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

Note: Substitution role: - ← +; Support role: + → +
6. Conclusion
Maurizio Massaro and Andrea Moro
The present paper illustrates a conceptual framework that links <strong>the</strong> aims <strong>of</strong> knowledge leadership
process, levers <strong>of</strong> control and trust. Previous research argues that <strong>the</strong>re could be a link between trust
and control but it does not investigate such a link properly, nor does it investigate <strong>the</strong> impact on
knowledge leadership process. This paper argues that trustworthiness factors substitute control
mechanisms in supporting <strong>the</strong> knowledge leadership process when <strong>the</strong> firm implements boundary,
diagnostic and belief LOCs. We point out that integrity could substitute <strong>the</strong> belief systems in inspiring
and mentoring people; benevolence and integrity could substitute boundary systems in supporting
alignment <strong>of</strong> KM with strategies; ability could substitute diagnostic systems in executing activities for
allowing <strong>the</strong> achievement <strong>of</strong> aims. At <strong>the</strong> same time, benevolence and Integrity could support
interactive systems in fostering teaching and knowledge process sharing.
This research also evidences limitations that open <strong>the</strong> door to new and additional research. Firstly, we
investigate a few small firms in Nor<strong>the</strong>rn Italy. This aspect limits <strong>the</strong> possibility <strong>of</strong> generalize <strong>the</strong>
conceptual framework, because <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> culture in developing trust. Thus, it could be useful to
examine <strong>the</strong> applicability <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> conceptual framework in o<strong>the</strong>r cultural environments. Secondly, <strong>the</strong>
approach is qualitative. Testing <strong>the</strong> conceptual framework quantitatively could be interesting and
could provide some insights into whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> conceptual framework can be generalized. Thirdly, <strong>the</strong>
research is cross sectional. It could be interesting to examine <strong>the</strong> evolution <strong>of</strong> trust through time and
its impact on LOCs and KM.
Notwithstanding <strong>the</strong> stated limitations, this research is a step forward in <strong>the</strong> examination <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong>
trust and control mechanisms on <strong>the</strong> knowledge leadership process.
References
Argyris, C. (1992), On Organisational Learning, 2 nd Edition, Blackwell Publisher, Oxford, UK.
Barney, J.B., (1990). “The Debate between Traditional Management Theory and Organisational Economics:
Substantive Differences or Intergroup Conflict?” Academy <strong>of</strong> Management Review, 15(3), 382-393.
Bijaya M. and Uday Bhaskar A. (2011) "Knowledge management process in two learning organisations", Journal
<strong>of</strong> Knowledge Management, 15(2), 344-359.
Birkinshaw, J. (2001), ”Making sense <strong>of</strong> knowledge management” Ivey Business Journal, 65(4), 32-36.
Doz, Y.L., (1996), “The Evolution <strong>of</strong> Cooperation in Strategic Alliances: Initial Conditions or Learning Process?”
Strategic Management Journal, 17(1), 55-83.
Faems, D., Janssens, M. and Van Looy, B. (2010), ”Managing <strong>the</strong> Cooperation–Competition Dilemma in R&D
Alliances”, Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(1), 3–22.
Gulati, R. and Singh, H. (1998), “The Architecture <strong>of</strong> Cooperation: Managing Coordination Costs and
Appropriation Concerns in Strategic Alliances”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 43(4), 660-679.
Holsapple, C.W. and Jones, K. (2005) ”Exploring Secondary Activities <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Knowledge Chain”, Knowledge and
Process Management, 12(1), 3-31.
Langhfield-Smith, K., (2008), “The Relations Between Transactional Characteristics, Trust and Risk in <strong>the</strong> Start-
Up Phase <strong>of</strong> a Collaborative Alliance”, Management Accounting Reserach, 19(4), 344-364
Lewicki, R.J. and Bunker, B.B. (1996), “Developing and Maintaining Trust in Working Relationships. In R.M.
Kramer and T.R. Tyler” (Eds), Trust in Organisation (114-139), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Loermans, J. (2002), “Synergizing <strong>the</strong> learning organization and knowledge management”, Journal <strong>of</strong> Knowledge
Management, 6(3), 285-294.
Luhmann, N. (2000), “Familiarity, Confidence, Trust: Problems and Alternative. In D. Gambetta (Ed.)” Trust:
Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, Department <strong>of</strong> Sociology, University <strong>of</strong> Oxford.
Macaulay, S. (1963), “Non-contractual Relations in Business: a Preliminary Study” American Sociological
Review, 28(1), 55-67.
Mayer, R.C., Davies, J.H. Schoorman, F.D. (1995), “An Integrative Model <strong>of</strong> Organisational Trust”, Academy <strong>of</strong>
Management Review, 20(3), 709-734.
Mundy, J. (2010), “Creating dynamic tensions through a balanced use <strong>of</strong> management control systems”,
Accounting, Organizations and Society, 35(5), 499-523.
Nold, H.A. (2011), ”Making Knowledge management work: tactical to practical”, Knowledge Management
Research, 9(3), 84-94.
Nonaka I,. Takeuchi H. (1995), The Knowledge-Creating Company, Oxford University Press, New York, USA.
Nooteboom, B. (2002), Trust. Edgar Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
Nooteboom, B., Berger, H. and Noorderhaven, N.G. (1997), “Effects <strong>of</strong> Trust and Governance on Relational
Risk”, Academy <strong>of</strong> Management Journal, 40(2), 308-338.
Ring, P.S. and Van de Ven, A.H. (1992), “Structuring cooperative relationships between organisations”, Strategic
Management Journal, 13(7), 483-498.
364