Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Knowledge ...

Individual Level Influencers on Tacit Knowledge Sharing
Processes
Claire Gubbins 1 , Grainne Kelly 1 , Lawrence Dooley 2 , Cécile Emery 3 and Eamonn
Murphy 4
1
HRM & Organizational Psychology Group, Dublin City University, Dublin,
Ireland
2
Department <strong>of</strong> Management and Marketing, University College Cork, Ireland
3
Employment Relations & Organizational Behaviour Group, London School <strong>of</strong>
Economics & Political Science, London, UK
4
Enterprise Research Centre, University <strong>of</strong> Limerick, Limerick, Ireland
claire.gubbins@dcu.ie
grainne.kelly@dcu.ie
L.Dooley@ucc.ie
c.emery@lse.ac.uk
eamonn.murphy@ul.ie
Abstract: Smith (2001) notes that "much <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> knowledge on which performance in real-world settings is based
is tacit knowledge" and 90 percent <strong>of</strong> knowledge in any organisation is embedded in people's heads. It is through
converting tacit knowledge to value that <strong>the</strong> organisation obtains <strong>the</strong> competitive advantages achievable through
knowledge management (KM) (KPMG, 2000). Much research explores <strong>the</strong> management <strong>of</strong> explicit knowledge
but limited progress is made on that <strong>of</strong> tacit knowledge (Insch et al., 2008; Perez & Mitra, 2007). Employees are
<strong>the</strong> fundamental repositories <strong>of</strong> tacit knowledge and are <strong>the</strong> key players in knowledge management initiatives.
Tacit knowledge is personal, hard to communicate and exists in individuals mental models (Cho, Li, Su, 2007). It
is <strong>the</strong>refore <strong>the</strong> individual whom decides if <strong>the</strong>y will share <strong>the</strong>ir knowledge (Constant et al., 1994). Thus, an
understanding <strong>of</strong> individual factors and <strong>the</strong>ir influence on knowledge management processes is key to <strong>the</strong>
success <strong>of</strong> any knowledge management initiative (Tohidinia & Mosakhani, 2010). Wang and Noe (2010) and
Cho, Li and Su (2007) argue for fur<strong>the</strong>r research on individual level variables. Additionally, <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> studies
on <strong>the</strong>se variables is limited and many define knowledge broadly to include explicit knowledge. This study aims to
advance on this research gap and explore <strong>the</strong> influence <strong>of</strong> individual level factors on tacit knowledge
management processes. The case study is based on an American multinational manufacturing site and <strong>the</strong>
participants are engineers whom engage in routine and non-routine tasks which demand use <strong>of</strong> both explicit and
tacit knowledge. A qualitative methodology is utilised. This paper presents <strong>the</strong> preliminary results <strong>of</strong> this
investigation.
Keywords: Tacit Knowledge, Knowledge Management, Individual Factors
1. Introduction
There is broad agreement in <strong>the</strong> literature as to <strong>the</strong> processes involved in knowledge management.
Alavi and Leidner (2001) succinctly identify four basic steps involved in <strong>the</strong> knowledge management
process: creation, storage/retrieval, transfer, and application <strong>of</strong> knowledge. Kakabadse, Kouzmin, and
Kakabadse (2001) and Yahya and Goh (2002) both refer to an additional step; knowledge acquisition
or capture. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), in specific consideration <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> tacit-explicit dimension <strong>of</strong>
knowledge, refer to <strong>the</strong> steps <strong>of</strong> socialisation, externalisation, combination and internalisation. The
review suggests that <strong>the</strong> sub-processes in <strong>the</strong> knowledge management process are knowledge
seeking, access, sharing (socialisation), capture (externalisation) and transfer (internalisation and
application). These sub-processes are not necessarily sequential but ra<strong>the</strong>r interactive. While such
sub-processes are evident in <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>oretical literature, <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> empirical studies reviewed are
concerned with <strong>the</strong> step <strong>of</strong> knowledge sharing or fail to disentangle <strong>the</strong> steps thus potentially
neglecting key precursor and post cursor steps and <strong>the</strong> associated influential nuances which may
better inform understanding <strong>of</strong> how to manage knowledge, in particular tacit knowledge. In this regard,
this paper focuses on individual level influencers on each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se sub-processes. The literature
emphasises that an important reason for failure in knowledge sharing is <strong>the</strong> lack <strong>of</strong> consideration <strong>of</strong>
<strong>the</strong> influence <strong>of</strong> organizational and interpersonal characteristics (Carter & Scarbrough, 2001; Voelpel,
Dous & Davenport, 2005). Wang & Noe (2010) focus on <strong>the</strong> individual level factors that influence
knowledge sharing between employees as <strong>the</strong>y argue that team and organizational level knowledge
is influenced by <strong>the</strong> extent to which knowledge sharing occurs between employees (Cabrera &
Cabrera, 2005; Gupta & Govindarajan, 2000; Nonaka, 1994; Polanyi, 1966; Tsoukas & Vladimirous,
2001). In a recent review <strong>of</strong> empirical studies focused at <strong>the</strong> individual level <strong>of</strong> knowledge sharing,
372