中山管理評論

  期刊全文閱覽

中山管理評論  2015/3

第23卷第1期 跨領域質性研究特刊  p.57-90

DOI:10.6160/2015.03.02


題目
競爭鬥智:對手間的知識分享策略
Competitive Outsmarting: Knowledge Sharing Strategies among Rivals
(635888136838125000.pdf 551KB)

作者
蔡振昌、黃上娥/義守大學企管系、義守大學管理研究所
Chen-Chang Tsai, Sandra Huang/

Department of Business Administration,I-Shou University; Graduate School of Management, I-Shou University


摘要(中文)

知識分享可能令競爭優勢流失,但也可能提升。對知識工作者而言,要不要分享著實是一個兩難的議題。本論文以吸收能力為理論基礎,分析知識分享本質與不同知識類別的運用特性等。研究發現指出,知識分享其實是精彩的鬥智過程,對手會先判斷兩者間吸收能力的差距,再據以選擇適當的知識分享策略,以便在分享知識時能立於不敗之地。本研究透過八個案例,分析競爭對手之間如何判斷吸收能力的差距,選擇不同的知識類別、資訊與專業技能特性,據以採用安全型、保護型與創造型等知識分享策略。這些策略使對手間可以分享知識,同時又創造雙贏之優勢。本文歸納不同知識分享模式做為理論貢獻,並據以探討對實務的啟發。

(635888136837656250.pdf 174KB)

關鍵字(中文)

知識分享、吸收能力、競爭優勢、案例研究、知識分享策略


摘要(英文)

The question of how to share knowledge with competitors while enhance competitive advantage is worthy of investigation. This study adopts the concept of absorptive capacity as a basis for analyzing the essence of knowledge sharing and the features of knowledge categories. We argue that knowledge sharing can be a strategic behavior. Competitors would judge disparity in absorptive capacity faced by both sides to select appropriate knowledge-sharing strategies. This study details why sharing knowledge with competitors while enhance competitive advantages. Eight case studies are examined to show how to judging disparity in absorptive capacity between competitors and using different characteristics of information and professional skills to select different approaches, such as secure, protective, and creative knowledge-sharing strategies. These strategies facilitate the sharing of knowledge with competitors while creating competitive advantage. Finally, we categorized strategic knowledge-sharing behavior model as a basis for examination of theoretical contributions and practical suggestions.

(635888136837656250.pdf 174KB)

關鍵字(英文)

Knowledge sharing, Absorptive capacity, Competitive advantages, Case Study, Knowledge-sharing strategy


政策與管理意涵

知識擁有者的基本功:包括瞭解資訊(information)與專業技能 (know-how)具有不同的分享功能、掌握知識分享是互動學習的本質,並學 會判斷競爭對手的吸收能力(包括認知能力、努力、問題的複雜性)等。掌握 上述三項基本功,在知識分享的鬥智過程中將能游刃有餘,既可以保護競爭優 勢,也能伺機創造競爭優勢。 判斷雙方吸收能力差距的線索:1. 判斷認知能力差距的線索:參考過去 的成就或雙方互動過程,比較雙方運用認知能力據以發現問題、解讀問題、轉 換資訊成為解決方法(專業技能)的差異等,藉以評估雙方認知能力的差異。 2. 判斷努力差距的線索:觀察競爭者平時的投入以及對目標追求動機的強 弱。3. 情境複雜性:例如雙方共同面的問題愈複雜、愈沒有標準答案或需要 創新才能解決的問題,則愈依賴認知能力與各種情境的努力練習,方能決定雙 方吸收能力的差異。 競爭對手間的知識分享策略:根據雙方吸收能力差距有三種不同組合。 高手面對弱者,不論問題困難與否,知識分享不僅是自己複習的機會,還可藉 機提升友誼並獲得非金錢報償等。雙方實力在伯仲之間,選擇僅分享資訊,目 的是先保護競爭優勢,但可以藉由對方回饋,再伺機創造know-how 提升競爭 優勢。最後,同為高手,最好是共同面對最困難問題,沒有任何一方有把握自 行解決,二個高手互相分享資訊與know-how 的前提通常是雙方具備高度友誼 與信任,而且共同追求未來的高難度目標,認同並感受需要與高手互相合作, 才能共同對外競爭並達成個人目標。 知識分享意涵:知識分享其實是『進可攻、退可守』,鼓勵知識擁有者大 膽尋求知識分享機會,在各種不同競爭對手與知識分享的鬥智過程中,巧妙善 用本研究所提出的知識分享策略,藉以提升競爭優勢。


參考文獻

方世杰、方世榮,2000,「知識管理─觀念架構的建立」,商管科技季刊,1 卷 3 期:
355~374。
蔡敦浩、李慶芳,2008,「情境知識的浮現:敘說探究半導體工程師的維修經驗」,
管理學報,25 卷 6 期:699~716。
蕭瑞麟,2010,不用數字的研究,初版,台北:台灣培生教育。
Barney, J. B., 1991, “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage,” Journal of
Management, Vol. 17, No. 1, 99-120.
Bogers, M., 2011, “The open innovation paradox: knowledge sharing and protection in
R&D collaborations,” European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 14, No.
1, 93-117.
Brown, J. S. and Duguid, P., 2001, “Knowledge and organization: a social-practice
perspective,” Organization Science, Vol. 12, No. 2, 198-213.
Cao, Y. and Xiang, Y., 2012, “The impact of knowledge governance on knowledge
sharing,” Management Decision, Vol. 50, No. 4, 591-610.
Cohen, W. M. and Levinthal, D. A., 1990, “Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on
learning and innovation,” Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 35, No. 1, 128-
152.
Connelly, C. E. and Kelloway, E. K., 2003, “Predictors of employees’ perceptions of
knowledge sharing cultures,” Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
Vol. 24, No. 5, 294-301.
Constant, D., Kiesler, S., and Sproull, L., 1994, “What’s mine is ours, or is it?”
Information Systems Research, Vol. 5, No. 4, 400-422.
Cook, S. D. N. and Brown, J. S., 1999, “Bridging epistemologies: the generative dance
between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing,” Organization
Science, Vol. 10, No. 4, 381-400.
Daft, R. and Weick, K., 1984, “Toward a Model of Organizations as Interpretation
Systems,” Academy of Management Review, Vol. 9, No. 2, 284-295.
Davenport, T. H. and Prusak, L., 1998, Working knowledge: how organizations manage
what they know, 1st, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Denzin, N. K., 1970, The research act in sociology, 1st, London: Butterworths.
Denzin, N. K., 1978, The research act: a theoretical introduction to sociological
methods, 1st, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Dierickx, I. and Cool, K., 1989, “Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of
competitive advantage,” Management Science, Vol. 35, No. 12, 1504-1511.
Dyer, J. H. and Nobeoka, K., 2000, “Creating and managing a high-performance
knowledge-sharing network: the oyota case,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21, No. 3, 345-367.
Eisenhardt, K. M., 1989a, “Building theories from case study research,” Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 14, No. 4, 532-550.
Eisenhardt, K. M., 1989b, “Making fast strategic decisions in high-velocity environments,”
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 32, No. 3, 543-576.
Firestone, W. A., 1993, “Alternative arguments for generalizing from data as applied to
qualitative research,” Educational Researcher, Vol. 22, No. 4, 16-23.
French, J. R. and Bertram, H. R., 1959, “The Bases of Social Power” in Cartwright, D. (ed.),
Studies in Social Power, First Edition, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan
Press, 150-167.
Gibbert, M. and Krause, H., 2002, “Practice exchange in a best practice marketplace” in
Davenport, T. H. and Probst, G. J. B. (eds.), Knowledge Management Case Book,
First Edition, New York: Erlangen, 89-105.
Giddens, A., 1984, The constitution of society: outline of the theory of structure, 1st
,
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Grant, R. M., 1996, “Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: organizational
capability as knowledge integration,” Organization Science, Vol. 7, No. 4, 375-388.
Haas, M. R. and Hansen, M. T., 2007, “Different knowledge, different benefits: toward a
productivity perspective on knowledge sharing in organizations,” Strategic
Management Journal, Vol. 28, No. 11, 1133-1153.
Hansen, M. T., 1999, “The search-transfer problem: the role of weak ties in sharing
knowledge across organization subunits,” Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol.
44, No. 1, 82-111.
Hansen, M. T., Mors, M. L., and Løvås, B., 2005, “Knowledge sharing in organizations:
multiple networks, multiple phases,” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 48,
No. 5, 776-793.
Hendriks, P., 1999, “Why share knowledge? The influence of ICT on motivation for
knowledge sharing,” Knowledge and Process Management, Vol. 6, No. 2, 91-100.
Hidding, G. and Catterall, M. S., 1998, “Anatomy of a learning organization: Turning
Knowledge into Capital at Andersen Consulting,” Knowledge and Process
Management, Vol. 5, No. 1, 3-13.
Huber, G. P., 1991, “Organizational learning: the contributing processes and the literatures,”
Organization Science, Vol. 2, No. 1, 88-115.
Kassarjian, H. H., 1977, “Content analysis in consumer research,” Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 4, No. 1, 8-18.
Kogut, B. and Zander, U., 1992, “Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the
replication of technology,” Organization Science, Vol. 3, No. 3, 383-397.
Mäkelä, K., Andersson, U., and Seppälä, T., 2012, “Interpersonal similarity and knowledge
sharing within multinational organizations,” International Business Review, Vol. 28, No. 11, 439-451.
Maturana, H. R. and Varela, F. J., 1998, The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of
human understanding, 2nd, Boston: Shambhala.
McEvily, S. K., Das, S., and McCabe, K., 2000, “Avoiding competence substitution through
knowledge sharing,” Academy of Management Review, Vol. 25, No. 2, 294-311.
Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M., 1994, Qualitative data analysis, 2nd, Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Noblit, G. W. and Hare, R. D., 1988, Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies,
1
st, Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H., 1995, The knowledge-creating company, 1st, New York:
Oxford University Press.
Nonaka, I., 1994, “A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation,”
Organization Science, Vol. 5, No. 1, 14-37.
Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., and Konno, N., 2000, “SECI, Ba and leadership: a unified model of
dynamic knowledge creation,” Long range planning, Vol. 33, No. 1, 5-34.
Orlikowski, W. J., 2002, “Knowing in practice: enacting a collective capability in
distributed organizing,” Organization Science, Vol. 13, No. 3, 249-273.
Patton, M. Q., 1990, Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, 2nd, Newbury Park,
CA: Sage.
Quinn, J. B., Anderson, P., and Finkelstein, S., 1996, “Managing professional intellect:
making the most of the best,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 74, No. 2, 71-80.
Ragin, C. C., 1987, The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and
Quantitative Strategies, 1st, London: University of California Press.
Renzl, B., 2008, “Trust in management and knowledge sharing: The mediating effects of
fear and knowledge documentation,” Omega, Vol. 36, No. 2, 206-220.
Senge, P., 1998, “Sharing Knowledge: You can’t own knowledge, so why not share it?”
Executive Excellence, Vol. 15, No. 6, 11-12.
Silverstein, A., 1988, “An Aristotelian resolution of the idiographic versus nomothetic
tension,” American Psychologist, Vol. 43, No. 6, 425-430.
Spencer, J. W., 2003, “Firms’ knowledge share strategies in the global innovation system:
empirical evidence from the flat panel display industry,” Strategic Management
Journal, Vol. 24, No. 3, 217-233.
Strauss, A. L. and Corbin, J., 1990, Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory
procedures and techniques, 1st, Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Szulanski, G., 1996, “Exploring internal stickiness: impediments to the transfer of best
practice within the firm,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17, No. 1, 27-43.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., and Shuen, A., 1997, “Dynamic capabilities and strategic
management,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18, No. 7, 509-533.
Thurstone, L. L., 1938, Primary mental abilities, 1st, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Tsai, W., 2002, “Social Structure of ‘Coopetition’ within a multiunit organization:
coordination, competition, and intraorganizational knowledge sharing,”
Organization Science, Vol. 13, No. 2, 179-190.
Tsoukas, H., 1996, “The firm as a distributed knowledge system: A con-structionist
approach,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17, No. s2, 11-25.
Von Hippel, E., 1987, “Cooperation between rivals: informal know-how trading,” Research
Policy, Vol. 16, No. 6, 291-302.
Wasko, M. and Faraj, S., 2000, “It Is What One Does: Why People Participate and Help
Others in Electronic Communities of Practice,” Journal of Strategic Information
Systems, Vol. 9, No. 2-3, 155-173.
Witzel, A., 1985, “Das roblemzentrierte Interview” in Jüttemann, G. (ed.), Qualitative
Forschung in der Psychologie, First Edition, Weinheim, DE: Beltz, 227-255.
Yin, R. K., 1994, Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 1st, London: Sage.
Zhou, K. Z. and Li, C. B., 2012, “How knowledge affects radical innovation: knowledge
base, market knowledge acquisition, and internal knowledge sharing,” Strategic
Management Journal, Vol. 33, No. 9, 1090-1102.