Date: April 12, 2013 Topic: The Shrinking ... - Georgetown Law

connection with the knowledge provider. Therefore, KMS reduces the need for forming new ties
to gain new knowledge. From this perspective, one would expect that a manager’s technology
use to access a partner’s knowledge (by downloading the partner ’s documents in the KMS) will
decrease the likelihood of new tie formation between the manager and the partner.
Yet our qualitative interviews suggest that technology use without relationships could be
dangerous. People who perceive the risks of misusing distant knowledge might like to connect
with distant partners in order to clarify the appropriate use of that knowledge, but they have no
immediate access to forming those relationships. One possible solution would be to rely on
indirect contacts in order to form relationships with distant knowledge providers. This use of preexisting
social capital in order to form a new relationship with a knowledge provider is
consistent with the social perspective that highlights the importance of interpersonal
relationships in shaping technology use.
Integrating the materialist and social perspectives suggests that the benefits of knowledge
acquired from technology use can be perceived and acted on when surrounded by a context of
complementary social capital. This social capital context should make it more feasible to
conceive of the potential fruitfulness of collaborating. For example, one of our interviewers
(documented above) commented that after downloading a partner’s documents, he was more
likely to connect with that partner if already somewhat acquainted, but not if he lacked any
connection. Therefore, we expect that technology use combined with indirect ties from a
manager to a partner will increase the likelihood of new tie formation, while technology use
lacking pre-existing social capital will not.
H1: Managers downloading documents of partners with whom they have prior indirect
ties (social capital) will increase the likelihood of new tie formation, relative to
downloading documents of partners without prior ties (no social capital).
Technology use and value creation
Research on innovation and value creation suggests that the discovery and combination
of knowledge from different domains helps to foster new knowledge creation (Leonard-Barton
1995; Burt 2004). Hence our baseline expectation about the influence of technology use on value
creation in the law firm is positive. The vision for KMS use, largely rooted in a materialist
perspective, holds that these systems should facilitate effective search and use of existing
knowledge to surface new solutions for clients. Those new solutions might include the
development of new types of services, or the adaptation of existing services to match the needs
of new clients.
For example, a lawyer whose client is considering opening a manufacturing plant in
another country may want to consider a range of issues including tax, intellectual property, and
labour law. If that lawyer turns to her firm’s KMS to search for relevant documents, she may
find examples that are similar but not spot-on. Hence the knowledge content of prior documents
cannot simply be replicated, but hopefully by combining those prior documents, she can produce
higher quality advice for her client. Without the ability to access and integrate prior knowledge
through the KMS, the partner would never have been able to provide that increased level of
service. Further, in subsequent years, that partner may be able to integrate insights gained from
those diverse document inputs for other value creating opportunities, such as analyzing the legal
merits and risks of plant relocations for other clients—leading to additional increases in client
work and revenues.
5