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

Albena Antonova and Aniko Csepregi
techniques. While different researchers investigate knowledge types, organizational types or KS
instruments, we propose a new assessment framework. It is based on <strong>the</strong> developed KS/KT model
(Antonova et al. 2011) and is composed <strong>of</strong> 4 layers – initiator, focus, process and purpose <strong>of</strong> KS.
Therefore this framework is applied on empirical data, obtained from a survey among 640 middle
managers in Bulgaria and Hungary. It will be discussed how individuals are involved in KS activities
and what <strong>the</strong>ir role is during <strong>the</strong> internalization and externalization <strong>of</strong> knowledge. Analysis <strong>of</strong> empirical
results will enable us to identify popular practices for KS. The proposed model will enhance <strong>the</strong>
understanding <strong>of</strong> KS practices and will visualize <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> knowledge internalization and
externalization for s<strong>of</strong>t techniques. It will propose a practical approach to improve organizational s<strong>of</strong>t
techniques for knowledge sharing.
2. Theoretical overview
2.1 Understanding Knowledge sharing and Knowledge transfer
In <strong>the</strong> first section we will provide a short overview <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> concepts <strong>of</strong> knowledge sharing and
knowledge transfer. According to Mughal (2010) in <strong>the</strong> epistemological literature <strong>of</strong> knowledge
management <strong>the</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> knowledge sharing and transfer have been used interchangeably.
However, it can be noticed that KS is used in social and organizational research texts, highlighting <strong>the</strong>
role <strong>of</strong> individual and organizational factors for KS (Lin, 2007; Hendriks,1999). On opposite, <strong>the</strong> term
KT is applied ra<strong>the</strong>r on abstract level, designating <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> knowledge transfer, media and ICT
technologies implementation.
Christensen (2007, pp. 37) believes that “<strong>the</strong> goal <strong>of</strong> KS can ei<strong>the</strong>r be to create new knowledge by
differently combining existing knowledge or to become better at exploiting existing knowledge”.
Knowledge sharing is <strong>the</strong> voluntary dissemination <strong>of</strong> acquired skills and experience to <strong>the</strong> rest <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>
organization (Law, 2007). Bosua and Scheepers (2007) insist on <strong>the</strong> dual process <strong>of</strong> KS for enquiring
and contributing to knowledge through activities such as learning by- observation, listening and
asking, sharing ideas, giving advice, recognizing cues, and adopting patterns <strong>of</strong> behaviour. From <strong>the</strong>
point <strong>of</strong> view <strong>of</strong> Yang et al. (2007, pp.96) KS is “a set <strong>of</strong> behaviours about knowledge exchange which
involves actors, knowledge content, organizational context, appropriate media, and social
environment”. The two sides <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> knowledge sharing process are discussed differently in <strong>the</strong>
literature and are assumed to have different nature and are influenced by different factors (van den
Ho<strong>of</strong>f, de Ridder 2004). Ardichvili et al (2003) distinguish between supplying and demanding for
knowledge, while van den Ho<strong>of</strong>f and de Ridder (2004) determine knowledge donating and knowledge
collecting.
Ipe (2003) draws a distinction between knowledge sharing and knowledge transfer. KS is “<strong>the</strong> process
by which knowledge held by an individual is converted into a form that can be understood, absorbed,
and used by o<strong>the</strong>r individuals” (Ipe 2003:34) and as a result <strong>the</strong> sender and <strong>the</strong> recipient has a joint
ownership <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> knowledge. Meanwhile according to Ipe (2003) KT mainly illustrates <strong>the</strong> knowledge
movement that occurs between larger organizational entities (departments, divisions or organizations)
described by Chakravarthy et al. (1999) or Lam (1997). Following <strong>the</strong> organizational point <strong>of</strong> view KT
is <strong>of</strong>ten considered as “an event through which one organization learns from <strong>the</strong> experience <strong>of</strong>
ano<strong>the</strong>r” (Darr, Kurtzberg 2000, pp. 29) or it “occurs when experience in one unit <strong>of</strong> an organization
affects ano<strong>the</strong>r unit” (Argote, Ingram 2000, pp. 154).
From ano<strong>the</strong>r perspective that investigates individual level, knowledge transfer (KT) assumes all
activities <strong>of</strong> exchanging explicit or tacit knowledge between two agents, during which one agent
receives and applies <strong>the</strong> knowledge provided by <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r agent (Kumar, Ganesh, 2009). Knowledge
transfer consists <strong>of</strong> movements <strong>of</strong> knowledge between its origin and destination within a specific
context (Bosua, Scheepers, 2007). Thus KT is <strong>the</strong> act <strong>of</strong> transmitting knowledge from one source to
ano<strong>the</strong>r source and using <strong>the</strong> transmitted knowledge in a general way. Following KT, <strong>the</strong> user should
be able to interpret knowledge, and at <strong>the</strong> end <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> KT <strong>the</strong> user himself/herself has to show <strong>the</strong>
same knowledge ability owned by <strong>the</strong> source (Garavelli et al., 2002).
The KS process consists <strong>of</strong> two main activities: transmission and absorption, between <strong>the</strong> knowledge
owner (who possesses knowledge) and <strong>the</strong> knowledge perceiver (who acquires knowledge)
(Hendriks, 1999). First, <strong>the</strong> knowledge owner communicates knowledge in some form (written, verbal)
and after that <strong>the</strong> knowledge receiver has to be able to perceive expression <strong>of</strong> this knowledge and
make sense <strong>of</strong> it. Thus <strong>the</strong> KS process includes both <strong>the</strong> externalization (through <strong>the</strong> competences <strong>of</strong>
38