Comparing KM influence factors between Finland and Japan - a focus on cultre

1. A Study On The Influence of National
Culture on Knowledge Sharing
Laitinen, J. A. (Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan)
Pawlowski, J. M. (Hochschule Ruhr West University of Applied
Sciences, Germany)
Senoo, D (Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan)

2. Licensing: Creative Commons
You are free:
to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the
work
to Remix — to adapt the work
Under the following conditions:
Attribution. You must attribute the work in the
manner specified by the author or licensor
(but not in any way that suggests that they
endorse you or your use of the work).
Noncommercial. You may not use this work for
commercial purposes.
Share Alike. If you alter, transform, or build
upon this work, you may distribute the
resulting work only under the same or
similar license to this one.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

3. Tokyo Institute of Technology, Senoo
Laboratory
 Located at Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan
 Professor Dai Senoo
 Graduated from Hitotsubashi University, was supervised
by Nonaka
 Currently focusing on knowledge management
 4 full time PhD students, (3 foreigners, 1 Japanese)
 Additional part-time PhD students

4. 4Prof. Dr. Jan M. Pawlowski
History
• Founded in 2009
• Public institution, regional development
• 3000 students, 70 professors and growing 
• Western Ruhr area (Bottrop, Mülheim)
Business Information Systems
• Business Information Systems
• (Global) Process Management
• Supporting globally distributed workgroups in
knowledge-intensive organizations
• Knowledge Management, E-Learning & Open
Educational Resources
• Reference Modeling
• Cultural adaptation
Hochschule Ruhr West
Ruhr West University of Applied Sciences

5. Content
 Background
 On knowledge sharing and national culture
 Research question, methodology
 Results
 Future work
 References

6. Background
 Culture
 “[…] definitive, dynamic purposes and tools (values, ethics,
rules, knowledge systems) that are developed to attain group
goals” (Mabawonku, 2003)
 Significant variance in national culture can exist within a
single country (Hofstede, 1980)
 Significant overlap can also be found in national cultures
(Hofstede, 1980)
 While simplifications of reality, cultural models can give
guidelines on where the differences can be found.
 E.g. Hofstede (1980) and updated versions

7. On knowledge sharing and
national culture
 Various approaches to encompass the relevant aspects
 More abstract frameworks (Bhagat et al., 2002)
 Country-specific approach (Huang et al., 2008)
 Frameworks discusses either organization or individual level
variables in regards to a key topic
 E.g. individual level trust (Usoro et al., 2007)
 E.g Existence of formal knowledge sharing policy (Strach and
Everett, 2006),
 Need for frameworks detailing relevant factors in both
organizational and individual levels, and how they interact
with national culture and knowledge sharing

8. Research methodology
 To discover the relevant influencing factors,
researchers decided to carry out semi-structured
interviews
 Countries: Finland and Japan
 Interviewee candidates: industry and academic
professionals, who have experience in knowledge
management, and had experience in both countries. In
total 9 interviews (4 Japanese and 5 Finnish)

9. Proposed framework

10. Overview of influencing
factors
Influencing factor Influencing attributes Links to
National Culture • Individualistic –
collectivistic
• Horizontal – vertical
• Long-term orientation
• Individual
• Organization
• Trust
• Willingness
Individual • Cultural distance
• Language fluency of the
individual
• Organization
• Trust
• Willingness
Organization • Incentives
• Management support
for knowledge sharing
practices
• Existence of formal
knowledge sharing
strategies
• Common goal
• Individual
• Trust
• Tools
• Willingness
Trust • Competency-based
• Integrity-based
• Benevolence-based
• Willingness
• Organization
• Individual
Tools • Support communication
with other employees
• Ease of use
• Willingness
Willingness • Sharing outside of
group
• Knowledge sharing

11. Overview of influencing
factors
Influencing factor Influencing attributes Links to
National Culture • Individualistic –
collectivistic
• Horizontal – vertical
• Long-term orientation
• Individual
• Organization
• Trust
• Willingness
Individual • Cultural distance
• Language fluency of the
individual
• Organization
• Trust
• Willingness
Organization • Incentives
• Management support
for knowledge sharing
practices
• Existence of formal
knowledge sharing
strategies
• Common goal
• Individual
• Trust
• Tools
• Willingness
Trust • Competency-based
• Integrity-based
• Benevolence-based
• Willingness
• Organization
• Individual
Tools • Support communication
with other employees
• Ease of use
• Willingness
Willingness • Sharing outside of
group
• Knowledge sharing

12. Key results – cultural aspects
 Three key factors
 Long-term orientation
 Horizontal-vertical structures
 Group orientation
 Subsection of Hofstede’s dimensions
 Supported by previous research (Möller & Svahn,
2004)

13. Key results – Individual level
 Key factors
 Similar level of language fluency
 Understanding of cultural differences
 Trust

14. Key results – organizational
level
 Key factors
 Language skills of the manager
 Incentives
 Common goals
 Knowledge sharing strategy, management support
 Tools
 Willingness to share
 Sharing outside of the group

15. Benefits of the proposed
framework
 Proposed framework encompasses individual, organizational
and national cultural influence factors
 None of the previous frameworks do this
 Combination of three different cultural influence factors and
other influence factors seem to to cover culture specific
features
 Individualistic-collectivistic, Horizontal-vertical, Long-term
orientation
 E.g. Guanxi (China), Face (Japan)
 Clearly shows where influence of culture can be found in
individual and organizational level
 The framework clearly shows the directions of influences
making it easier for practitioners and researchers to apply the
framework

16. Future research directions
 Further confirmation of the results through quantitative
methods.
 Subsections of the framework can be fruitful
 Influence of national culture on tool customization
 Preferences between explicit and tacit knowledge

17. References
 Bhagat, R. S., Kedia, B.L., Harveston, P. D., Triandis, H. C.: Cultural variations on the
cross-border transfer of organizational knowledge: an integrative framework. Academy of
Management Review, 27(2), 204–221 (2002)
 Huang, Q., Davison, R. M., Gu, J.: Impact of personal and cultural factors on knowledge
sharing in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25(3), 451–471 (2008)
 Hofstede, G.: Cultures Consequences: International Differences in Work-related Values.
Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications (1980)
 Mabawonku, A. O.: Cultural framework for the development of science and technology in
Africa. Science and Public Policy, 30(2), 117-125 (2003).
 Strach, P., Everett, A. M.: Knowledge transfer within Japanese multinationals: Building a
theory. Journal of knowledge Management, 10(1), 55–68 (2006)
 Usoro, A., Sharratt, M. W., Tsui, E., Shekhar, S.: Trust as an antecedent to knowledge
sharing in virtual communities of practice. Knowledge Management Research & Practice,
(5), 199–212 (2007)

18. Questions?
Thank you for listening

19. Web:
http://en.hochschule-ruhr-west.de/research/computer-
science/institute-members/professor-jan-pawlowski.html
http://www.idea-space.eu/
https://jp.linkedin.com/pub/jouni-laitinen/6b/706/308
E-Mail:
Laitinen.j.aa@m.titech.ac.jp
jan.pawlowski@hs-ruhrwest.de