firms
only rarely address <strong>the</strong>se sources for obtaining knowledge in all domains.
248