IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rug/rugwps/07-464.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Impact Of Coherent Versus Multiple Identities On Knowledge Integration

Author

Listed:
  • A. WILLEM
  • H. SCARBROUGH
  • M. BUELENS

Abstract

This paper addresses the influence of two competing views of social identity on knowledge integration within organizations. One view sees social identity primarily as a coherent characteristic of organisations, which can leverage knowledge integration by developing loyalty, trust, shared values and implicit norms (Kogut and Zander, 1996). The opposing view considers social identification as multiple and fragmented (Albert, Ashforth and Dutton, 2000; Alvesson, 2000). This fragmented view emphasises the problematic nature of social identity for knowledge integration. The aim of this paper is to examine these competing accounts and to develop insight under what conditions coherent respectively multiple social identities are advantageous for knowledge integration by the comparative analysis of two polar case studies. Our case studies reveal the different effects of a coherent versus multiple identity on knowledge integration and the need for a coherent company-wide social identity to leverage knowledge integration between organizational units.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Willem & H. Scarbrough & M. Buelens, 2007. "Impact Of Coherent Versus Multiple Identities On Knowledge Integration," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 07/464, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    • Handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:07/464
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://wps-feb.ugent.be/Papers/wp_07_464.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kane, Aimee A. & Argote, Linda & Levine, John M., 2005. "Knowledge transfer between groups via personnel rotation: Effects of social identity and knowledge quality," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 56-71, January.
    2. Richard A. Bettis & C. K. Prahalad, 1995. "The dominant logic: Retrospective and extension," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(1), pages 5-14.
    3. Kate M. Andrews & Brian L. Delahaye, 2000. "Influences On Knowledge processes In Organizational Learning: The Psychosocial Filter," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 797-810, September.
    4. Paul S. Adler, 2001. "Market, Hierarchy, and Trust: The Knowledge Economy and the Future of Capitalism," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 215-234, April.
    5. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1996. "What Firms Do? Coordination, Identity, and Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(5), pages 502-518, October.
    6. Maxine Robertson & Jacky Swan, 2003. "'Control - What Control?' Culture and Ambiguity Within a Knowledge Intensive Firm," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(4), pages 831-858, June.
    7. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    8. Szulanski, Gabriel, 2000. "The Process of Knowledge Transfer: A Diachronic Analysis of Stickiness," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 9-27, May.
    9. James P. Walsh, 1995. "Managerial and Organizational Cognition: Notes from a Trip Down Memory Lane," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 280-321, June.
    10. Maryam Alavi & Amrit Tiwana, 2002. "Knowledge integration in virtual teams: The potential role of KMS," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 53(12), pages 1029-1037, October.
    11. Janice M. Beyer & David R. Hannah, 2002. "Building on the Past: Enacting Established Personal Identities in a New Work Setting," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(6), pages 636-652, December.
    12. Argote, Linda & Ingram, Paul & Levine, John M. & Moreland, Richard L., 2000. "Knowledge Transfer in Organizations: Learning from the Experience of Others," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 1-8, May.
    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. Storz, Cornelia, 2008. "Dynamics in innovation systems: Evidence from Japan's game software industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1480-1491, October.

    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. A. Willem & M. Buelens, 2003. "Making Competencies Cross Business Unit Boundaries: The Interplay between Inter-Unit Coordination, Trust and Knowledge Transferability," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 03/176, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    2. A. Willem & M. Buelens, 2005. "Knowledge Sharing in Public Sector Organizations: The Effect of Organizational Characteristics on Interdepartmental Knowledge Sharing," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 05/344, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    3. Christos Kolympiris & Sebastian Hoenen & Peter G. Klein, 2019. "Learning by Seconding: Evidence from National Science Foundation Rotators," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(3), pages 528-551, May.
    4. Filipe M. Santos & Kathleen M. Eisenhardt, 2005. "Organizational Boundaries and Theories of Organization," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(5), pages 491-508, October.
    5. Fascia, Michael, 2019. "The role of religious experience in the knowledge transfer process," OSF Preprints bm7s3, Center for Open Science.
    6. Simon Gaechter & Georg von Krogh & Stefan Haefliger, 2006. "Private-Collective Innovation and the Fragility of Knowledge Sharing," Discussion Papers 2006-21, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    7. Felix Kipkosgei & Seung Yeon Son & Seung-Wan Kang, 2020. "Coworker Trust and Knowledge Sharing among Public Sector Employees in Kenya," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-17, March.
    8. Pamela Chidiogo Izunwanne, 2017. "Developing an Understanding of Organisational Knowledge Creation: A Review Framework," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(02), pages 1-31, June.
    9. Mai, Nhat Chi, 2020. "Unpacking the process of overseas knowledge recontextualisation in returnee entrepreneurship - a learning perspective : a study of returnee entrepreneurs in Vietnam," OSF Preprints y5psh, Center for Open Science.
    10. Gächter, Simon & von Krogh, Georg & Haefliger, Stefan, 2010. "Initiating private-collective innovation: The fragility of knowledge sharing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 893-906, September.
    11. Narda R. Quigley & Paul E. Tesluk & Edwin A. Locke & Kathryn M. Bartol, 2007. "A Multilevel Investigation of the Motivational Mechanisms Underlying Knowledge Sharing and Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 71-88, February.
    12. Ilgaz Arikan & Ipek Koparan & Asli M Arikan & Oded Shenkar, 2022. "Dynamic capabilities and internationalization of authentic firms: Role of heritage assets, administrative heritage, and signature processes," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(4), pages 601-635, June.
    13. Iivari Bäck & Marko Kohtamäki, 2016. "Joint Learning in Innovative R&D Collaboration," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 62-86, January.
    14. Law, Kuok Kei, 2014. "The problem with knowledge ambiguity," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 444-450.
    15. 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.
    16. Argote, Linda & Fahrenkopf, Erin, 2016. "Knowledge transfer in organizations: The roles of members, tasks, tools, and networks," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 146-159.
    17. Linda Argote & Ella Miron-Spektor, 2011. "Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1123-1137, October.
    18. Emma L. Hitchen & Petra A. Nylund & Eric Viardot, 2017. "The Effectiveness Of Open Innovation: Do Size And Performance Of Open Innovation Groups Matter?," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(03), pages 1-24, April.
    19. Der-Fang Hung, 2015. "Sustained Competitive Advantage and Organizational Inertia: The Cost Perspective of Knowledge Management," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 6(4), pages 769-789, December.
    20. Chris Kimble, 2013. "Knowledge management, codification and tacit knowledge," Post-Print halshs-00826911, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    case studies; knowledge integration; multiple identities; organization theory; organization-wide identity; social identity;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:rug:rugwps:07/464. 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: Nathalie Verhaeghe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ferugbe.html .

    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.