IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i5p3094-d765645.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovation Research on Symbiotic Relationship of Organization’s Tacit Knowledge Transfer Network

Author

Listed:
  • Jiang Xu

    (School of Management Engineering, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China)

  • Huihui Wu

    (School of Management Engineering, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China)

  • Jianhua Zhang

    (School of Management Engineering, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China)

Abstract

The sustainable development of organizations is inseparable from innovation, and tacit knowledge is the core resource used to achieve organizational innovation. Due to the implicitness of tacit knowledge and the complexity of members’ relationships, symbiotic relationships between members have dramatically affected the transfer effect of tacit knowledge. However, previous studies on tacit knowledge transfer only focus on the characteristics of the subject or object; fewer consider the role of symbiotic relationships between knowledge subjects. An organization’s tacit knowledge transfer network (OTKTN) is a dynamic knowledge transfer network established among multiple members. Tacit knowledge transfer and sharing among network members conform to the symbiotic feature. To examine various relationships between members, and to investigate the mechanisms that impact tacit knowledge transfer, this article aims to analyze the symbiotic relationships in OTKTN based on the symbiotic perspective. The Lotka–Volterra model was used to construct symbiotic evolution model, and symbiotic coefficients were constructed from the four levels: knowledge-based psychological personal ownership (KPPO) of the knowledge provider, media richness, trust of the knowledge receiver, and organizational rewards matching, to discuss symbiotic modes. Finally, numerical simulation software was applied to simulate the evolution of knowledge levels in members. The results show that the four kinds of symbiotic modes between members include independence, commensalism, asymmetric mutualism, and symmetric mutualism. Symmetric mutualism is the best mode. In this mode, maximum level in independence mode affects the final stable knowledge level; the initial knowledge amount and natural growth rate both affect knowledge growth rate. Media richness, receiver’s trust, and organizational rewards matching can increase members’ tacit knowledge, but the knowledge provider’s KPPO inhibits members’ tacit knowledge growth. This article provides guidance to form a healthy symbiotic relationship and help organizations increase tacit knowledge.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiang Xu & Huihui Wu & Jianhua Zhang, 2022. "Innovation Research on Symbiotic Relationship of Organization’s Tacit Knowledge Transfer Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-22, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:5:p:3094-:d:765645
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/5/3094/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/5/3094/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wenpin Tsai, 2002. "Social Structure of “Coopetition” Within a Multiunit Organization: Coordination, Competition, and Intraorganizational Knowledge Sharing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 179-190, April.
    2. Bernard L. Simonin, 1999. "Ambiguity and the process of knowledge transfer in strategic alliances," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(7), pages 595-623, July.
    3. Yang, Shu-Chen & Farn, Cheng-Kiang, 2009. "Social capital, behavioural control, and tacit knowledge sharing—A multi-informant design," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 210-218.
    4. Yen Tran & Volker Mahnke & Björn Ambos, 2010. "The Effect of Quantity, Quality and Timing of Headquarters-initiated Knowledge Flows on Subsidiary Performance," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 50(4), pages 493-511, August.
    5. Jiuling Xiao & Yuting Bao & Jiankang Wang & Haiyun Yu & Zhenzhong Ma & Lei Jing, 2021. "Knowledge Sharing in R&D Teams: An Evolutionary Game Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-18, June.
    6. Taddeo, Raffaella & Simboli, Alberto & Morgante, Anna & Erkman, Suren, 2017. "The Development of Industrial Symbiosis in Existing Contexts. Experiences From Three Italian Clusters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 55-67.
    7. Richard L. Daft & Robert H. Lengel, 1986. "Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 554-571, May.
    8. Cem Işık & Ekrem Aydın & Tarik Dogru & Abdul Rehman & Rafael Alvarado & Munir Ahmad & Muhammad Irfan, 2021. "The Nexus between Team Culture, Innovative Work Behaviour and Tacit Knowledge Sharing: Theory and Evidence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-21, April.
    9. Samer Faraj & Georg von Krogh & Eric Monteiro & Karim R. Lakhani, 2016. "Special Section Introduction—Online Community as Space for Knowledge Flows," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 668-684, December.
    10. Robin Cowan & Nicolas Jonard & Jean-Benoit Zimmermann, 2007. "Bilateral Collaboration and the Emergence of Innovation Networks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(7), pages 1051-1067, July.
    11. Sheng-Yuan Wang & Wan-Ming Chen & Xiao-Lan Wu & A. E. Matouk, 2021. "Competition Analysis on Industry Populations Based on a Three-Dimensional Lotka–Volterra Model," Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, Hindawi, vol. 2021, pages 1-15, July.
    12. Seckyoung Loretta Kim, 2021. "Supervisor Knowledge Sharing and Employee Knowledge Sharing: The Moderating Roles of Learning Goal Orientation and Affective Organizational Commitment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-13, April.
    13. Pablo Muñoz & Boyd Cohen, 2018. "Sustainable Entrepreneurship Research: Taking Stock and looking ahead," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 300-322, March.
    14. Nitya Prasad Singh & Blaine David Stout, 2018. "Knowledge Flow, Innovative Capabilities And Business Success: Performance Of The Relationship Between Small World Networks To Promote Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(02), pages 1-35, February.
    15. Super, Janice Francis & Li, Pingshu & Ishqaidef, Ghadir & Guthrie, James P., 2016. "Group rewards, group composition and information sharing: A motivated information processing perspective," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 31-44.
    16. Li, Chia-Ying & Hsieh, Chang-Tseh, 2009. "The impact of knowledge stickiness on knowledge transfer implementation, internalization, and satisfaction for multinational corporations," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 425-435.
    17. Nachiket Bhawe & Shaker A. Zahra, 2019. "Inducing heterogeneity in local entrepreneurial ecosystems: the role of MNEs," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 437-454, February.
    18. Tanya Menon & Jeffrey Pfeffer, 2003. "Valuing Internal vs. External Knowledge: Explaining the Preference for Outsiders," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 497-513, April.
    19. Zihanxin Li & Guilong Zhu, 2021. "Knowledge Transfer Performance of Industry-University-Research Institute Collaboration in China: The Moderating Effect of Partner Difference," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-22, November.
    20. J. Stuart Bunderson & Peter Boumgarden, 2010. "Structure and Learning in Self-Managed Teams: Why “Bureaucratic” Teams Can Be Better Learners," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 609-624, June.
    21. Elfring, Tom & Hulsink, Willem, 2003. "Networks in Entrepreneurship: The Case of High-Technology Firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 409-422, December.
    22. Qian Li & Yuanfei Kang, 2019. "Knowledge Sharing Willingness and Leakage Risk: An Evolutional Game Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-21, January.
    23. Xiaoxing Zhang & Changyuan Gao & Shuchen Zhang, 2021. "Research on the Knowledge-Sharing Incentive of the Cross-Boundary Alliance Symbiotic System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-20, September.
    24. Kai Liu & Xingping Wang & Yiran Yan, 2022. "Network Analysis of Industrial Symbiosis in Chemical Industrial Parks: A Case Study of Nanjing Jiangbei New Materials High-Tech Park," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-23, January.
    25. Alnaimi, Ayman Mousa Mahmoud & Rjoub, Husam, 2021. "Perceived organizational support, psychological entitlement, and extra-role behavior: The mediating role of knowledge hiding behavior," Journal of Management & Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(3), pages 507-522, May.
    26. Jie Zhao & Chanjuan Zhu & Zhixiang Peng & Xin Xu & Yan Liu, 2018. "User Willingness toward Knowledge Sharing in Social Networks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-27, December.
    27. Bruce Kogut, 2000. "The network as knowledge: generative rules and the emergence of structure," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 405-425, March.
    28. Gabriel Szulanski & Rossella Cappetta & Robert J. Jensen, 2004. "When and How Trustworthiness Matters: Knowledge Transfer and the Moderating Effect of Causal Ambiguity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(5), pages 600-613, October.
    29. Ying-Hua Huang & Tzung-Ru Yang, 2019. "Exploring On-Site Safety Knowledge Transfer in the Construction Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-16, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xin Liu & Lin Zhang & Abhinav Gupta & Xiaoming Zheng & Changqi Wu, 2022. "Upper echelons and intra‐organizational learning: How executive narcissism affects knowledge transfer among business units," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(11), pages 2351-2381, November.
    2. Francesco Ciabuschi & Oscar Martín Martín & Benjamin Ståhl, 2010. "Headquarters’ Influence on Knowledge Transfer Performance," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 50(4), pages 471-491, August.
    3. Law, Kuok Kei, 2014. "The problem with knowledge ambiguity," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 444-450.
    4. Balboni, Bernardo & Marchi, Gianluca & Vignola, Marina, 2017. "Knowledge transfer in the context of buyer–supplier relationship: An analysis of a supplier's customer portfolio," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 277-287.
    5. Nicolai J. Foss & Kenneth Husted & Snejina Michailova, 2010. "Governing Knowledge Sharing in Organizations: Levels of Analysis, Governance Mechanisms, and Research Directions," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(3), pages 455-482, May.
    6. Nicolai J. Foss & Torben Pedersen, 2019. "Microfoundations in international management research: The case of knowledge sharing in multinational corporations," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 50(9), pages 1594-1621, December.
    7. Francesco Ciabuschi & Henrik Dellestrand & Philip Kappen, 2011. "Exploring the Effects of Vertical and Lateral Mechanisms in International Knowledge Transfer Projects," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 129-155, April.
    8. Yan Wang & Lifan Yang & Enzo Russo & Domenico Graziano, 2021. "The Incentive Mechanism of Knowledge Sharing in Cross-Border Business Models Based on Digital Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-33, November.
    9. López-Sáez, Pedro & Cruz-González, Jorge & Navas-López, Jose Emilio & Perona-Alfageme, María del Mar, 2021. "Organizational integration mechanisms and knowledge transfer effectiveness in MNCs: The moderating role of cross-national distance," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(4).
    10. Martin M�ller & Allison Stewart, 2016. "Does Temporary Geographical Proximity Predict Learning? Knowledge Dynamics in the Olympic Games," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(3), pages 377-390, March.
    11. Goh, Shao Hung & Eldridge, Stephen, 2019. "Sales and Operations Planning: The effect of coordination mechanisms on supply chain performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 80-94.
    12. Linda Argote & Sunkee Lee & Jisoo Park, 2021. "Organizational Learning Processes and Outcomes: Major Findings and Future Research Directions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5399-5429, September.
    13. Pérez-Nordtvedt, Liliana & Babakus, Emin & Kedia, Ben L., 2010. "Learning from international business affiliates: developing resource-based learning capacity through networks and knowledge acquisition," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 262-274, September.
    14. Foss, Nicolai J. & Pedersen, Torben, 2001. "The MNC as a Knowledge Structure: The Roles of Knowledge Sources and Organizational Instruments for Knowledge Creation and Transfer," Working Papers 12-2001, Copenhagen Business School, Department of International Economics and Management.
    15. Milanov, Hana & Fernhaber, Stephanie A., 2009. "The impact of early imprinting on the evolution of new venture networks," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 46-61, January.
    16. Chengli Shu & Cuijuan Liu & Shanxing Gao & Mark Shanley, 2014. "The Knowledge Spillover Theory of Entrepreneurship in Alliances," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 38(4), pages 913-940, July.
    17. Antonelli, Cristiano & David, Paul, 2015. "The Generation of Knowledge as an Emergent System Property: An Introduction," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201540, University of Turin.
    18. Grama-Vigouroux, Simona & Saidi, Sana & Berthinier-Poncet, Anne & Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Madanamoothoo, Allane, 2020. "From closed to open: A comparative stakeholder approach for developing open innovation activities in SMEs," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 230-244.
    19. Hallin, Christina & Holm, Ulf & Sharma, Dharma Deo, 2011. "Embeddedness of innovation receivers in the multinational corporation: Effects on business performance," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 362-373, June.
    20. Zhang, Feng & Jiang, Guohua & Cantwell, John A., 2019. "Geographically Dispersed Technological Capability Building and MNC Innovative Performance: The Role of Intra-firm Flows of Newly Absorbed Knowledge," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 1-1.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:5:p:3094-:d:765645. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.