IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/comaot/v26y2020i2d10.1007_s10588-020-09313-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The optimal knowledge creation strategy of organizations in groupthink situations

Author

Listed:
  • Namjun Cha

    (Seoul National University)

  • Junseok Hwang

    (Seoul National University)

  • Eungdo Kim

    (Chungbuk National University)

Abstract

Even though both collective intelligence and groupthink promote concurrence seeking, studies focused on the relationship between the two are lacking. Therefore, this study aims to explore how to transform groupthink into collective intelligence that contributes to knowledge creation. Three “switching factors”— “knowledge conflict,” “reconsideration,” and “organizational memory”—are defined herein. The effects of each factor and combinations of factors were tested through an agent-based model (ABM) and efficiency analysis. The ABM simulation showed that “knowledge conflict” is good for organizational performance but reduces the scope for new knowledge. On the contrary, a model with “reconsideration” or “organizational memory” was able to hold the heterogeneity of knowledge. With respect to efficiency, eight possible strategies were tested by stochastic frontier analysis. Its results showed that the combination of “knowledge conflict” and “reconsideration” had the highest efficiency with respect to both “between-group” and “meta-frontier.” Thus, this study suggests that the switching factors and strategies using their combinations can help in ensuring decentralization and diversity in organizations, and ultimately, contribute to new knowledge creation—specifically, the combination of “knowledge conflict” and “reconsideration” is the most efficient strategy. This study contributes to the possible existence of switching factors and, using them, builds an optimal strategy in the practical field of knowledge management.

Suggested Citation

  • Namjun Cha & Junseok Hwang & Eungdo Kim, 2020. "The optimal knowledge creation strategy of organizations in groupthink situations," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 207-235, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:comaot:v:26:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s10588-020-09313-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s10588-020-09313-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10588-020-09313-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10588-020-09313-w?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Levy, Paul E. & Albright, Michelle D. & Cawley, Brian D. & Williams, Jane R., 1995. "Situational and Individual Determinants of Feedback Seeking: A Closer Look at the Process," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 23-37, April.
    2. Jan Leimeister, 2010. "Collective Intelligence," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 2(4), pages 245-248, August.
    3. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    4. Kraus, Alan & Litzenberger, Robert H, 1975. "Market Equilibrium in a Multiperiod State Preference Model with Logarithmic Utility," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 30(5), pages 1213-1227, December.
    5. Loasby, Brian J., 2002. "The evolution of knowledge: beyond the biological model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1227-1239, December.
    6. Pannell, David J., 1997. "Sensitivity analysis of normative economic models: theoretical framework and practical strategies," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 139-152, May.
    7. Jon Hartwick & Henri Barki, 1994. "Explaining the Role of User Participation in Information System Use," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 440-465, April.
    8. Xiao, Yu & Han, Jingti, 2016. "Forecasting new product diffusion with agent-based models," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 167-178.
    9. Guus ten Broeke & George van Voorn & Arend Ligtenberg, 2016. "Which Sensitivity Analysis Method Should I Use for My Agent-Based Model?," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 19(1), pages 1-5.
    10. Johanna Gast & Katherine Gundolf & Rainer Harms & Elvin Matos Collado, 2019. "Knowledge management and coopetition: How do cooperating competitors balance the needs to share and protect their knowledge?," Post-Print hal-02943192, HAL.
    11. George Battese & D. Rao & Christopher O'Donnell, 2004. "A Metafrontier Production Function for Estimation of Technical Efficiencies and Technology Gaps for Firms Operating Under Different Technologies," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 91-103, January.
    12. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    13. Samer Faraj & Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa & Ann Majchrzak, 2011. "Knowledge Collaboration in Online Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1224-1239, October.
    14. John H. Miller & Scott E. Page, 2007. "Social Science in Between, from Complex Adaptive Systems: An Introduction to Computational Models of Social Life," Introductory Chapters, in: Complex Adaptive Systems: An Introduction to Computational Models of Social Life, Princeton University Press.
    15. Nigel Gilbert & Pietro Terna, 2000. "How to build and use agent-based models in social science," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 1(1), pages 57-72, March.
    16. Eric W. Stein & Vladimir Zwass, 1995. "Actualizing Organizational Memory with Information Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(2), pages 85-117, June.
    17. Daniel Robey & Dana L. Farrow & Charles R. Franz, 1989. "Group Process and Conflict in System Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(10), pages 1172-1191, October.
    18. John H. Miller & Scott E. Page, 2007. "Complexity in Social Worlds, from Complex Adaptive Systems: An Introduction to Computational Models of Social Life," Introductory Chapters, in: Complex Adaptive Systems: An Introduction to Computational Models of Social Life, Princeton University Press.
    19. Aggarwal, Ishani & Woolley, Anita Williams, 2013. "Do you see what I see? The effect of members’ cognitive styles on team processes and errors in task execution," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 92-99.
    20. George P. Huber, 1991. "Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 88-115, February.
    21. Esser, James K., 1998. "Alive and Well after 25 Years: A Review of Groupthink Research," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 73(2-3), pages 116-141, February.
    22. Conor Mayo-Wilson & Kevin Zollman & David Danks, 2013. "Wisdom of crowds versus groupthink: learning in groups and in isolation," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 42(3), pages 695-723, August.
    23. Francesca Riccobono & Manfredi Bruccoleri & Andreas Größler, 2016. "Groupthink and Project Performance: The Influence of Personal Traits and Interpersonal Ties," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 25(4), pages 609-629, April.
    24. Massari, Giovanni F. & Giannoccaro, Ilaria & Carbone, Giuseppe, 2019. "Are distrust relationships beneficial for group performance? The influence of the scope of distrust on the emergence of collective intelligence," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 343-355.
    25. Christopher O’Donnell & D. Rao & George Battese, 2008. "Metafrontier frameworks for the study of firm-level efficiencies and technology ratios," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 231-255, March.
    26. De Vincenzo, Ilario & Massari, Giovanni F. & Giannoccaro, Ilaria & Carbone, Giuseppe & Grigolini, Paolo, 2018. "Mimicking the collective intelligence of human groups as an optimization tool for complex problems," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 259-266.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sai Yayavaram & Sasanka Sekhar Chanda, 2023. "Decision making under high complexity: a computational model for the science of muddling through," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 300-335, June.

    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. Agulles, Remei & Prats, Mª Julia, 2011. "Learning in practice: What organizational and management literature can contribute to professional and occupational development," IESE Research Papers D/938, IESE Business School.
    2. Neale, Margaret A. & Griffith, Terri & Sawyer, John E., 2000. "Information Technology as a Jealous Mistress: Competition for Knowledge between Individuals and Organizations," Research Papers 1611, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    3. Linda Argote & Ella Miron-Spektor, 2011. "Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1123-1137, October.
    4. Schilling, Melissa A. & Green, Elad, 2011. "Recombinant search and breakthrough idea generation: An analysis of high impact papers in the social sciences," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 1321-1331.
    5. Adrian S. Choo & Kevin W. Linderman & Roger G. Schroeder, 2007. "Method and Psychological Effects on Learning Behaviors and Knowledge Creation in Quality Improvement Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 437-450, March.
    6. Anu Wadhwa & Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas & M. B. Sarkar, 2017. "The Paradox of Openness and Value Protection Strategies: Effect of Extramural R&D on Innovative Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 873-896, October.
    7. Flaminio Squazzoni, 2010. "The impact of agent-based models in the social sciences after 15 years of incursions," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 18(2), pages 197-234.
    8. Stefan Wagner & Karin Hoisl & Grid Thoma, 2014. "Overcoming localization of knowledge — the role of professional service firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(11), pages 1671-1688, November.
    9. Hakki Yildirmaz & M. Atilla Öner & Nicole Herrmann, 2018. "Impact of Knowledge Management Capabilities on New Product Development and Company Performance," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(04), pages 1-34, August.
    10. Maria Adenfelt & Katarina Lagerström, 2008. "The development and sharing of knowledge by Centres of Excellence and transnational teams: A conceptual framework," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 319-338, May.
    11. Situngkir, Hokky & Lumbantobing, Andika Bernad, 2020. "The Pandemics in Artificial Society: Agent-Based Model to Reflect Strategies on COVID-19," MPRA Paper 102075, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Pak, Yong Suhk & Ra, Wonchan & Lee, Jong Min, 2015. "An integrated multi-stage model of knowledge management in international joint ventures: Identifying a trigger for knowledge exploration and knowledge harvest," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 180-191.
    13. Tracy A. Jenkin, 2013. "Extending the 4I Organizational Learning Model: Information Sources, Foraging Processes and Tools," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-14, August.
    14. Muqtafi Akhmad & Shuang Chang & Hiroshi Deguchi, 2021. "Closed-mindedness and insulation in groupthink: their effects and the devil’s advocacy as a preventive measure," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 455-478, November.
    15. Jiménez-Jiménez, Daniel & Sanz-Valle, Raquel, 2011. "Innovation, organizational learning, and performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 408-417, April.
    16. Jianwen Liao & Harold Welsch & Michael Stoica, 2003. "Organizational Absorptive Capacity and Responsiveness: An Empirical Investigation of Growth–Oriented SMEs," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 28(1), pages 63-86, January.
    17. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    18. James Caton, 2017. "Entrepreneurship, search costs, and ecological rationality in an agent-based economy," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 30(1), pages 107-130, March.
    19. Bernardo Batiz-Lazo & Jorge Gomes & Maria Mendes, 2002. "New Product Development & Management Of Knowledge In Portuguese Higher Education," Industrial Organization 0211019, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Zhang, Haisu & Wu, Fang & Cui, Anna Shaojie, 2015. "Balancing market exploration and market exploitation in product innovation: A contingency perspective," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 297-308.

    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:spr:comaot:v:26:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s10588-020-09313-w. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.