{"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.
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?