Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sharing knowledge, being different and working as a team

  • Article
  • Published:
Knowledge Management Research & Practice

Abstract

Knowledge-intensive work in modern global organisations is largely organised in teams or groups. Most of this work can be classified as knowledge creation with outcomes such as plans, contracts, proposals and analyses. Cooperating for knowledge-intensive work is recognised as a social process in which identification and organisational climate play an important role. Yet despite the mutual interdependence of members, their relations in teams are not necessarily closely knitted. Teams in multinational companies consist of members with different national, ethnic, functional and educational backgrounds, who are often situated at different locations, using a combination of means to communicate. These are not the most favourable conditions for an open way of exchanging knowledge and insights. On the other side, diversity in expertise is supposed to be a necessary condition for knowledge creation. It offers the requisite variety that is needed to cope with complex problems and the cognitive distance that is supposed to stimulate organisational learning. It is expected that identification of team members with their group can counterbalance the negative effects of diversity, while it can enforce the positive effect of task interdependence. This research is directed to the relations between social identification, diversity, interdependence and knowledge sharing in corporate teams. Social identification is an important issue since it is known as a builder of extra role behaviour in organisations. Diversity and interdependence are team features that shape the identification with a team. Social identification is considered as an important mediator between these independent variables and knowledge sharing as a dependent variable. The research has been carried out in a large beverage company with plants and agencies all over the world. A questionnaire has been used with validated scales. The research data stem from a sample of 169 respondents from 30 teams. A strong relation between knowledge sharing and social identification was found, while diversity of teams plays an intriguing role in stimulating and inhibiting knowledge sharing between team members.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ardichvili AP and Wentling T (2003) Motivation and barriers to participation in virtual knowledge-sharing communities of practice. Journal of Knowledge Management 7 (1), 64–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron RM and Kenny DA (1986) The moderator mediator variable distinction in social psychological-research – conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51 (6), 1173–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bijlsma K, Rosendaal BW and Bunt G vd (2005) Can trust breed heed? Differential effects of trust on heed and performance in a network and a divisional form of organizing. In Trust Under Pressure (BIJLSMA-FRANKEMA KM, Ed), pp 206–231, Edward Elgar, Chettenham.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bogenrieder I and Nooteboom B (2004) Learning groups: what types are there? A theoretical analysis and an empirical study in a consultancy firm. Organization Studies 25 (2), 287–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boisot MH (1995) Information Space: A Framework for Learning in Organizations, Institutions and Cultures. Routledge, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown JS and Duguid P (2001) Knowledge and organization: a social-practice perspective. Organization Science 12 (2), 198–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown SL and Eisenhardt KM (1995) Product development – past research, present findings, and future-directions. Academy of Management Review 20 (2), 343–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabrera EF and Cabrera A (2005) Fostering knowledge sharing through people management practices. International Journal of Human Resource Management 16 (5), 720–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campion MA, Medsker GJ and Higgs AC (1993) Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness – implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology 46 (4), 823–850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Child J (1994) The Role of Social Identity in the International Transfer of Knowledge Through Joint Venture. Cambridge Judge Institute of Management Studies, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen SG and Bailey DE (1997) What makes teams work: group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management Accounting Research 23 (3), 239–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman JS (1990) Foundations of Social Theory. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creed WED and Miles RE (1996) Trust in organizations: a conceptual framework linking organizational forms, managerial philosophies, and the opportunity costs of controls. In Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research (TYLER R, Ed), pp 16–38, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cummings JN (2004) Work groups, structural diversity, and knowledge sharing in a global organization. Management Science 50 (3), 352–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson AC (1999) Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly 44 (2), 350–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson AC (2002) The local and variegated nature of learning in organizations: a group-level perspective. Organization Science 13 (2), 128–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson AC, Winslow AB, Bohmer RMJ and Pisano GP (2003) Learning how and learning what: effects of tacit and codified knowledge on performance improvement following technology adoption. Decision Sciences 34 (2), 197–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellemers N, De Gilder D and Haslam SA (2004) Motivating individuals and groups at work: a social identity perspective on leadership and group performance. Academy of Management Review 29 (3), 459–478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faraj S and Sproull L (2000) Coordinating expertise in software development teams. Management Science 46 (12), 1554–1568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiol CM (1994) Consensus, diversity, and learning in organizations. Organization Science 5 (3), 403–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiol CM and O’Connor EJ (2005) Identification in face-to-face, hybrid, and pure virtual teams: untangling the contradictions. Organization Science 16 (1), 19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gherardi S and Nicolini D (2000) To transfer is to transform: the circulation of safety knowledge. Organization 7 (2), 329–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson CB and Gibbs JL (2006) Unpacking the concept of virtuality: the effects of geographic dispersion, electronic dependence, dynamic structure, and national diversity on team innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 51, 451–495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobman EV, Bordia P and Gallois C (2003) Consequences of feeling dissimilar from others in a work team. Journal of Business and Psychology 17 (3), 301–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede G (1980) Culture's Consequences. Sage Publications, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsiu-Fen Lin GGL (2006) Effects of socio-technical factors on organizational intention to encourage knowledge sharing. Management Decision 44 (1), 74–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jehn KA, Northcraft GB and Neale MA (1999) Why differences make a difference: a field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly 44 (4), 741–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut B and Zander U (1996) What firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning. Organization Science 7 (5), 502–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer R (1991) Intergroup relations and organizational dilemmas: the role of categorization processes. Research in Organizational Behavior 13, 191–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathieu JE and Taylor SR (2007) A framework for testing meso-mediational relationships in organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior 28 (2), 141–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michailova S and Hutchings K (2006) National cultural influences on knowledge sharing: a comparison of China and Russia. Journal of Management Studies 43 (3), 383–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milliken FJ and Martins LL (1996) Searching for common threads: understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Academy of Management Review 21 (2), 402–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nahapiet J and Goshal S (1998) Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review 23 (2), 242–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka I (1994) A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science 5 (1), 14–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nooteboom B (2000) Learning by interaction: absorptive capacity, cognitive distance and governance. Journal of Management and Governance 4 (1/2), 69–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osterloh M and Frey BS (2000) Motivation, knowledge transfer, and organizational forms. Organization Science 11 (5), 538–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff PM, Paine JB and Bachrach DG (2000) Organizational citizenship behaviors: a critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management 26 (3), 513–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rico RC and Cohen SG (2005) Effects of task interdependence and type of communication on performance in virtual teams. Journal of Managerial Psychology 20 (3/4), 261–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosendaal BW (2006) Learning cycles in knowledge intensive organizations: an exploratory study of the nature and dimensions of knowledge development in four departments. Knowledge Management Research & Practice 4 (4), 261–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulz M (2001) The uncertain relevance of newness: organizational learning and knowledge flows. Academy of Management Journal 44 (4), 661–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro DL, Furst SA, Spreitzer GM and Von Glinow MA (2002) Transnational teams in the electronic age: are team identity and high performance at risk? Journal of Organizational Behavior 23 (4), 455–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sole D and Edmondson A (2002) Situated knowledge and learning in dispersed teams. British Journal of Management 13 (special issue 2), S17–S34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szulanski G (1996) Exploring internal stickiness: impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal 17, 27–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Hooff B and De Leeuw van Weenen F (2004) Committed to share: commitment and CMC use as antecedents of knowledge sharing. Knowledge and Process Management 11 (2), 13–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Vegt G and Bunderson JS (2005) Learning and performance in multidisciplinary teams: the importance of collective team identification. Academy of Management Journal 48 (3), 532–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Vegt G and Van de Vliert E (2000) Team members’ affective responses to patterns of intragroup interdependence and job complexity. Journal of Management 26 (4), 633–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Vegt G and Van de Vliert E (2002) Intragroup interdependence and effectiveness: review and proposed directions for theory and practice. Journal of Managerial Psychology 17 (1/2), 50–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Vegt G and Van de Vliert E (2005) Effects of perceived skill dissimilarity and task interdependence on helping in work teams. Journal of Management 31 (1), 73–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Zee K, Atsma N and Brodbeck F (2004) The influence of social identity and personality on outcomes of cultural diversity in teams. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 35 (3), 283–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Knippenberg D (2000) Work motivation and performance: a social identity perspective. Applied Psychology – An International Review 49 (3), 357–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Knippenberg D, De Dreu C and Homan AC (2004) Work group diversity and group performance: an integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology 89 (6), 1008–1022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Krogh G (1998) Care in knowledge creation. California Management Review 40 (3), 133–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wageman R (1995) Interdependence and group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly 40 (1), 145–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick KE and Roberts KH (1993) Collective mind in organizations – heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly 38 (3), 357–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wuyts S, Dutta S and Nooteboom B (2005) Empirical tests of optimal cognitive distance. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 58 (2), 277–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zarraga C and Bonache J (2005) The impact of team atmosphere on knowledge outcomes in self-managed teams. Organization Studies 26 (5), 661–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zellmer-Bruhn M and Gibson C (2006) Multinational organization context: implications for team learning and performance. Academy of Management Journal 49 (3), 501–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Public Administration and Organisational Studies, Faculty of Social Science, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Bastiaan Rosendaal

Authors
  1. Bastiaan Rosendaal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bastiaan Rosendaal.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rosendaal, B. Sharing knowledge, being different and working as a team. Knowl Manage Res Pract 7, 4–14 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2008.32

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2008.32

Keywords

Search

Navigation