Abstract
PurposeThe SECI model (Nonaka, 1994) is the best-known conceptual framework for understanding knowledge generation processes in organizations. To date, however, empirical support for this framework has been overlooked. The present study aims to provide an evidence-based groundwork for the SECI model by testing a multidimensional questionnaire Knowledge Management SECI Processes Questionnaire (KMSP-Q) designed to capture the knowledge conversion modes theorized by Nonaka.MethodologyIn a twofold study, the SECI model was operationalized via the KMSP-Q. Specifically, Study One tested its eight-dimensional structure through exploratory and confirmatory factorial analyses on 372 employees from different sectors. Study Two examined the construct validity and reliability by replicating the KMSP-Q factor structure in knowledge-intensive contexts (on a sample of 466 health-workers), and by investigating the unique impact of each dimension on some organizational outcomes (i.e., performance, innovativeness, collective efficacy).FindingsThe overall findings highlighted that the KMSP-Q is a psychometrically robust questionnaire in terms of both dimensionality and construct validity, the different knowledge generation dimensions being specifically linked to different organizational outcomes.Research/Practical ImplicationsThe KMSP-Q actualizes and provides empirical consistency to the theory underlying the SECI model. Moreover, it allows for the monitoring of an organization’s capability to manage new knowledge and detect the strengths/weaknesses of KM-related policies and programs.Originality/ValueThis paper proposes a comprehensive measure of knowledge generation in work contexts, highlighting processes that organizations are likely to promote in order to improve their performance through the management of their knowledge resources.
Highlights
Knowledge represents a crucial drive for organizations’ competitive advantage
Exploratory Factor Analysis In order to examine the dimensionality of the Knowledge Management SECI Processes Questionnaire (KMSP-Q), an EFA was conducted on the 48 items with Principal Axis Factoring extraction
A first contribution of this study is that findings showed adequate robustness of the KMSP-Q, a measurement that could help to actualize and test the theory underlying the SECI
Summary
Knowledge represents a crucial drive for organizations’ competitive advantage. It generates value by supporting an organization’s capability to produce innovation (Ahuja and Katila, 2001; Darroch, 2005; Zhou and Li, 2012), learn and unlearn (Hedberg, 1981; Gherardi, 2000; King, 2009), and transfer best practices across boundaries (Hansen, 1999; Carlile, 2004; Patriotta et al, 2013).Following the wider debate about the emergence of the information age and the knowledge society, recent years have seen an explosion of writings about organizational knowledge from different disciplinary and theoretical perspectives (Patriotta, 2003). This literature has suggested the development of management practices able to render knowledge available throughout the organization (e.g., O’Dell and Greyson, 1998; Pfeffer and Sutton, 1999; Brown and Duguid, 2000; Davenport and Prusak, 2000). Within this plethora of knowledge-based theories, concepts, and tools, the SECI model is widely acknowledged as a theoretical landmark and adopted as framework for most knowledge management conceptualization or descriptive purposes in case studies. The model stands out because it formalizes a theory of knowledge creation based on the epistemological distinction between tacit and explicit knowledge and offers practical tool for assessing knowledge creation in organizational contexts
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
