Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Book Reviews
679
Despite these reservations, this book is a significant publication and a must read for scholars interested in diversity, race, and gender relationships in organizations. It moves beyond
stereotypes as a way of understanding differential treatment of black women managers, it acknowledges history and oppression through individual experiences, and it captures the
mixture of patriarchy and racism that perpetuates discrimination of both black and white
women in their journey up the corporate ladder.
REFERENCES
Fox-Genovese, E. 1991. Feminism without illusions. Chapel
Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Helgesen, S. 1990. The female advantage: Womens ways of
leadership. New York: Doubleday.
Hennig, M., & Jardim, A. 1978. The managerial woman. New
York: Basic Books.
Kanter, R. M. 1977. Men and women of the corporation. New
York: Basic Books.
Rosener, J. B. 1990. Ways women lead. Harvard Business
Review, 68(6): 1112.
680
sticky knowledge addresses an important question for managers: Why dont best practices
spread within organizations? Gabriel Szulanski,
professor of strategy and management at
INSEAD, explores the effect of knowledge barriers and motivational barriers on knowledge
transfer.
Motivational barriers to knowledge transfer
are well known in the management literature.
Interdivisional jealousy, lack of economic incentives, resistance to change, and turf protection
are examples of the many potential motivational barriers to knowledge transfer. Szulanski,
however, adds another set of reasons, besides
motivational ones, that may explain why knowledge may not transfer.
Szulanski calls this alternative set of reasons
knowledge barriers. Examples of knowledge
barriers are the recipients level of knowledge
prior to the transfer, the recipients ability to
shed prior practices, and the pre-existing social
ties between the source and the recipient. These
factors are different from motivational barriers.
Indeed, Szulanski finds that knowledge barriers
in some circumstances overshadow motivational barriers to the transfer of best practices
within the organization.
Szulanski first discusses the characteristics of
knowledge that lead to stickiness in the transfer
of best practice. A critical characteristic concerns the concept of causal ambiguity (Lippman
& Rumelt, 1982). Causal ambiguity increases
stickiness, since a completely successful recreation of knowledge is impossible owing to
irreducible uncertainty that prevents a complete
understanding of how features of the new context affect the outcome of the re-creation effort.
Szulanski next discusses the characteristics of
the source that lead to stickiness. One critical
characteristic is that the source lacks motivation
to share crucial knowledge. A second critical
characteristic is that the source lacks credibility.
Szulanski then turns to the characteristics of
the recipient that lead to stickiness. Here he
identifies the lack of prior-related knowledge,
which highly influences absorptive capacity
(Cohen & Levinthal, 1990). A recipient that lacks
absorptive capacity will be less likely to recognize the value of new knowledge, less likely to
re-create that knowledge, and less likely to apply such knowledge successfully. Szulanski also
predicts that the motivation of the recipient will
affect the stickiness of knowledge.
October
Finally, Szulanski emphasizes context. An important contextual aspect for both the source
and the recipient of knowledge is the nature of
their pre-existing relationships. An arduous relationship might create additional hardships to
the transfer of knowledge.
Szulanski further advances the management
research literature by introducing four stages of
transfer initiation, implementation, ramp-up,
and integration in which stickiness may arise
for different reasons. Initiation stickiness is difficulty recognizing opportunities to transfer and
then acting on them. Implementation stickiness
includes poor communication between the
source and recipient. Ramp-up stickiness typically corresponds to the degree of causal ambiguity of the practice. Integration stickiness occurs when there is a failure to achieve a truce in
intraorganizational conflict (Nelson & Winter,
1982).
Szulanski presents a wide variety of empirical
support for the proposed model and predictions.
The four types of stickiness are illustrated with
findings from in-depth fieldwork in different settings: Rank Xerox (now Xerox Europe), Banc One,
and Centel, which is a subsidiary of Sprint. Following these case studies, Szulanski presents
the empirical results of statistical analyses that
stem from data collected through a two-step
questionnaire survey. The research relies on 271
surveys studying the transfer of 38 (technical
and administrative) practices in 8 companies:
AMP, AT&T Paradyne, British Petroleum, Burmah Castrol, Chevron Corporation, EDS, Kaiser
Permanente, and Rank Xerox. The empirical results largely corroborate the theory developed
in the book, with some interesting surprises,
such as the finding that knowledge retention
and recipient motivation act as barriers to transfer in the ramp-up phase of transfer. Szulanski
finds that knowledge barriers to transfer have a
larger effect on the stickiness of knowledge than
motivational barriers, and the two barriers
jointly explain nearly 75 percent of the variance
in stickiness.
Szulanskis study is one of the earliest and
most exhaustive on the transfer of knowledge
within corporations. This book presents much of
the best thinking on the challenges of knowledge transfer. In exploring the implications of
the study, the book suggests that researchers
delve deeper into the stages of knowledge transfer, the individual constructs that are most influ-
2003
Book Reviews
681
Moving away from the closed system approach to knowledge could lead management
research in new and productive directions. In
addition to tradeoffs between leveraging existing knowledge and generating new knowledge,
firms may face a link between the phase of
industry evolution and the internal approach to
knowledge. There may also be natural phases of
knowledge in the life cycle of organizations, as
they move from renewal (e.g., creation of knowledge resources) to expansion (e.g., leveraging
existing knowledge). These phases will require
different approaches to organizational structure
and different approaches to knowledge.
Sticky Knowledge presents research findings
with meaning for scholars and managers. The
book manages to explore complex theoretical issues in straightforward language, and provides
the details of analysis in appendixes directed at
active researchers. Szulanski combines an interesting set of studies on knowledge, and his book
represents an excellent summation of what we
currently know about the transfer of knowledge in
organizations. This book will take its rightful
place as a major contribution to research on organizational capabilities.
REFERENCES
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A
new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 128 152.
Lippman, S. A., & Rumelt, R. P. 1982. Uncertain imitability: An
analysis of interfirm differences in efficiency under
competition. Bell Journal of Economics, 13: 418 438.
Nelson, R., & Winter, S. 1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Ruggles, R. 1998. The state of the notion: Knowledge management in practice. California Management Review,
40(3): 80 89.
Thompson, J. D. 1967. Organizations in action. New York:
McGraw-Hill.