Knowledge Creation in Life Sciences Scientific Research Teams: A Qualitative Study of Principal Investigators in Lithuania

Knowledge creation in multidisciplinary project teams: an empirical study of the processes and their dynamic interrelationships

PurposeThe process of knowledge creation is recognized as an essential process for organizational learning and innovation. Creating knowledge to solve the problems and complexities of today's world is like opening a black box. Hence, the higher education system and universities are exploring ways to overcome the complexities and cope with global changes. In this regard, interdisciplinary collaborations and activities are crucial in creating knowledge and innovation to counter these changes. This study aimed to know the experiences of Shiraz university interdisciplinary researchers in the field of humanities and also design and explain the conceptual model of knowledge creation in interdisciplinary research teams in the field of humanities.Design/methodology/approachIn this qualitative research, grounded theory was implemented based on Strauss and Corbin's systematic approach. The sampling method was purposeful, and the participants included sixteen faculty members of shiraz university who had at least one experience of performing an interdisciplinary activity in one of the humanities fields. The first participant was selected as a pilot, and the rest were selected by snowball sampling. Semi-structured interviews were also used to collect data and continued until theoretical saturation was attained. After collecting the available information and interviewing the people, the data were organized and analyzed in three stages, open coding, axial coding, and selective coding, using the proposed framework of Strauss and Corbin. Finally, the researcher reached a final and meaningful categorization.FindingsIn this research, the results were presented as a paradigm model of knowledge creation in the interdisciplinary research teams in the field of humanities. The paradigm model of the study consists of causal factors (internal and external factors), main categories (specialized competencies, scientific discourse, understanding of knowledge domains), strategies (structuring and synchronizing), context (individual and organizational), interfering factors (leadership, industry, and society), and consequences (individual and group achievement).Originality/valueThe present study aimed to explore the experiences of researchers in the interdisciplinary humanities research teams on knowledge creation in qualitative research. The study used Strauss and Corbin's systematic approach to recognize the causal factors of knowledge creation and the contexts. Discovering the main category of knowledge creation in interdisciplinary research teams, the authors analyze the strategies and consequences of knowledge creation.

In organizations, knowledge is mainly created by individuals in interaction. What individuals do is determined not only by external influences (the main focus of other studies), but also by their own intrinsic characteristics. As a consequence, it is important to elucidate how some of these characteristics can potentially impact knowledge creation (KC) in organizations. Based on previous research and on empirical data collected from two business organizations operating in Japan, this study found that certain personality traits of the human resources can significantly affect specific KC processes. This finding is discussed in the final section, where the paper concludes emphasizing the possibility to optimize KC in teams through a synergistic scheme that considers not only the technological aspects, but also the human aspects.

Virtual teams have made such an impact on organisations' knowledge management. As a result, the phenomenon of knowledge creation in virtual teams obviously deserves researchers' attention. Nonetheless, literature on virtual teams has not been much theory-grounded. Thus, to explore the influence of virtual teams on knowledge creation and fill the scarcity of theoretical foundation in the literature, this paper firstly proposes a theoretical model of knowledge creation process in virtual teams called Adaptive Social-Externalisation by primarily drawing from Nonaka's Organisational Knowledge Creation theory as well as Adaptive Structuration theory and Agency theory. Secondly, the characteristics of the process are also derived as Adaptiveness, Simultaneity, and Goal Congruency and Information Symmetry and can be used to determine the effectiveness of both knowledge creation and overall performance of a virtual team. Both theoretical and practical implications are then discussed.

Putting Knowledge Creation Under a Magnifying Glass In Chapter 3, I asked how innovation possibilities emerge in a team. I identified expansive transitions, moves from coordination to cooperation and communication in the way a team interacts and relates to its object. These concepts, further elaborated in Chapter 4, led to the tension between fixation and flow, or stabilization and destabilization, in a team's activity. In Chapter 5, yet another mechanism, namely, boundary crossing, was identified. All these findings may be regarded as elements or prerequisites that facilitate innovative learning and knowledge creation in work teams. But the process of knowledge creation itself remains to be explored in detail. So in this chapter I ask: How do teams learn and create new knowledge? I define innovative organizational learning as collaborative learning in work organizations that produces new solutions, procedures, or systemic transformations in organizational practices (Engestrom, 1995a). Studies of innovative organizational learning have thus far mostly produced relatively general conceptual tools (e.g., Argyris & Schon, 1978; Senge, 1990). Although it is commonly acknowledged that innovative learning at work has a complex cyclic character (e.g., Dixon, 1994), there have been few detailed attempts at theorizing such cycles and modeling their steps. One of the most interesting attempts is the book by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995). These authors focus exclusively on innovative learning, which they prefer to call knowledge creation in organizations. Nonaka and Takeuchi propose a theory of knowledge upon which they build a model of cycles of knowledge production.

Purpose– In this study, Nonaka and Takeuchi’s socialization, externalization, combination and internalization (SECI) model of knowledge creation is used to gain insight into the process of knowledge creation in data teams. These teams are composed of school leaders and teachers, who work together to improve the quality of education. They collaboratively create knowledge related to data use and to an educational problem they are studying. The paper aims to discuss these issues.Design/methodology/approach– A qualitative micro-process case study was conducted for two data teams. The modes, transitions and content of the knowledge creation process were analyzed for all data team meetings over a two-year period. In addition, all team members were interviewed twice to triangulate the findings.Findings– Results show that the knowledge creation process was cyclical across meetings, but more iterative within meetings. Furthermore, engagement in the socialization and internalization mode provided added value in this process. Finally, the SECI model clearly differentiated between team members’ processes. Team members who engaged more often in the socialization and internalization modes and displayed more personal engagement in those modes gained greater and deeper knowledge.Research limitations/implications– The SECI model is valuable for understanding how teams gain new knowledge and why they differ in those gains.Practical implications– Stimulation of active personal engagement in the socialization and internalization mode is needed.Originality/value– This is one of the first attempts to concretely observe the process of knowledge creation. It provides essential insights into what educators do in professional development contexts, and how support can best be provided.

Thanks to reputation and gamification mechanisms, collaborative question answering systems coordinate the process of topical knowledge creation of thousands of users. While successful, these systems face many challenges: on one hand, the volume of submitted questions overgrows the amount of new users willing, and capable, of answering them. On the other hand, existing users need to be retained and optimally allocated. Previous work demonstrates the positive effects that two important aspects, namely engagement and expertise valorisation, can have on user quality and quantity of participation. The magnitude of their effect can greatly vary across users and across topics. In this paper we advocate for a more in-depth study of the interplay that exists between user engagement factors in question answering systems. Our working hypothesis is that the process of knowledge creation can be accelerated by better understanding and exploiting the combined effects of the interests and expertise of users, with their intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. We perform a study over 6 years of data from the StackOverflow platform. By defining metrics of expertise and (intrinsic and extrinsic) motivations, we show how they distribute and correlate across platform’s users and topics. By means of an off-line question routing experiment, we show how topic-specific combinations of motivations and expertise can help accelerating the knowledge creation process.

In Quebec (Canada), the 2004 health system reform brought new challenges for organizations and professionals. To support the reform, the Regional Public Health Directorate of Montreal designed a professional development pilot program, the Health Promotion Laboratory, a strategy to develop and improve health promotion practices and competencies in local health and social services centers. This article reports the results of an analysis of two laboratory sites using a mixed-methods approach and a multiple case study design; the aim was to describe the creation of knowledge through the laboratory and its dissemination in the organization, as well as to identify influencing factors. In-depth semistructured interviews were conducted to collect data on the knowledge creation process and organizational context. Self-administered questionnaires were used four times over the course of each laboratory to measure active participation, commitment, psychological safety, innovation, and satisfaction. Our findings showed that knowledge acquired through participation in the laboratory was disseminated in the host organizations, both through externalization, combination, and, to a lesser extent, internalization. It is highly plausible that team processes and outcomes such as commitment, satisfaction, and innovation influenced this process, as well as contextual factors such as participant turnover, university affiliation, and internal team dynamics. These results show the potential of the laboratory for improving professional practices. They also suggest useful avenues for managers and decision makers interested in implementing such an initiative. Future work should consider the inclusion of other constructs derived from the literature on team effectiveness such as group learning, communication, and skill development.

Aim/Purpose: There is ample evidence that team processes matter more than the characteristics of individual team members; unfortunately, very few empirical studies have examined communication process variables closely or tied them to team outcomes. Background: The University of Miami Laboratory for Integrated Knowledge (U-LINK) is a pilot funding mechanism that was developed and implemented based on empirically-established best practices established in the literature on the Science of Team Science (SciTS). In addition to addressing grand societal challenges, teams engaged in processes designed to enhance the process of “teaming”. This study uses the Inputs-Mediator-Outputs-Inputs (IMOI) model as a blueprint for an investigation into how team communication processes (shared communication, shared leadership, formal meetings, informal meetings) influence intermediary team processes (goal clarity, role ambiguity, process clarity, trust) and team outcomes (team satisfaction, team productivity). Methodology: Monte Carlo methodologies were used to explore both longitudinal self-report (survey of communication and team outcome variables) data and objective data on scholarly productivity, collected from seventy-eight members of eleven real-world intact interdisciplinary teams to explore how team communication processes affect team outcomes. Contribution: This study is among the few that centers communication practice and processes in the operationalization and measurement of its constructs and which provides a test of hypotheses centered on key questions identified in the literature. Findings: Communication practices are important to team processes and outcomes. Shared communication and informal meetings were associated with increased team satisfaction and increased research productivity. Shared leadership was associated with increased research productivity, as well as improved process and goal clarity. Formal meetings were associated with increased goal clarity and decreased role ambiguity. Recommendation for Researchers: Studying intact interdisciplinary research teams requires innovative methods and clear specification of variables. Challenges associated with access to limited numbers of teams should not preclude engaging in research as each study contributes to our larger body of knowledge of the factors that influence the success of interdisciplinary research teams. Future Research: Future research should examine different team formation and funding mechanisms and extend observation and data collection for longer periods of time.

PurposeThe objective of this paper is to develop a model for planning and establishment of knowledge management (KM) strategy in one of the Iranian Sub‐stream Aerospace Industries Organization to improve company's performance.Design/methodology/approachThis research tries to use multi‐method approach by integrating balanced score card, which is a renowned strategic management approach, and Nonaka and colleagues' knowledge creation process (socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization model), which is a well‐known knowledge creation and conversion model, being adopted as the foundations of strategic knowledge management model (SKMM).FindingsThe analytical approach identifies eight issues as critical success factors of the knowledge strategy map in this case study. The overall results from the case study are positive as well, thus reflecting the appropriateness of the suggested SKMM model.Research limitations/implicationsSKMM can be used to help forward the plan, establishment and evaluation of KM strategies and initiatives. This helps to ensure that the essential issues are covered during design and implementation phases of KM strategies.Originality/valueThis paper further provides an integrated perspective of KM metrics in high‐tech industries including the aerospace industry. It gives valuable information and guidelines that hopefully will help leaders to consider important issues during performance measurement of KM strategies in organizations.

This paper aims to develop a professional knowledge creation model for the hospital sector. For this purpose, we qualitatively explore the determinants and process of knowledge creation in the hospital sector. Drawing from organization theory, we develop a hospital's professional knowledge creation model and develop three propositions first. We further explore the theoretical model at organization level by case study in Taiwan. The findings suggest that the hospital's professional knowledge creation is influenced by knowledge stock, social ties and isomorphic pressures as propositions argued. However, hospitals' attempts to keep aligned with their highly institutionalized environments may pay more attention to both existing knowledge stock and the process of professional knowledge creation for their survival. Finally, it is hoped that the significances of this study will contribute to the development of hypotheses in the future quantitative study for building a generalized knowledge creation model for the hospital organization.

Collective processes of organizational knowledge creation remain poorly explored. Yet efficient knowledge management has to focus on those processes as far as it aims at dealing with sustaining knowledge development and knowledge sharing rather than solely its memorization. In this paper, we present a comparative analysis of two processes of knowledge creation within a business intelligence unit. This analysis leads to a five stages model that can be used either as a descriptive or prescriptive tool for knowledge management.

Knowledge management has been a proven tool to foster organizational performance, innovations, and individual knowledge workers’ productivity. A stream of empirical studies has demonstrated with contradictory results that each single organizational knowledge management process – knowledge creation, knowledge sharing and utilization – can enhance the knowledge workers’ productivity in isolation. In contrast, our study argues with the support of Nonaka’s theory and alignment theory that knowledge utilization is the only frontline and primary knowledge management process which can enhance knowledge workers’ productivity while other knowledge management processes (knowledge creation and knowledge sharing) support and supplement each other as well as improve knowledge utilization. This means that shared and created knowledge will not enhance the productivity of knowledge workers until organizations strive for knowledge utilization. This study used data collected from 336 knowledge workers in the Telecom industry of Pakistan and examined it using partial least squares modelling. The findings indicated that knowledge utilization is the sole frontline and primary knowledge management to enhance the productivity of knowledge workers. Hence, knowledge utilization can only influence productivity indirectly by increasing the utilization of knowledge created and/or shared.

Purpose– This paper aims to explore the relationship between knowledge creation and intellectual capital (IC) through an empirical study in the pharmaceutical industry. In the current economy, knowledge and IC are considered as the most important organizational assets and are the key resources in gaining competitive advantage.Design/methodology/approach– This paper adopts the socialization, externalization, combination and internalization (SECI) model to examine the format of knowledge creation processes (KCP) and uses a model to demonstrate the relationship between KCP and IC and its components in the pharmaceutical industry. A valid instrument was adopted to collect the required data on KCP and and IC dimensions. Structural equation modeling was used to assess the measurement model and to test the research hypotheses using the data collected from 470 completed questionnaires.Findings– The results supported the research model and revealed that KCP has significant influence on the accumulation of human capital. The performance of human capital manifests significant impact on structural capital and relational capital.Practical limitations/implications– Given the strong association between KCP and IC, managers should define their own robust operations for knowledge creation to improve their IC accumulation.Originality/value– This research departs from the earlier research on KCP–IC by adopting the SECI model and a research model that facilitates the exploration of the relationship between KCP and IC dimensions in the pharmaceutical industry. The research results provided strong support for the KCP–IC relationship.

Purpose - The researcher investigates the extent to which knowledge sharing moderates the relationship between knowledge creation and business process re-engineering (BPR) outcomes of financial services offered by financial institutions in Uganda. Design/Methodology - The study adopted cross-sectional survey design to collect data at one point in time using self-administered questionnaire to examine the relationship between knowledge creation and business processes. The study at first used statistical package for social scientists to establish clusters among the surveyed financial services and later a model was derived using R programming software to test for knowledge creation and business process re-engineering performance outcomes. Findings - The study found a significant conditional effect of knowledge sharing on knowledge creation and business process re-engineering outcomes. Implying that investment in knowledge sharing creates awareness about the financial services outcomes of financial institutions using business process re-engineering to provide financial services. Originality - This study contributes to business process re-engineering literature by advancing the idea that BPR is an important economic resource that enhanced through instituting knowledge creation and sharing practices in a complex environment. Ideally, creating and sharing knowledge is one of the drivers of customer value, efficiency, and effectiveness of financial services in financial institutions. Practical Implications - Managers of financial institutions need to pay keen interest in managing business processes using relevant knowledge and transforming in new products, new processes, and new markets to boost business process re-engineering outcomes by building a strong knowledge creation system through training and development programs for senior managers.