Enhancing knowledge exchange and combination through HR practices: reflexivity as a translation process

• Published date: 01 July 2016
• Date: 01 July 2016
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12108

Enhancing knowledge exchange and combination

through HR practices: reflexivity as a translation

process

Kathy Monks and EdelConway, DCU Business School, DublinCity University

Na Fu, School of Business, MaynoothUniversity

Katie Bailey, Department of Business and Management, University of Sussex

Grainne Kelly, Queens University Management School, Queens University Belfast

Enda Hannon, Kingston Business School, Kingston University

Human Resource Management Journal, Vol26, no 3, 2016, pages 304–320

Knowledge-intensive firms need to encourage their employees to engage in knowledge exchange and

combination (KEC) so as to create the new knowledge that is core to their success. HRM has thepotential to

play a key role in encouraging KEC, but relatively little is known about the micro-processes through which

HRM and KEC are linked. Based on a sample of498 knowledge workers in 14 knowledge-intensive firms in

the pharmaceutical and informationand communicationstechnology sectors in Irelandand the UK, this study

focuses on theknowledge workers themselvesand their perceptions of howHR practices influence KEC. Inso

doing, we drill down into the micro-foundations of the proposed linkages between HRM and knowledge

creation, proffering reflexivityas a translation process in understanding these linkages.

Contact: Edel Conway, LINK Research Institute, DCU Business School, Dublin City University,

Ireland. Email:Edel.Conway@dcu.ie

Keywords: HR practices; reflexivity; knowledge exchange and combination; learning; task

interdependence; knowledge workers

INTRODUCTION

Many knowledge-intensive firms (KIFs) invest heavily in HR practices that will

encourage individual learning as such investment is believed to enhance the

potentialfor knowledge sharing and,ultimately,new knowledge for the firm (Swart

and Kinnie, 2003;Swart et al., 2014). However,the processes through which theseHR practices

encourage the knowledge exchange and combination (KEC) that is central to the creation of

new knowledge remain poorly understood.

This articleexplores this issue from the perspective of the knowledgeworkers themselves by

considering how their perceptions of HR practices influence how they perceive and interact

with others in exchanging and combining knowledge. In so doing, we drill down into the

micro-foundations (Foss et al., 2010; Minbaeva et al., 2012; Minbaeva, 2013) of the proposed

linkages betweenHRM and knowledge creation, profferingreflexivity as an important process

in understanding this linkage. Our explanation is rooted in both cognitive and practice-based

theories of learning and knowledge (Schön, 1983; Marshall, 2008; Tsoukas, 2009; Yanow and

Tsoukas, 2009), and we integrate insights from these domains in order to propose that

reflexivity acts as a process that enables knowledge workers to ‘translate’their individual

learning into knowledge that is of value to both themselves and their organisations. By

borrowing from organisation theories that have been relatively neglected by HRM scholars

(Watson,2007), we provide novel insightsinto how the mechanisms that governthe translation

process may operate.

Please citethis article in press as: Monks, K.,Conway, E., Fu, N., Bailey, K., Kelly,G., and Hannon, E. (2016) Enhancingknowledge exchange and

combinationthroughHR practices: reflexivityas a translation process.Human Res ource Management Journ al 26: 3, 304–320

304 HUMAN RESOURCEMANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL26, NO 3, 2016

©2016 John Wiley& Sons Ltd.

doi: 10.1111/1748-8583.12108

bs_bs_banner

By focusingon reflexivity in this way, our research contributesto understanding more about

the social and psychological processes (Boxall, 2014)that contribute to the ‘“how”of HRM in

the chain of processesthat make models of HRM work wellor poorly’(Boxall et al., 2007:7). We

identify two types of HR practices –learning-enhancing employment practices and task

interdependent work practices –that, we argue, build individuals’knowledge, skills and

abilities (KSAs), thereby encouraging KEC. We then extend the concept of reflexivity –a

process through which individuals review, discuss and modify their work with co-workers

so as to improve work effectiveness –from its primarily cognitive and team-based focus

(Schippers et al., 2015) to encompass individual, relational and practice elements. In so doing,

we propose reflexivity as ‘an explanatory mechanism located at the individual and

interpersonallevels’(Minbaeva et al., 2012: 389)that enables understanding of how individual

learning and knowledge gained through HR practices may encourage KEC. We theorise in

terms of ‘the actions and interactions of individuals’on the basis that ‘an understanding of

the levels of individuals (i.e. organisational members) and their interaction may yield novel

insights into organisation-level phenomena’(Foss et al., 2010: 457).

The paper is structured as follows. We first examine the literature on knowledge workers

and the link between HRM and KEC, before considering the mediating role of reflexivity in

understanding this relationship. We then present findings of a survey of 498 knowledge

workers across 14 KIFs in the pharmaceutical and information and communications

technology (ICT) sectors in Ireland and the UK. These workers were primarily engaged in

project-based and cross-functional work, which included interdependent tasks. Finally, we

discuss the implications of our research for both theoryand practice.

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT

While definitions of knowledge work, knowledge workers and KIFs remain contested (see

Alvesson, 2001); there is general agreement that knowledge workers are individuals who are

highly educated, who engage in complex tasks and who work in environments that require

problem-solvingand thinking skills that areused not just to apply existingknowledge but also

to reconstructand create new knowledge(Benson and Brown, 2007).A KIF represents one such

environmentandhasbeenviewedasa‘firm that can produceexceptionally good results with

the help of outstanding expertise’(Alvesson, 2001: 865).

The question for KIFsis how this ‘outstanding expertise’mightbe acquired, exchanged and

combined among knowledge workers. Collins and Smith (2006: 545) point out that firms in

dynamic industries ‘may be especially dependent on the ability of knowledge workers, such

as scientists and engineers, to exchange and combine information in new ways’.‘Exchange’

and ‘combination’have been identified as ‘generic processes’that are central to the creation

of new resources, including knowledge (Moran and Ghoshal, 1996; Nahapiet and Ghoshal,

1998: 247). ForSmith et al. (2005: 347), ‘implicitin the notion of exchange is the assumption that

individuals hold different levels and types of knowledge and information, and that they

can/willengage in teamwork and communicationto learn from one another evenwhen payoffs

are uncertain’.‘Combination’is regarded as a process of bringing together ‘elements

previously unconnected’or ‘developing novel ways of combining elements previously

associated’(Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998: 248).

The followingconditions for KEC have been identified:the opportunity to actuallymake the

combination or exchange; the expectation that the exchanges or combinations will create

personal and organisational value; and that individuals have the ability to engage in KEC

(Moran and Ghoshal, 1996). These elements of KEC resonate with the ability, motivation and

K. Monks etal.

HUMAN RESOURCEMANAGEMENT JOURNAL, VOL26, NO 3, 2016 305

©2016 John Wiley& Sons Ltd.