Knowledge type and communication media choice in the knowledge transfer process.

Many researchers have written that knowledge is the key ingredient in gaining a competitive advantage (e.g., Gnyawali et al., 1997; Kogut and Zander, 1992) and that knowledge is a firm's main inimitable resource (Grant, 1996b). One important implication of this research is that in order for firms to maximize the competitive advantage arising from knowledge, knowledge must be effectively transferred within organizations. What is absent in the literature, however, is information on how organizations accomplish this task (Spender and Grant, 1996). While the importance of research on knowledge sharing has been well documented (e.g., Dodgson, 1993), very little empirical research exists that offers practical guidelines for organizations seeking to manage the knowledge transfer process.

Research on knowledge transfer in organizations has been conducted from a variety of theoretical perspectives including individual psychology, strategic management, and organization theory. The psychology literature has focused on individual knowledge transfer processes and outcomes, such as how task experience affects performance on other tasks or the extent and accuracy of recall (Argote et al., 2000). In contrast, the strategy literature has focused on organizational outcomes like firm success and competitive advantage (e.g., Grant, 1996b; Zander and Kogut, 1995). Zander and Kogut (1995) have shown that increasing degrees of knowledge codifiability and teachability speed knowledge transfer. Organization theory researchers have been concerned with organization forms and how they affect the knowledge transfer process (Darr et al., 1995; Argote et al., 2000). What ties these diverse approaches together is the belief that knowledge transfer within organizations is a key component of organizational learning, a topic that is also the focus of considerable attention (Dodgson, 1993).

In this research we propose that one way organizations manage the knowledge-sharing process is to select appropriate communication media for the property or type of knowledge to be transferred. Our survey of 287 employees in five hospitals provides support for our hypotheses, and our results were consistent across three administrative levels: hospital administrators, nursing directors, and staff nurses. Communication media classified as having low-media richness were most likely to be chosen to share information or explicit knowledge, whereas media classified as having high-media richness were most likely to be chosen to transfer know-how or tacit knowledge (Daft and Lengel, 1986; Grant, 1996b; Nonaka, 1991).

In the next sections we discuss the literature that addresses knowledge and knowledge transfer, and develop our hypotheses by building on the strategic management and organization theory literatures. We then present the methods and results of our empirical analysis, followed by a discussion section that addresses the implications of our study for both researchers and managers. Finally, we conclude with a summary of the overall study, limitations, and directions for future research.

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Knowledge and Knowledge Transfer

Throughout the 1990s and early 2000s, both researchers and practitioners (e.g., Desenberg, 2000; Govindarajan and Fisher, 1990; Kogut and Zander, 1992; Narasimha, 2000; Zander and Kogut, 1995) have discussed the importance of knowledge transfer within organizations. The idea that knowledge transfer is necessary to an organization's success has become the focal point of strategy and the strategic planning process (Liebeskind, 1996). Knowledge has emerged as the most strategically significant resource of the firm (Grant, 1996b).

Knowledge may be defined as information whose validity has been established through test of proof and can therefore be distinguished from opinion, speculation, beliefs, or other types of unproven information (Liebeskind, 1996). This definition of knowledge consists of two primary classifications: information (explicit knowledge) and know-how (tacit knowledge) (Nonaka, 1991; Simmonds et al., 2001). Information is knowledge that can be transmitted without loss of integrity once the syntactical rules required for deciphering it are known. Thus, knowledge as information implies knowing what something means, and that it can be written down (Grant, 1996b; Nonaka, 1994). Know-how is more complex than information. Know-how is the accumulated practical skill or experience that allows one to do something efficiently. Know-how has a personal quality that makes it difficult to formalize and to communicate because it involves both cognitive and technical elements and is not easy to write down (Grant, 1996b; Nonaka, 1994).

Knowledge transfer within organizations is one important way for organizational members to learn from one another and to create new knowledge. It may be described as the process through which one organizational unit (individual, group, department, etc.) is affected by the experience of another (Argote et al., 2000). There are many reasons that knowledge transfer is vital to organizations. First, high resource sharing and knowledge transfer may yield a synergistic cost advantage, providing a shared resource at a lower cost if different parts of the organization had produced or created it separately (Brush, 1996; Govindarajan and Fisher, 1990; Gupta and Govindarajan, 1986; Porter, 1987). Second, knowledge transfer enables organizational members to identify and to respond appropriately to critical environmental situations and to adapt more quickly (Zajac and Bazerman, 1991). Third, knowledge transfer allows members to obtain more complete information and to make better informed decisions (Gnyawali et al., 1997). Finally, organizations create new knowledge by integrating complementary knowledge held separately by organizational members (Anand et al., 2003; Grant, 1996a).

In this study, we adopt the organizational learning perspective of Dodgson (1993) who argues that individuals are the primary learning entity in organizations and that it is the individual that creates organizational forms that encourage learning and knowledge transfer. If individuals transfer knowledge to other organizational members, then the organization has learned. Organizational learning results in associations, cognitive systems, and memories that are shared by organizational members (Fiol and Lyles, 1985). Our purpose is therefore to use the theoretical literature to explain how organizations transfer knowledge, and offer managerial implications as a consequence of our empirical analyses.

Many factors are involved in transferring knowledge within organizations. The literature has identified several characteristics of knowledge, knowledge sources, knowledge recipients, and contextual situations that act to either promote or inhibit knowledge transfer. Additionally, there are a wide range of mechanisms that may be used to share organizational knowledge. As discussed above, a central attribute of knowledge is its tacitness. Imperfectly understood and idiosyncratic features of knowledge increase the difficulty of knowledge transfer and application (Lesser and Fontaine, 2004; Szulanski, 1996). Moreover, knowledge without a proven record of past usefulness may also be more difficult to transfer (Szulanski, 1996).

Relationships between knowledge sources and recipients are also an important determinant of knowledge transfer or diffusion (Strang and Soule, 1998). Cohesion through strong ties such as close social relations, organizational cultures, or a shared superordinate identity promotes knowledge sharing in a number of ways. These include frequent interaction, pressures for conformity, increased trust, and individuals feeling more comfortable sharing knowledge with those belonging to the same group (Kane et al., 2005; Strang and Soule, 1998; Wang and Nicholas, 2005). In addition, weak ties such as those between individuals in overlapping social circles play a role in knowledge sharing through the spreading of news or information (Strang and Soule, 1998).

Characteristics of knowledge providers and recipients that are likely to intervene in the knowledge-sharing process include absorptive capacity, the ability to exploit outside sources of knowledge (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990; Szulanski, 1996), levels of motivation, (Szulanski, 1996), and spatial proximity (Schenkel, 2004; Strang and Soule, 1998). Lastly, variations in organizational contexts with respect to formal structures and systems may affect the number of attempts and outcomes of attempts to transfer knowledge (Szulanski, 1996). Interconnected organizations such as franchises or chains can transfer knowledge more readily across their respective units (Argote et al., 2000).

Firm-specific contexts also affect the choice of knowledge transfer mechanisms. These mechanisms include personnel movement, managerial expatriation, technology transfer, patents, and interorganizational relationships such as joint ventures (Argote et al., 2000; Downes and Thomas, 2000; Wang and Nicholas, 2005). Underlying these organizational-level mechanisms are the important social interaction processes of communication and training. Social processes involve the sharing, combining, and storing of knowledge through natural means such as meals or driving to customer sites, or more formal means such as company meetings or events (Argote et al., 2000; Fontaine and Millen, 2004; Schenkel, 2004).