Knowledge arbitrage: what are the risks, and do they matter?

IF 6.6 2区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Juthamon Sithipolvanichgul, Amandeep Dhir, Shalini Talwar, Pallavi Srivastava, Puneet Kaur
{"title":"Knowledge arbitrage: what are the risks, and do they matter?","authors":"Juthamon Sithipolvanichgul, Amandeep Dhir, Shalini Talwar, Pallavi Srivastava, Puneet Kaur","doi":"10.1108/jkm-05-2023-0411","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>It is largely acknowledged that arbitrating the flow of knowledge can help firms strategically leverage tacit and explicit internal knowledge. However, despite the apparent scholarly and managerial acceptance of the criticality of the flow of knowledge between various stakeholders, the academic understanding of knowledge arbitrage remains coarse-grained. There are practically no empirical insights available to unravel the consequences of firms’ knowledge arbitrage choices regarding rewards and risks. This study aims to identify the risks that emerge as firms channel the flow of knowledge from surplus to deficit areas within organizational boundaries. To this end, the authors investigate several subsumed subprocesses in knowledge arbitrage to map the associated risks.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>This study used an exploratory qualitative approach to examine the risks that emerge as firms attempt to support knowledge flows within their organizational boundaries. The data were collected through open-ended essays via an online research platform from 45 full-time employees of firms operating in different sectors. The collected data were analyzed inductively through open, axial and selective coding.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The research findings identified three key subprocesses of knowledge arbitrage: knowledge diffusion, knowledge brokering and knowledge absorption. These subprocesses are susceptible to various risks arising the form of channels, champions, sharers and receivers of knowledge flows. In general, the study showed that a firm’s decision regarding knowledge flows, such as structured or random flows, or the presence or absence of designated coordinators to broker the flow carries specific risks for both sharers and receivers. In particular, while the risks of knowledge hiding, misinformation and disinformation manifest in all three subprocesses, low employee engagement, loss of knowledge and information overload also emerged as key risks in any two of the three subprocesses.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This study offers valuable insights by uncovering the hitherto unexplored risks in intrafirm knowledge arbitrage. Given that knowledge is a crucial organizational tool for driving performance, innovation and competitive advantage, understanding the risks associated with intrafirm arbitrated knowledge flows can help firms anticipate and mitigate the associated adverse consequences. The findings make a novel contribution by offering (a) a comprehensive categorization of the risks associated with knowledge arbitrage rooted in processes, people and structures and (b) a macro overview of knowledge arbitrage risks associated with the processes of knowledge diffusion, knowledge brokering and knowledge absorption.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":48368,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Knowledge Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Knowledge Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jkm-05-2023-0411","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

It is largely acknowledged that arbitrating the flow of knowledge can help firms strategically leverage tacit and explicit internal knowledge. However, despite the apparent scholarly and managerial acceptance of the criticality of the flow of knowledge between various stakeholders, the academic understanding of knowledge arbitrage remains coarse-grained. There are practically no empirical insights available to unravel the consequences of firms’ knowledge arbitrage choices regarding rewards and risks. This study aims to identify the risks that emerge as firms channel the flow of knowledge from surplus to deficit areas within organizational boundaries. To this end, the authors investigate several subsumed subprocesses in knowledge arbitrage to map the associated risks.

Design/methodology/approach

This study used an exploratory qualitative approach to examine the risks that emerge as firms attempt to support knowledge flows within their organizational boundaries. The data were collected through open-ended essays via an online research platform from 45 full-time employees of firms operating in different sectors. The collected data were analyzed inductively through open, axial and selective coding.

Findings

The research findings identified three key subprocesses of knowledge arbitrage: knowledge diffusion, knowledge brokering and knowledge absorption. These subprocesses are susceptible to various risks arising the form of channels, champions, sharers and receivers of knowledge flows. In general, the study showed that a firm’s decision regarding knowledge flows, such as structured or random flows, or the presence or absence of designated coordinators to broker the flow carries specific risks for both sharers and receivers. In particular, while the risks of knowledge hiding, misinformation and disinformation manifest in all three subprocesses, low employee engagement, loss of knowledge and information overload also emerged as key risks in any two of the three subprocesses.

Originality/value

This study offers valuable insights by uncovering the hitherto unexplored risks in intrafirm knowledge arbitrage. Given that knowledge is a crucial organizational tool for driving performance, innovation and competitive advantage, understanding the risks associated with intrafirm arbitrated knowledge flows can help firms anticipate and mitigate the associated adverse consequences. The findings make a novel contribution by offering (a) a comprehensive categorization of the risks associated with knowledge arbitrage rooted in processes, people and structures and (b) a macro overview of knowledge arbitrage risks associated with the processes of knowledge diffusion, knowledge brokering and knowledge absorption.

知识套利:有哪些风险?
目的 人们普遍认为,对知识流动进行仲裁有助于企业战略性地利用内部隐性和显性知识。然而,尽管学术界和管理界显然都接受了知识在不同利益相关者之间流动的重要性,但学术界对知识套利的理解仍然比较粗略。几乎没有任何实证研究可以揭示企业知识套利选择在回报和风险方面的后果。本研究旨在确定企业在组织边界内引导知识从盈余领域流向赤字领域时出现的风险。为此,作者调查了知识套利中的几个子过程,以绘制相关风险图。本研究采用探索性定性方法,研究企业在其组织边界内试图支持知识流动时出现的风险。数据是通过一个在线研究平台,以开放式论文的形式从不同行业企业的 45 名全职员工中收集的。研究结果确定了知识套利的三个关键子过程:知识扩散、知识中介和知识吸收。这些子过程容易受到知识流动的渠道、拥护者、分享者和接受者等形式的各种风险的影响。总体而言,研究表明,企业关于知识流动的决定,如结构化流动或随机流动,或有无指定协调人作为知识流动的中介,都会给分享者和接受者带来特定的风险。特别是,虽然知识隐藏、错误信息和虚假信息的风险在所有三个子过程中都有体现,但员工参与度低、知识流失和信息超载也成为三个子过程中任何两个子过程的主要风险。鉴于知识是推动绩效、创新和竞争优势的重要组织工具,了解与企业内部知识套利流动相关的风险有助于企业预测和减轻相关的不利后果。研究结果做出了新的贡献,提供了(a)与知识套利相关的风险的全面分类,这些风险植根于流程、人员和结构中;以及(b)与知识传播、知识中介和知识吸收流程相关的知识套利风险的宏观概述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.70
自引率
15.70%
发文量
99
期刊介绍: Knowledge Management covers all the key issues in its field including: ■Developing an appropriate culture and communication strategy ■Integrating learning and knowledge infrastructure ■Knowledge management and the learning organization ■Information organization and retrieval technologies for improving the quality of knowledge ■Linking knowledge management to performance initiatives ■Retaining knowledge - human and intellectual capital ■Using information technology to develop knowledge management ■Knowledge management and innovation ■Measuring the value of knowledge already within an organization ■What lies beyond knowledge management?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信