Sandor Lowik, Jeroen Kraaijenbrink and Aard J. Groen
The paper aims to understand how individuals differ in individual absorptive capacity – their ability to recognize, assimilate, transform and exploit external knowledge. These…
Abstract
Purpose
The paper aims to understand how individuals differ in individual absorptive capacity – their ability to recognize, assimilate, transform and exploit external knowledge. These individual absorptive capacities are a key knowledge management building block for an organization’s open innovation practices. The study examines individual antecedents – human capital, social capital and cognition – and innovation outcomes of individual absorptive capacity.
Design/methodology/approach
This is a quantitative study of 147 employees in a single medium-sized Dutch industrial firm. Based on a survey and structural equation modeling, the antecedents’ prior knowledge diversity, network diversity and cognitive style are examined in relation to individual absorptive capacity. Further, the mediating effects of individual absorptive capacity on its antecedents and innovation outcome are investigated.
Findings
The main findings are that prior knowledge diversity, external network diversity and a bisociative cognitive style explain differences in individual absorptive capacity. A bisociative cognitive style appears to be the most important factor. Also, this study finds that individual absorptive capacity mediates between its antecedents and individual innovation performance and is therefore a relevant factor to capture value from external knowledge sources.
Research limitations/implications
The study extends open innovation theory by exploring individual-level factors that explain the ability to capture value from external knowledge. It suggests that differences in open innovation practices are explained by heterogeneity at the individual level. Further, it explains how individuals’ potentials for open innovation are mediated by their absorptive capacities. These insights enable future researchers to further examine individual-level factors in knowledge management practices and to explore cross-level individual-organizational interactions for open innovation.
Practical implications
This paper highlights that individuals’ engagements in open innovation practices are explained not only by individuals’ motivations but also by their abilities to absorb external knowledge. Further, it helps managers to design knowledge management practices to promote employees’ absorptive capacities, to improve open innovation processes.
Originality/value
This study investigates the neglected individual-level factors of open innovation practices from a micro-foundational and knowledge management perspective. To our best knowledge, this is the first study to examine individual-level antecedents and outcomes of individual absorptive capacity.
Details
Keywords
Sandor Lowik, Jeroen Kraaijenbrink and Aard Groen
The paper aims to understand how knowledge-intensive teams can develop and enhance their team absorptive capacity (ACAP) level, by exploring whether individual and organizational…
Abstract
Purpose
The paper aims to understand how knowledge-intensive teams can develop and enhance their team absorptive capacity (ACAP) level, by exploring whether individual and organizational factors are complements or substitutes for team ACAP.
Design/methodology/approach
The study applies a configurational approach using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to identify combinations of individual and team factors that are associated with team ACAP. Data were gathered through a survey among 297 employees of four medium-sized Dutch firms, working in 48 functional teams.
Findings
The primary finding is that knowledge-intensive team ACAP depends on a triad of complementary factors: team members’ individual ACAP, factors that enable knowledge integration and factors that motivate knowledge integration. Underdevelopment of one or more factors leads to lower team ACAP.
Research limitations/implications
The study contributes to the discussion on the locus of knowledge-creation and enhances understandings of why knowledge-intensive teams differ in knowledge processing capabilities. It suggests future research on cross-functional teams in new ventures and large firms.
Practical implications
The paper informs managers and team leaders about the factors that determine knowledge-intensive teams’ ACAP, enabling them to develop team-specific strategies to increase their teams’ performance.
Originality/value
The study takes a holistic perspective on knowledge-intensive team ACAP by using a configurational approach. It also highlights the potential of team-level research in the knowledge management literature for both researchers and practitioners.
Details
Keywords
Carla C.J.M. Millar, Martin Lockett and John F. Mahon
This paper aims to further research on leadership and knowledge management through formal knowledge strategies in knowledge-intensive organizations (KIOs), and analyse knowledge…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to further research on leadership and knowledge management through formal knowledge strategies in knowledge-intensive organizations (KIOs), and analyse knowledge management challenges and approaches within KIOs, especially tacit knowledge.
Design/methodology/approach
This paper is based on conceptual and literature research.
Findings
Managing knowledge as an organizational asset involves how knowledge is obtained, stored and organized, and accessed and shared when needed. This is crucial for KIOs. Knowledge that is not captured, understood and transferred, throughout the organization, is useless. This requires the integration of systems and processes with people and leadership. Tacit knowledge generation and transfer is especially important in KIOs. In particular, the success of KIOs depends crucially on management’s ability to give leadership in a way that supports knowledge-intensive teamwork. The global nature of internal and external knowledge networks adds to the leadership challenge. This can be made more complex by cultural differences, intellectual property protection (formal and informal) and talent scarcity.
Research limitations/implications
Further research is needed to identify the types of KIO and to better understand sound common knowledge management and related leadership principles across all types of KIO and those that are more context-dependent on the type of KIO and/or its business and cultural context. More research is needed on policy making organizations, in-company policy-making research and development and creative industries.
Originality/value
The paper takes forward research on leading knowledge management in KIOs and introduces 14 challenging new papers in this specific field of research.