知识转移的基本理论

1、第二组期末论文第一部分知识转移的基本理论赵春宏引言随着知识经济的到来，知识成为最重要的生产要素。知识转移作为知识管 理的一部分，已成为企业取得竞争优势的基础，而知识转移的效果与效率直接影 响一个组织的生存与发展。因此，研究知识如何在不同的个体、团队和组织之间 流动转移，成为当前知识管理研究领域的一个热点。本文试从知识转移的概念、 分类、过程和影响因素这四个方面，总结一些学者关于知识转移研究的主要观点， 重点梳理一些学者在知识转移领域所取得的研究成果。一、知识转移的概念1977年Teece1提出了知识*移的思想,认为企业通过技术的国际转移,能 积累起大量跨国界应用的知识。在此后的研究中，知识转移

2、逐渐成为了知识管理 的一个热点，有许多学者都对知识转移做出了解释，并常常与知识共享、知识扩散等概念相关联。Jensen和Meckling 2解释知识转移时认为,知识转移包括存储 知识、处理知识的能力和知识输入、输出大脑的途径。Szulanski3认为知识转移是指知识跨组织或个体边界的有目的、有计划的知识共享；这里， Szulanski把 知识转移视为一种特殊的知识共享机制。Davenport和Prusak4认为知识转移包括知识传递(扩散)和知识吸收(应用)两个过程；其中，接收知识意味着对信息的 充分理解并能够据此采取行动。如果知识没有被吸收，那么这一知识就不能说已 经转移了 ；提供知识并不代表

3、转移知识。Holtham指出知识转移是一种沟通的 过程，知识不像商品可以自由传递，学习知识的时候，即知识转移时，必须有 重建的行为，而且要具备应有知识，才能完成转移。由此，可以看出，知识转移 涉及到知识发送方和知识接收方两个主体，客体是知识，客观条件是传输的途 径，目标是能够利用知识来指导行为。从以上学者对知识转移(Knowledge Transfei)的理解，我们有必要对知识共 享(Sharing)、知识转移(Transfer)、知识扩散(Dissemination) 这三个概念做一 区分：Davenport认为，知识转移=知识扩散+知识吸收；知识扩散只涉及到知识 提供者发送知识，而未包括接

4、收者对知识的吸收和应用。另外，知识转移比较强调由组织主导、较正式、有明确知识目标，以及提供者与接受者有明确的流动方 向类型的知识流动；而知识共享比较强调非正式、 水平式、自由式和个人平等的 学习。二、知识转移的分类从所转移知识的类型，将知识划分为显性知识和隐性知识， 知识转移可分为 隐性转移和显性转移。根据知识存在的层次，可以分为个体、团队和组织三个层 次，知识转移就发生在个体与团队之间、个体与组织之间、团队与组织之间、组 织与组织之间以及个体之间、团体之间、组织之间。Nancy M. Dixon6对团队与团队之间的共有知识的转移做了分类。Nancy M. Dixon首先对共有知识做了定义：即

5、员工从完成公司的任务中学到的知识，共有知识是know-hoW勺知识，而不是从学校学到“ know what”知识，然后利用谁是预期的知识接受者、任务的性 质、被转移知识的类型等标准提出了知识转移的五种类型：连续转移(SerialTransfer)、近转移(Near Transfer)、远转移(Far Transfei) 战略转移(Strategic Transfer) 专家转移(Expert Transfer) 0这五种类型的区分如 表1 :表1、五种类型的知识转移连续转移近转移远转移战略转移专家转移定义一个团队从某一背 景下完成任务中所得到的知识，被转移 到团队下一次在不 同背景下完成同样任

6、务中一个团队长期从 事的重复性工作 中获得的显形知 识，被其他从事非 正常类似的工作团队再次使用转移一个团队在 从事一种非常规 的工作时获得的隐形知识，让组织 内从事类似工作 的别的团队得到完成一项不经 常发生，但对整个组织非常重 要的战略任务 所需要的组织的集体知识一个遇到超 出知识范围 技术问题的 团队，在组织 中寻求他人经验任务和 背景相 似性知识接受方(也是知 识发送方)在新背景 下完成相似的任务知识接受方所执 行的任务和发送 方执行的任务相 似，且是在相似背 景下接受方所从事的工作和发送方的工作性质相似，但 背景不同接受方执行一 项影响整个组 织的任务，与发送方背景不同接受方与发 送

7、方执行不 同的任务，但 有相似的背景任务的 性质经常性，非常规经常性，常规经常性，非常规不经常发生，非 常规常规，但很少 发生知识的 类型隐形知识，显形知识显形知识隐形知识隐形知识，显形 知识显形知识举例一个发电机更换团 队更换化工厂的发 电机。当更换精炼厂 的发电机时，团队使用来自化工厂工作 所形成的知识亚特兰大一家汽 车总装厂的一个 团队发明了怎么 在10秒钟内安装刹车装置。位于芝 加哥的一个团队 运用该知识将时 间缩减了 15秒钟英国石油的同行帮助：同行们从世界各地赶来帮助 一个团队研究一个特殊的石油勘探场地。这种合作提供了解决问题 的新方法一个公司并购了 ABC公司，6 个月后另外一

8、个地方的另外一个公司，使用 在ABC项目上 所学知识来并购DEF技术人员向 网络发邮件， 询问如何增 加年久的监 视器的亮度， 7位专家给出 了答案三、知识转移的过程基于对知识转移过程的现实观察，许多学者提出了有关知识转移的模型， 其 中Hanse认为知识转移包括搜索和转移两阶段，较为著名的是SzulanskP在1996年提出的四阶段模型。模型如图1,首先是初始阶段，主要是识别有价值的知识， 并决定是否转移该知识；其次是实施阶段，双方建立起适合知识转移的渠道，提供 方向接受方传递知识；再次是调整阶段，主要是接受方对于被转移的知识进行调 整，并能够在新的情境中应用。最后是整合阶段，接受方通过制度

9、化将获得的新知 识融合成为自身的规范或习惯。初始*在Szulansk研究的基石上，对Szulansk的模型进行了重新修改，Kwan and Cheung8在2006年提出了新的四阶段模型。如图2所示模型间的转换对应关系、 新的四阶段模型。其中，将Szulansk的模型的开始阶段分为动机和匹配阶段；实 施和调整阶段合并为实施阶段，因为这两个阶段的决定因素很大程度上是相似 的；最后的阶段定义为保持阶段，是为了解释知识贬值(Argote, 1999 )的现象并且反映通过知识转移来反映企业达到可持续绩效的重要性；另外，Kwan andCheung为动机与匹配是一个反复的过程(模型中用双箭头表示)，这样

10、更好地描 述了实践中的知识转移过程。图2-Szulanfki 模型一Kwan and Cheung 模型+,四、知识转移的影响因素Szulanski从内部知识粘性入手细分了从提供方到接受方进行转移的四个阶 段，同时又鉴别了影响知识转移的四类因素：知识特性、知识发送方、知识接收 方和转移环境。知识特性：知识的模糊性程度会影响知识转移的方式和效果。 显性知识相对 来说转移效率高；隐性知识更多的只能通过个人之间的面对面的沟通交流来实 现，很难有效的提高转移效率。知识发送方：知识转移的发生，首先要有一个愿意共享的知识源的存在。 知 识发送发是否有动机与他人共享知识，是自发的愿意共享还是来自外力的驱动。

11、 例如，跨国公司中分部与分部之间的知识转移包括分部与分部之间自发的知识转 移，还有在总部调动下分部之间的知识转移。知识接收方：从知识发送方获取知识的愿望和学习能力是影响知识转移效果 的重要因素。转移环境：包括企业的组织结构、企业文化和制度安排等方面。 有些组织结 构形态支持某些知识的传播而另一些则妨碍知识的转移。另外，知识转移中两主体的关系、两主体特征的相似度、知识的相容性等也 会影响知识转移的效果。五、结论和评述知识经济凸显了知识的重要作用，而现代科技所表现出的高度分化和高度综 合的特点，决定了任何单一组织都难以同时具备创新所需要的知识和能力。同时,全球性市场竞争的高度不确定性，高技术研发的

12、高投入和高风险特点，技术寿命 周期的不断缩短，也促使企业寻找各种途径，与其他组织进行合作，获取知识，协 同创新。因而知识转移研究是当今知识管理领域的研究热点。Teece ,D. Technology transfer by multinational firms : the resource cost of transferring technological know - howJ . The Economic Journal ,1977 ,(87) :242 - 261.Jensen MC, Meckling W H. Specific and general knowledge, and

13、 organizational structureA.In Paul S. Myers(Ed.), Knowledeg management and organizational design C.Newton, MA: Butterworth- Heinemann,1996: 17- 37.Szulanski , G. Exploring internal stickiness : Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firmJ . Strategic Management Journal (special issu

14、e) ,1996 , (17) :27 - 44.Thomas H Davenport. Working knowledge: how organizations manage what they know M.Harvard Business School Press ,1998.Holtham Clive, Courtney Nigel. Developing managerial learning styles in the context of the strategic application of information and communications technologie

15、sJ. International Journal of Training & Development, 2001, 5(1):22- 34.Dixon N M. Common knowledge: how companies thrive by sharing what they know M.Harvard Business School Press,2000.Szulanski, G, Exploring Internal Stickiness: Impediments to the Transfer of Best Practice Within the Firm. Strategic

16、 Management Journal, 1996. 17: p. 27-43Kwan, M. M. and P.-K. Cheung (2006). The Knowledge Transfer Process: From Field Studies to Technology Development. Journal of Database Management 17：16-32.第二部分Knowledge Transfer in Multi-National CorporationsWeiting Chen 陈炜婷Management Science 0610628095Introduc

17、tionUnder the international dynamic competitive background, knowledge is considered the most valuable strategic resource which generates continuous competitive advantages. For enterprises, the development and maintenance of its competitive advantages depend on its capability to manage its knowledge,

18、 i.e. capability to create, transfer, use and protect its knowledge capital. Most researchers believe that the reason why Multi-national Corporations (MNCs) exist and develop is that MNCs themselves are effective mechanisms of creating and transferring knowledge among nations. Therefore, the knowled

19、ge management and knowledge transfer among MNCs have become subjects of ample international research recently 1.Knowledge transfer and knowledge managementThere are various kinds of knowledge transfer definition. To sum up, they can be divided into three categories.The first category emphasizes the

20、transfer of the knowledge content. For example, researchers abroad apply the simple transfer method to give the definition of the organizational knowledge transfer between the knowledge sources and recipients 2. According to Garavelli etc.3, codification and interpretation are the main cognitive pro

21、cesses involved in knowledge transfer, while codification and interpretation represent upstream and downstream of knowledge transfer respectively. Knowledge objects, constructed through codification, are explained to users by cognitive systems.The second one highlights the profits of sources and rec

22、ipients of knowledge transfer. Knowledge transfer in organizations is the process through which one unit (e.g., group, department, or division) is affected by the experience of another 4. Darr and Kurtzberg 5, go further by arguing that knowledge transfer has occurred when a contributor shares knowl

23、edge that is used by adopter, which differs from others that equate knowledge transfer simply with sharing.Xiaoying Dong 6 also points out that only when new changes occur in the transfer process can the organizational capability of recipients be enhanced actually.The third one combines the above tw

24、o points, which stresses not only the transfer process but also the application and profits. Knowledge transfer is not simply the transfer channels but indeed the innovation process through acquisition and assimilation. According to Dong-Gil Ko, Laurie J. Kirsch etc. 7, knowledge transfer is defined

25、 as the communication of knowledge from a source so that it is learned and applied by a recipient.In comparison, the third category is more comprehensive. Knowledge transfer is accompanied by both the value transfer and the corresponding profits.Knowledge management is a wider concept, which means a

26、 systematic method to create, store, transfer and use knowledge. Knowledge transfer and knowledge management is interconnected. In the knowledge competition, the contradiction between the infinite knowledge and limited knowledge storage of units highlights the importance of knowledge transfer in the

27、 overall knowledge management system. As literature and empirical evidence suggests, knowledge transfer is considered a key process in knowledge management especially at international level.Micro-perspective: Knowledge flows in MNCsKnowledge flows are the vectors of knowledge transfer. From the micr

28、o-perspective, it is investigated through two ways: knowledge flow networks and knowledge flow channels 1.Knowledge flow networksThe headquarters and subsidiaries of MNCs are interconnected as network systems, with each being a node. There are several types of knowledge flow in terms of geographic c

29、haracteristics: first, flows among subsidiaries due to the difference in knowledge stock between each subsidiary. This can happen because of self-organized activities among subsidiaries, or intentional control from headquarters. Second, flows among subsidiaries and headquarters. Knowledge transferre

30、d from headquarters to subsidiaries is more synthesized, while the reverse transfer from high-level subsidiaries to headquarters may propel headquarters to develop knowledge creation and integration. Third, flows among units of MNCs (including headquarters and subsidiaries) and host countries, which

31、 are affected by units capability of learning, exploring and exploiting local recourses Fourth, flows among units of MNCs and other countries.Moreover, it is important to note that the extent of knowledge transfer in terms of output and input within a MNC also depends on the different roles of its a

32、ffiliated company 8. The main characteristics of these roles are the following: First, role of global innovator generates high output flow, low input flow. The affiliated company acts as a source of knowledge for other units. Second, role of integrated player generates high output flow and high inpu

33、t flow. Its role is similar to that of the global innovator, but is also implies a responsibility to create knowledge capable of being used by other affiliated companies. It differs in that it is not self-sufficient in the satisfaction of its own knowledge necessities. Third, role of implementer gen

34、erates low output flow and high input flow. It relies on input flows coming from headquarter or the affiliated companies. For this reason, it creates little knowledge by itself. Fourth, role of local innovator generates low output flow and low input flow. The affiliated company takes total responsib

35、ility for the creation of a relevant know-how. Nevertheless, this knowledge is considered to idiosyncratic to have a competitive use out of the country where the affiliated company is located.From other point of views 1, knowledge transfer is interwoven with competitive flows andco-operative flows,

36、where integration, substitution and transplant exist together under the guidance of intentional planning and coordination supplemented with unintentional self-organized operation. Moreover, the knowledge flows within MNCs contain multilateral relation among affiliated individuals and organizations.K

37、nowledge flow channelsThe process of knowledge transfer is realized through channels, which affect the quality and quantity of knowledge transferred 1.The effect of knowledge transfer should be analyzed comprehensively in terms of aspects such as sphere, depth, speed, cost and profits of knowledge t

38、ransfer etc. These depend on the following factors 1:First, the characteristics of knowledge. Explicit and tacit knowledge have huge difference in aspects of transfer media, method, and cost etc. As tacit knowledge character increases, this knowledge becomes less teachable, less codifying, and then

39、less transferable. This knowledge transference is complex and difficult for several reasons, among which the following stand out 8: complex nature; acquisition by means of experience, test and error method; teaching and learning, if possible, is developed by demonstration, observation, imitation and

40、 feedback these activities need close personal contact for a long period of time; organizational learning generates tacit knowledge that is collective and even more difficult to transfer; and although expatriate staff can serve as a substitute for tacit knowledge transference, it becomes a costly pr

41、ocess, because this knowledge might be collective and needs the transference of a large amount of individuals from the headquarter, which might not be practical or even possible.Second, sources and recipients in knowledge transfer. The effectiveness of knowledge transfer depends to some extent on th

42、e strength of the tie between the source and recipient, which is reflected in the ease of communication and in the “intimacy of their overall relationship 9. An arduous relationship might increase the effort needed to resolve transfer-related problems. The eventfulness of the knowledge transfer is a

43、lso likely to depend on the dispositions and abilities of the source and recipient. The motivation of the source may be affected by an incentive to compete or collaborate with the recipient and by the effort required to support the transfer. Furthermore, the source may not be perceived as reliable.

44、A capable and trustworthy source is more likely to influence the behavior of the recipient. Likewise, the recipient may be more or less motivated to seek or accept knowledge from the outside. Lack of motivation may result in procrastination, passivity, feigned acceptance, sabotage, or outright rejec

45、tion in the implementation and use of new knowledge. Recipients may also vary in their absorptive capacity their ability to exploit outside sources of knowledge. Furthermore, to reap the rewards of a transfer, recipients must be able to discard old practices and sustain new ones. Evidence from studi

46、es of innovation, planned organizational change, and organizational learning suggests that the challenge of abandoning old ways of doing things and of preserving new ones can be significant 9.Finally, the organizational context where the transfer is embedded may affect the eventfulness of the transf

47、er. Ultimately, the organizational context affects the willingness and ability of organizational subunits to complete transfer related tasks. Its influence occurs through norm and value setting, through fiat or incentives, and through counsel and support. An organizational context that facilitates t

48、he inception and development of transfers is frequently referred to as fertile . In contrast, a context that hinders the gestation and evolution of transfers is said to be barren . In a barren organizational context,transfer related problems are more difficult to resolve 9.Macro-perspective: Environ

49、ment of MNCsThe very existence of a MNC lies in its ability to internalize externalities by putting together local and international resources and activities at a more efficient rate than markets do. Therefore, the characteristics of host countries (including natural resources, labor resources, geog

50、raphic environment, technologic level, political and economic policies, market size, infrastructure, policies of import, export and tax, etc) have great impact on knowledge transfer in MNCs.Followed are the main factors that have been widely discussed in research 1.First, social capital is considere

51、d the lubricant during the knowledge transfer, which provides development platform for knowledge communication network. Knowledge exists in social relations among cooperating units of a community without fixed boundaries. The close social ties build confidence and trust among units, propelling them

52、to construct knowledge alliances.Second, industry cluster is defined as the geographic cluster gathered by the interconnection network of different sizes of co-operative enterprises and organizations. Most MNCs which have intensified R&D are based on industry cluster.Third, cross-culture management

53、is very important. Cultural differences may create bottlenecks that either impede or eliminate the potential for successful knowledge transfer. Lack of culture integration or even contradiction of cultures will make the subsidiaries deviate from their headquarters, which gives great discount on the

54、effectiveness of internal knowledge transfer. Using Hofstedes cultural distance of power distance, individualism/collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity/femininity, it is argued that the location of subsidiaries along each of these cultural dimensions will significantly impact the possi

55、bility of knowledge transfer between subsidiaries 10.Individualism/collectivism (IC) is the degree to which self-interest. It reflects the concerns of individuals with their own well-being versus the well-being of others.Power distance (PD) is based on peoples perception of inequality. It reflects t

56、he non-symmetrical nature of relationships that may exist between subsidiaries.Uncertainty avoidance (UA) is the reluctance to deal with ambiguity and is directly related to the willingness to embrace change.Masculinity/femininity (MF) is the willingness to promote societal values. In masculine cult

57、ures, there is a preference for assertiveness. Priority is given to results and rewards which are based on ambition and competitiveness. In feminine cultures, assertiveness is downplayed and differences are resolved through compromise and negotiation.What should be taken into account is that countri

58、es and their cultures evolve over time 10. Anecdotal evidence suggests that many MNCs are locating their subsidiaries in areas where there are a significant number of individuals with prior exposure to other cultures. Therefore, changes in the societys culture will affect how knowledge transfer goal

59、s are achieved.Intra-MNC knowledge transferBased on the previous analysis, the knowledge transfer within MNCs subsidiaries can be investigated through the following model, which includes factors of operational structure, integrative mechanisms and subsidiary control mechanisms 11. According to the e

60、mpirical research 11, these factors are significant under the significant level of 0.05.Operational structureSubsidiaries operate within an operational structure of relationships and links to other units.This operational structure is constituted by the actual physical and transactional flow between