Journal of Knowledge Management 

Abstract: Purpose – Knowledge sharing is the corner-stone of many organisations’ knowledge-management (KM) strategy. Despite the growing significance of knowledge sharing’s practices for organisations’ competitiveness and market performance, several barriers make it difficult for KM to achieve the goals and deliver a positive return on investment. This paper provides a detailed review of current KM and related literatures on a large number of possible knowledge-sharing barriers with the purpose of offering a more comprehensive and structured starting-point for senior managers when auditing their organisation’s current knowledge base and knowledge-sharing requirements. Design/methodology/approach – This article reviews and discusses over three dozen potential knowledge-sharing barriers, categorising them into three main domains of recently published works: individual/personal, organisational, and technological barriers. Findings – The extensive list of knowledge sharing barriers provides a helpful starting point and guideline for senior managers auditing their existing practices with a view to identifying any bottle-necks and improving on the overall effectiveness of knowledge-sharing activities. Practical implications – Managers need to realise, however, that a particular knowledge sharing strategy or specific managerial actions will not suit all companies and that there are differences to be expected between MNCs and SMEs, private, public sector, and not-for-profit organisations. As such, the implementation of knowledge-sharing goals and strategies into an organisation’s strategic planning and thinking will vary greatly. Originality/value – The main discussion of this paper brings together a large range of knowledgesharing barriers in an attempt to indicate the complexity of knowledge sharing as a value-creating organisational activity.

Abstract: Argues that the knowledge management process can be categorized into knowledge creation, knowledge validation, knowledge presentation, knowledge distribution, and knowledge application activities. To capitalize on knowledge, an organization must be swift in balancing its knowledge management activities. In general, such a balancing act requires changes in organizational culture, technologies, and techniques. A number of organizations believe that by focusing exclusively on people, technologies, or techniques, they can manage knowledge. However, that exclusive focus on people, technologies, or techniques does not enable a firm to sustain its competitive advantages. It is, rather, the interaction between technology, techniques, and people that allow an organization to manage its knowledge effectively. By creating a nurturing and “learning‐by‐doing” kind of environment, an organization can sustain its competitive advantages.

Abstract: Purpose – To provide important empirical evidence to support the role of knowledge management within firms.Design/methodology/approach – Data were collected using a mail survey sent to CEOs representing firms with 50 or more employees from a cross‐section of industries. A total of 1,743 surveys were mailed out and 443 were returned and usable (27.8 percent response rate). The sample was checked for response and non‐response bias. Hypotheses were tested using structural equation modelling.Findings – This paper presents knowledge management as a coordinating mechanism. Empirical evidence supports the view that a firm with a knowledge management capability will use resources more efficiently and so will be more innovative and perform better.Research limitations/implications – The sample slightly over‐represented larger firms. Data were also collected in New Zealand. As with most studies, it is important to replicate this study in different contexts.Practical implications – Knowledge management is embraced in...

Abstract: Determining which factors promote or impede the sharing of knowledge within groups and organizations constitutes an important area of research. This paper focuses on three such influences: “organizational commitment,” “organizational communication,” and the use of a specific instrument of communication – computer‐mediated communication (CMC). Two processes of knowledge sharing are distinguished: donating and collecting. A number of hypotheses are presented concerning the influence of commitment, climate and CMC on these processes. These hypotheses were tested in six case studies. The results suggest that commitment to the organization positively influences knowledge donating, and is in turn positively influenced by CMC use. Communication climate is found to be a key variable: a constructive communication climate was found to positively influence knowledge donating, knowledge collecting and affective commitment. Finally, a relationship was found that was not hypothesized: knowledge collecting influences knowledge donating in a positive sense – the more knowledge a person collects, the more he or she is willing to also donate knowledge to others. Based on these results, a number of theoretical and practical implications are discussed, and suggestions for further research are presented.