Boundaries knowledge (knowing)—A source of business innovation

• Date: 01 July 2019
• Published date: 01 July 2019
• Author: Mitsuru Kodama
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.1603

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Boundaries knowledge (knowing)—A source of business

innovation

Mitsuru Kodama

Department of Management, College of

Commerce and Graduate School of Business

Administration, Nihon University, Tokyo, Japan

Correspondence

Mitsuru Kodama, Department of Management,

College of Commerce and Graduate School of

Business Administration, Nihon University, 5‐

2‐1 Kinuta Setagaya‐ku, Tokyo 157‐8570,

Japan.

Email: kodama.mitsuru@nihon‐u.ac.jp

Funding information

Nihon University Multidisciplinary Research

Grant, Grant/Award Number: 2018–2019;

University's College of Commerce

This paper focuses on knowledge differences that occur between people and organi-

zations, and various “dissimilar things,”and presents the concept of “boundaries

knowledge”or “boundaries knowing”that arises from the awareness, perception,

and discovery by people and organizations of such differences. Then, through in‐

depth case studies, the paper identifies the impacts that the quality of boundaries

knowledge and boundaries knowing has on the creativity and innovation of people

and organizations. Moreover, the paper shows that “boundaries knowledge (know-

ing)”is a strategic thinking and action that provides optimized creations, solutions,

and processes for new knowledge creation such as strategy creation and execution

as personal, organizational, or corporate targets, or solutions for problems and issues

faced, as “the fourth knowledge”continuing from tacit knowledge, explicit knowl-

edge, and phronesis.

1|KNOWLEDGE CONVERGENCE FOR NEW

INNOVATION

It goes without saying that raising creativity across generations to con-

tribute to wide‐ranging social activities is important, not only for cor-

porate organizations but also in wider social organizations and

individual people. In recent years in the business world, there has been

heightened interest in new product and service developments brought

about through “knowledge convergence”(or knowledge creation) that

entails the fusing of dissimilar technologies and services (Kodama,

2017; Kodama & Shibata, 2016) as an indicator of new product devel-

opment for differentiation with other companies and novel business

developments into different fields. This is because there are now

many cases of never‐before‐seen and uniquely creative new products

and services achieved through the merging of knowledge from one

field with those of another (Kodama, 2007).

For example, the necessity to develop business strategies that can

respond to convergences such as the convergence of differing tech-

nologies and services or the convergence as product and service

developments and new business model formation across dissimilar

industries is becoming more and more pronounced. There is also a

strengthening of training and employment of personnel who think cre-

atively at the corporate side. Against this backdrop, this paper focuses

on the thinking and actions of organizations and individuals for crea-

tive thinking and innovation and aims at research on creative develop-

ments that bring about knowledge convergence (hereinafter referred

to as “knowledge creation”for consistency).

In business studies and psychology to date, the importance of

“intrinsic motivation”has been identified as a factor in raising creativ-

ity (e.g., Elsbach & Hargadon, 2006). Intrinsic motivation raises per-

sonal interests, curiosity, and the desire to learn as well as

knowledge flexibility and sustainability and further raises creativity

(Ryan & Deci, 2000; Shalley, Zhou, & Oldham, 2004). However,

regarding thinking on creativity, intrinsic motivation has been reported

in past empirical research as not necessarily raising creativity, depend-

ing on whether the focus is on novelty or utility (e.g., George & Zhou,

2007; Amabile, 1996). From conventional motivational information

processing theory, the focus of intrinsic motivation has been put on

novelty, and not necessarily utility.

On the other hand, Amabile (1996) asserts that psychological

effects come into play in the shift from novelty born of ideas that have

come about from intrinsic motivation to the subsequent stage, that is,

utility (usefulness). In this perspective, it is important that “creativity”

is both novelty and utility and must be argued from the perspective

that it achieves new creations or events and impacts broadly on soci-

ety (in other words innovation).

Received: 4 August 2018 Accepted: 11 March 2019

DOI: 10.1002/kpm.1603

210 © 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Knowl Process Manag. 2019;26:210–228.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/kpm

This paper focuses on knowledge differences that arise between

people, organizations, and various different objects and events and

names the new knowledge that comes about through the awareness,

perception, and discovery by people of such differences as “bound-

aries knowledge”(or “boundaries knowing”). This “boundaries knowl-

edge (knowing)”has hardly been discussed (taken up) in the field of

knowledge management or business and management nor in other

academic fields (other social sciences or humanities). This paper iden-

tifies the impacts that this boundaries knowledge (knowing) has on the

creativity and innovation of people and organizations. In other words,

the paper shows that this boundaries knowledge (knowing) brings

about capabilities to achieve optimized solutions and processes for

innovation activities entailed in the challenge of new knowledge crea-

tion taken up by people or organizations, or for solutions to target

problems and issues that they face.

2|STRUCTURE OF THIS PAPER AND

RESEARCH METHOD

From the perspective of existing research, this paper clarifies the con-

cept of “boundaries knowledge (knowing),”a concept that has hardly

ever been discussed in academic research to date. Then, in the bound-

ary regions of Socialization, Externalization, Combination, Internaliza-

tion in the SECI model of Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), the paper

identifies the existence of this boundaries knowledge (knowing) and

positions and describes in detail boundaries knowledge (boundaries

knowing) in the SECI model. In addition to tacit knowledge, the first

knowledge, explicit knowledge, the second knowledge, and practical

knowledge (phronesis), the third knowledge driving spiraling conver-

sion of those (Nonaka, Kodama, Hirose, & Kohlbacher, 2014), the

paper presents “boundaries knowledge (boundaries knowing)”as the

fourth knowledge.

As well as that, as an in‐depth case study on new product develop-

ment through knowledge creation, the paper then observes and ana-

lyzes the case of the commercialization process of the world's first

mobile phone with built‐in camera and “Sha‐mail”(email with photos)

from the perspective of the concept and framework of boundaries

knowledge (knowing). This research has exploratory aspects of

extracting details of certain people and organizations involved in cor-

porate innovation activities gathering data regarding the leadership

processes of their activities and carefully analyzing these. Therefore,

the author has adopted a qualitative survey and case study analysis

as methodology. This research methodology provides for the rich

gathering of data and rich analyses for introducing a new theoretical

framework that cannot be found in previous research.

Many scholars have already pointed out the effectiveness of case

studies (e.g., Eisenhardt, 1989; Pettigrew, 1990; Yin, 1994). Case stud-

ies are a very effective methodology for explaining the relationships

between causes and results of phenomena and their appropriateness

from multiple perspectives and interpretations through deep insights

based on objective qualitative information and the researchers' sub-

jective interpretation regarding individual cases that cannot be

obtained from statistical methods. Case studies are important not only

for complementing the generality of statistical methods but also in

constructing novel, creative theories.

The case study in this article focuses on research questions relating

to boundaries knowledge (knowing) in managing innovation in compa-

nies and provides in‐depth observations and analysis regarding how

that boundaries knowledge (knowing) achieved innovation activities.

Then, based on the above research approach, the paper observes

and analyzes the framework for knowledge creation through bound-

aries knowledge (knowing) from the in‐depth case study. Finally, the

paper discusses the implications and a conclusion gained from the

concept and case study.

3|THE CONCEPT AND FRAMEWORK OF

BOUNDARIES KNOWLEDGE (KNOWING)

3.1 |The necessity of boundaries knowledge

(knowing) and boundaries vision from existing research

In the knowledge economy, in addition to the necessity for individuals

living in corporate society to create diverse knowledge across differing

values and areas of specialization in organizations, it is also important

to form global networks of the best people and organizations around

the world to converge the best knowledge dispersed across the globe

with the knowledge of individuals and organizations. As a proposition,

this paper presents the concept of boundaries knowledge (knowing)

and boundaries vision (Kodama & Shibata, 2016) in the thinking of

individual people, which is a driver that accelerates the knowledge cre-

ation process.

The acquisition of creativity to generate new knowledge is indis-

pensable for practitioners in modern society. In the knowledge econ-

omy, diverse human knowledge (of which technology is one element)

is the source of valuable products, services, and business models that

can give a company new competitiveness. New value chains are

formed as new strategic models by merging diverse technologies of

different industries to bring about new products, services, and busi-

ness models that transcend various boundaries. Accordingly, for a

company to build new business, the company must refresh its per-

spectives on management to span the boundaries between the knowl-

edge of individuals, groups, and organizations (e.g., Kodama, 2007,

2011).

Boundaries knowledge (knowing) is crucial for knowledge creation

spanning different fields of specialization for successful new innova-

tion. New innovation occurs through the process of converging

diverse knowledge of dissimilar and unique areas of specialization

(e.g., Hacklin, Marxt, & Fahrni, 2009; Kodama, 2005, 2009; Rafols &

Meyer, 2010); in other words, the knowledge creation process

through boundaries vision can be thought of as occurring at the level

spanning different areas of expertise. By its nature, bringing together

knowledge that once belonged to separate areas of technical expertise

is the precondition for convergence. Therefore, to make convergence

KODAMA 211