Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A conceptual model for managing incompatible impacts of organisational structures on awareness levels

  • Article
  • Published:
Knowledge Management Research & Practice

Abstract

Awareness levels of individuals about various aspects of the collaborative processes can be achieved by effective promotive interactions among them. Cultural structures are regarded as one of the major determinants of knowledge sharing patterns and awareness levels of individuals in collaborative contexts. Through an exploratory review of the literature, the present study points to the two rival organisational structures of cooperation and competition that coexist in any organisation in different intensities and mixtures. Finding a desirable mix of the above two structures is currently a challenging task and no explicit method exists for determining such an ideal mix. This study provides further theoretical insights into the analysis of incompatible impacts of several factors on the awareness levels of individuals in collaborative contexts. Drawn from the findings in the current body of literature, a conceptual model is developed. The proposed model relates cooperative and competitive structures, task dimensions, and group characteristics as potential factors that determine the awareness levels of individuals. The face validity of the proposed model is checked by employing an expert focus group. As a result, a number of enhancements and improvements to the model are proposed. Pragmatic aspects of the proposed model are then discussed and recommendations for future research are provided.

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
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alavi M, Kayworth TR and Leidner DE (2006) An empirical examination of the influence of organisational culture on knowledge management practices. Journal of Management Information Systems 22 (3), 191–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alavi M and Leidner D (1999) Knowledge management systems: issues, challenges and benefits. Communications of the AIS 1 (2), 1–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alavi M and Leidner D (2001) Review: knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly 25 (1), 107–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ali M and Brookes L (2008) Culture and IS: national cultural dimensions within IS discipline. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems (MONTAZEMI B Ed), pp 1–11. Curran Associates Inc., Toronto, Canada.

  • Alper S, Tjosvold D and Law KS (2000) Conflict management, efficacy, and performance in organisational teams. Personnel Psychology 53 (3), 625–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Badovick GJ and Beatty SE (1987) Shared organisational values: measurement and impact upon strategic marketing implementation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 15 (1), 19–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balthazard PA and Cooke RA (2004) Organisational culture and knowledge management success: assessing the behavior-performance continuum. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Science (SPRAGUE R Ed), pp 511–533, IEE Computer Society, Waikoloa, Hawaii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beersma B, Hollenbeck JR, Humphery SE, Moon H, Conlon DE and Ilgen DR (2003) Cooperation, competition, and team performance: toward a contingency approach. Academy of Management Journal 46 (5), 572–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berson Y, Nemanich LA, Waldman DA, Galvin BA and Keller RT (2006) Leadership and organisational learning: a multiple levels perspective. The Leadership Quarterly 17 (6), 577–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock GW, Zmund RW, Kim YG, and Lee JN (2005) Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly 29 (1), 1–26.

  • Bogenrieder I (2006) Co-operation in a system of distributed cognition or how to co-operate with diverse knowledge. In The Future of Knowledge Management (RENZI B, MATZLER K and HINTERHUBER H, Eds), pp 205–218, Palgrave, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandenburger A and Nalebuff B (1998) Co-Opetition. Bantam Dell Pub Group, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell DJ (1988) Task complexity: a review and analysis. Academy of Management Review 13 (1), 40–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen G, Liu C and Tjosvold D (2005) Conflict management for effective top management teams and innovation in China. Journal of Management Studies 42 (2), 277–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chow CW, Deng FJ and Ho JL (2000) The openness of knowledge sharing within organisations: a comparative study of the United States and the People's Republic of China. Journal of Management Accounting Research 12 (1), 65–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark T, Jones M and Armstrong C (2005) The dynamic structure of management support systems: theory development, research focus, and direction. MIS Quarterly 31 (3), 579–615.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damian DE and Zowghi D (2003) An insight into the interplay between culture, conflict and distance in globally distributed requirements negotiations. In Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (SPRAGUE R Ed), pp 1–10, IEE Computer Society, Hawaii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daneshgar F (2004) Awareness net: a modeling language for collaborative business processes. Journal of Conceptual Modelling 32, http://www.inconcept.com/JCM/xxindex.html.

  • Daneshgar F and Wang W (2007) Validation of the awareness net model for the Australian security investment processes. Knowledge-based Systems 20 (8), 736–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davenport TH, Long DD and Beers MC (1998) Successful knowledge management projects. Sloan Management Review 39 (2), 43–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport TH and Prusak L (1998) Working Knowledge: How Organisations Manage What They Know. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeLong DW and Fahey L (2000) Diagnosing cultural barriers to knowledge management. Academy of Management Executive 14 (4), 113–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch M (1973) The Resolution of Conflict. Yale University Press, New Haven.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch M (2000) Cooperation and competition. In The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice (Deutsch M, Coleman PT and Marcus EC, Eds), pp 21–40, Jossey Bass, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker PF (2005) Managing oneself. Harvard Business Review 77 (2), 64–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliott D, Helsen WF and Chua R (2001) A century later: Woodworth's (1899) two-component model of goal directed aiming. Psychological Bulletin 127 (3), 342–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gold AH, Malhotra A and Segars AH (2001) Knowledge management: an organisational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems 18 (1), 185–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatch MJ (1993) The dynamics of organisational culture. Academy of Management Review 18 (4), 657–693.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendriks P (1999) Why share knowledge? The influence of ICT on the motivation for knowledge sharing. Knowledge and Process Management 6 (2), 91–100.

  • Huang JC and Newell S (2003) Knowledge integration processes and dynamics within the context of cross-functional projects. International Journal of Project Management 21 (3), 167–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janz BD and Prasarnphanich P (2003) Understanding the antecedents of effective knowledge management: the importance of a knowledge-centered culture. Decision Sciences 34 (2), 351–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarvenpaa SL and Staples DS (2001) Exploring perceptions of organisational ownership of information and expertise. Journal of Management Information Systems 18 (1), 151–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jashapara A (2003) Cognition, culture and competition: an empirical test of the learning organisation. The Learning Organisation 10 (1), 31–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jehn KA and Mannix E (2001) The dynamic nature of conflict: a longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal 44 (2), 238–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson DW and Johnson RT (2006) New developments in social interdependence theory. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs 131 (4), 285–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leidner DE and Kayworth T (2006) Review: a review of culture in information system research: toward a theory of information technology culture conflict. MIS Quarterly 30 (2), 357–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lencioni PM (2002) Make your values mean something. Harvard Business Review 80 (7), 113–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin WB (2008) The effect of knowledge sharing model. Expert Systems with Applications 34 (2), 1508–1521.

  • McDermott CM and Stock GN (1999) Organisational culture and advanced manufacturing technology implementation. Organisational Culture and Advanced Manufacturing Technology 17 (5), 521–533.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller P and Yu HC (2003) Organisational values and generational values: a cross cultural study. Australasian Journal of Business and Social Enquiry 1 (3), 138–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg H (1991) The effective organisation: forces and forms. Sloan Management Review 32 (2), 54–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nadler D and Tushman M (1988) Strategic Organisation Design: Concepts, Tools & Processes. Scott Foresman, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka I and Takeuchi H (1995) The Knowledge Creating Company. Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Padma P, Ganesh L and Rajendran C (2008) An exploratory study of the impact of the capability maturity model on the organisational performance of Indian software firms. Quality Management Journal 15 (2), 20–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phan PH (2000) Knowledge creation in strategic alliances: another look at organisational learning. Asia Pacific Journal of Management 17 (2), 201–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posner BZ, Kouzes JM and Schmidt WH (1985) Shared values make a difference: an empirical test of corporate culture. Human Resource Management 24 (3), 293–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ray P, Shahrestani SA and Daneshgar F (2005) The role of awareness modelling in cooperative management. Information Systems Frontiers 7 (3), 299–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richter AW, Scully J and West MA (2005) Intergroup conflict and intergroup effectiveness in organisations: theory and scale development. European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology 14 (2), 177–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robey D and Azevedo A (1994) Cultural analysis of the organisational consequences of information technology. Accounting Management and Information Technologies 4 (1), 23–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schein EH (1988) Organizational Culture and Leadership. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shin M (2004) A framework for evaluating economics of knowledge management systems. Information & Management 42 (1), 179–196.

  • Shrivastava SK and Wheater SM (1999) Architectural support for dynamic reconfiguration of large scale distributed applications. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Configurable Distributed Systems (WERNER B, Ed), pp. 1–14, IEEE Computer Society Press, Maryland, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl BC and El-Beltagi I (2004) Cultural universality versus particularity in CMC. Journal of Global Information Technology Management 7 (4), 47–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanne MB, Johnson DW and Johnson RT (1999) Does competition enhance or inhibit motor performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 125 (1), 133–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tjosvold D (1998) Cooperative and competitive goal approach to conflict: accomplishments and challenges. Applied Psychology: An International Review 47 (3), 285–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vera D and Crossan M (2004) Strategic leadership and organisational learning. Academy of Management Review 29 (2), 222–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsham G (2002) Cross-cultural software production and use: a structurational analysis. MIS Quarterly 26 (4), 359–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber RA and Camerer CF (2003) Cultural conflict and merger failure: an experimental approach. Management Science 49 (4), 400–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoo Y and Torrey B (2002) National Culture and Knowledge Management in a Global Learning Organisation. Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information Systems, Technology and Management, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

    Shahla Ghobadi & Farhad Daneshgar

Authors
  1. Shahla Ghobadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Farhad Daneshgar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shahla Ghobadi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ghobadi, S., Daneshgar, F. A conceptual model for managing incompatible impacts of organisational structures on awareness levels. Knowl Manage Res Pract 8, 256–264 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2010.16

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2010.16

Keywords

Search

Navigation