View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE

provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 41 ( 2012 ) 15 – 22

International Conference on Leadership, and Leadership role implementing transfer in creative organization: how does it work?

Lina Girdauskienė, Asta Savanevičienė

Kaunas University of Technology, Laisves av.55, Kaunas,44309, Lithuania

Abstract

Knowledge transfer as the process gets a huge emphasis on organization leaders because it is understood that affects knowledge creation, and organizational performance[23]. Knowledgetransferas a researchsubjecthas longattractedinterest fromscientistsand practitioners. Thus,traditional organizationsandtheirleadershave a numberof tools whichallow foruninterrupteddissemination as a technical- technologicalbase,a varietyof learningmethods etc.However,the creativeorganization with themostknowledgeare hidden, is facing challengesin order tomake this process sustainable. This article aims to analyze and examine how leaders make an impact on knowledgetransfer increative organizationandprovidesuggestionson how to ensurethe sustainability of this process. Carried out a quantitative analysis revealed two main problems - the direct leadership impact on knowledge transfer is weak. Second,there is noformaldissemination of knowledge,which isone of the mainbodiesof knowledgeimprovement ofsecuritymeasures.The assessment of theproblemsidentified inthe diffusion of knowledge, has been drafting proposals tothe leadersof creativeorganizations.

Keywords: knowledge transfer, leadership, creative organization

© 2012© 2011Published Published by Elsevier by Ltd. Elsevier Selection Ltd.Selection and/or peer review and/or under peer-review responsibility underof The Firstresponsibility International ofConference International on Leadership,Conference Technology on Leadership, and Innovation Techno Managementlogy and InnovationOpen access Management under CC BY-NC-ND license.

*Corresponding author. Tel. + 370-37-300-573 fax. +370-37-323-683 E-mail address: [email protected]

1. Introduction

A creative organization is a knowledge intensive organization which distinguishes itself for its origin in individual artistic creativity, skills and talent, which are used for new knowledge creation and innovation implementation. Creative organizations’ context causes specific environment for KM (), where the focus is on a continuous and natural process - knowledge sharing and new knowledge creation for future customer satisfaction through creative development of products or services. However, a creative nature and project based activities are becoming a major disturbance for successful knowledge transfer. The high staff turnover reduces effectiveness of knowledge transfer and systematic saving opportunities, downgrades mistake correction and learning efficiency. , which is the most widespread knowledge type in a creative organization, requiring particular management systems and tools, could be named as the main reason for this negative process[12].So, leaders meet with

1877-0428 © 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer review under responsibility of The First International Conference on Leadership, Technology and Innovation Management Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.04.002 16 Lina Girdauskienė and Asta Savanevičienė / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 41 ( 2012 ) 15 – 22

a challenge to manage this complicated process and to achieve organizational goals. This paper aims to identify and evaluate how leadership impacts knowledge transfer in a creative organization?

Theoretical background was prepared by description, analysis, comparison and the synthesis of scientific literature, the empirical quantitative research was done in Lithuanian creative organizations.

The main conclusion of the research is that the leadership impact on knowledge transfer could be separated into two parts - formal and informal. The transactional leadership should impact on knowledge transfer formally, transformational – informally.

2. Literature Analysis and Hypothesis

2.1. Features of knowledge transfer in a creative organization

Creative organizations consist of creative employees and their performance is based on continuous knowledge development and implementation. So the purpose of creative organizations is to disseminate valuable knowledge. Knowledge of creative organization could be analyzed using Nonaka’s (2000) classification of knowledge depending on its source and type. Two types could be indicated tacit - experimental (skills, individual know how, feelings, emotions) and concept knowledge (product concept, design, product name mean); and explicit type - routine knowledge (organizational culture, organization routines, know how in behavior) and systemic knowledge (documents, data basis, patents and license). Simplicity of knowledge transfer depends on knowledge type. Explicit knowledge transfer is more ordinary, acquiring just ICT ( communicating technology) while tacit knowledge transfer needs more complicated instruments, methods and tools and personal experience [25].Thus, knowledge management in a creative organization is primarily about making tacit knowledge more accessible since it accounts for a majority of an organization’s collective knowledge [10].

Creative organization transfer knowledge in two ways:formal and informal. Informal sharing of knowledge is deep, creative, and serendipitous while establishing long-lasting, effective networking. Organized formal knowledge sharing can reach much broader populations with greater value to the enterprise but may stifle some of the spontaneous and creative aspects of the informal sharing modes [26].But more often dissemination of knowledge is an organic and informal process.Knowledge often moves in a horizontal direction, as the creative organization activity is concentrated in the projects, while the ongoing projects and staff turnover, the knowledge is diffused throughout the organization and beyond. This process has both positive and negative aspects: a creative organization, without making efforts in disseminating knowledge, has no a direct impact and control on knowledge sharing process (knowledge of beneficiaries), and the possibility of unique, competitive organizational knowledge surrendering to competitors occurs. On the other hand, the process takes place spontaneously, even without making an effort and incurring costs (financial, time). Unfortunately, if the process is out of control in a centralized way, there is a wide cavity in only one type of knowledge transfer and not necessarily significant for the organization.

Different indicators such as culture, structure, , management style, organizational learning, making an affect on knowledge transfer could be defined. The role of culture to knowledge creation and transfer is highlighted by many scholars ([9],[3],[18]) and is important as well to formal as to informal knowledge transfer. Knowledge transfer is based on cooperation, openness and trust, providing opportunities for staff to develop actively new ideas and share knowledge, especially to encourage managers to experiment and take risks. As Al-Alawi, Al-Marzooqi, Mohammed (2007) state, a proper culture forms condition for sharing personal information, feelings and perceptions, previous experience Lina Girdauskienė and Asta Savanevičienė / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 41 ( 2012 ) 15 – 22 17 with trust, the existence of protective rules and procedures (institution-based trust), builds belief in others’ good intentions, strong knowledge of coworkers’ personalities (knowledge-based trust) [1]. Two types of culture could be indicated in a creative organization – closed and open. Closed culture forms a presumption which knowledge should be managed, define relations between individual and organizational knowledge, form social interaction context, which defines how specific knowledge should be used in a specific situations and form processes which results new knowledge. An open culture stimulating employees to experiment, be open, to take risk and for leaders to tolerate mistakes in such a way induce knowledge creation and sharing.

Technologies could be called one of the main instrument for formal knowledge transfer process, but very often is used for informal transfer as well. The project organization structure requires to host ICT mechanisms to support cooperation between the groups and members of the organization. So implemented knowledge management systems must connect people to enable them to think together and to take time to articulate and share information and insights they know are useful to their company [10].Employees exchange and combine knowledge (combination, joining and adaptation) using such exchange mechanisms as meetings, telephone conversations or contact by the ICT support (Skype, MSN, ICQ). ICT tools such as databases, intranets, administrative systems support the collection, storage and distribution of the formalized knowledge [4].

Knowledge sharing between individuals is a process that contributes to both individual and organizational learning [23].Knowledge transfer relates to emulation and continuous learning from competitors in market or licensed from inventors [21]. So establishing and promoting organizational learning improve knowledge transfer and organizational performance. Networks and communities of practice help to know what others know, to have access to other people’s thinking, to involve people in and to have a safe relationship promoting learning and creativity [8].

Concluding it could be stated that knowledge transfer is a complicated process in a creative organization because of its creative origin, tacitness of knowledge and high staff turnover. At the same project based performance of a creative organization forms flexible, organic structure with team working, cooperating and trust, what is one of the main successful knowledge transfer indicators.

2.2. Leadership role in a creative organization

Leaders in the creative organization can be classified according to their typical behavior and there the two types could be identified - transformational and transactional leadership [12]. Transformational leadership encourages people to perform and increase their demands respect hierarchy of values, to raise the cultural level of development. Transactional leaders try to carry out effectively its activities as well as evaluate their employees, but their criteria for evaluation is the existing competence of the workers rather than future potential.

Politis (2001) notes that leadership style, characterized by trust, respect for subordinates' ideas, cooperating behavior, stimulates more creativity, knowledge creation and dissemination, than leadership style, characterized by the orientation of the task and the autocratic behavior [27]. Deci and Ryan argue that transformation leadership encourages creativity and transactional reduces it [14]. Grabner (2007) supports the transformational leaders maintain, lives the staff's feelings and needs, encourage to express their expectations and provide a positive response to the information, promote skills development. In contrast, when managers control the behaviorand force employees to think and behave in certain ways, they reduce the inner motivation and make a negative impact on creativity and knowledge transfer [14].

18 Lina Girdauskienė and Asta Savanevičienė / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 41 ( 2012 ) 15 – 22

Thus, the literature review shows, the leaders have an impact on knowledge transfer process. Transformational leadership can make a positive impact on the transfer of knowledge forming a favorable medium for knowledge dissemination, while, transactional leaders, in order to improve knowledge transfer in a creative organization, may form a formal - technical-technological and structural conditions.

Amabile (1996, 1999) even raises the idea that the primary task of leaders is to create a favorable climate or environment in which members of the organization could create ideas, adapt and develop knowledge, implement innovation and improve the performance of companies, as regular between leaders and employees would be catalyzed by the acquisition of knowledge [2]. This idea is very attractive to creative organizations and their employees, because the role of leaders is weak. In summary, the leadership role in forming favorable conditions for the transfer of knowledge in creative organization, could be manifested in two aspects: formal and informal. Formal role of the leader gets a [10]: • Appropriate knowledge transfer technology deployment (intranets, portals, databases, knowledge banks); • The organizational structure of the application of knowledge transfer (work teams, a small number of hierarchies, empowerment); • Organizational learning (systematic learning, organizational development and organizational support for training, promotion and application systems, etc.).

Informal leadership role to knowledge transfer in a creative organization to occurs within [14]: • Organizational culture (openness, trust, experimentation, tolerance errors, creating communities of practice); • Management methods (open communication, low formalization, decentralization).

The impact of leaders on the knowledge transfer occurs not only in formal and informal manner, but also differs in behaviour - transformational and transactional leadership. The conceptualized scheme is presented below in Figure 1:

Transactional leadership

Transformational leadership

Fig. 1. The conceptualized scheme of the leadership impact on knowledge transfer in a creative organization Transactional behaviour of leaders should construct proper conditions for knowledge transfer and transformational behaviour of leaders would form appropriate climate applying management methods. So, the leadership behaviour would influence knolwedge transfer in both ways – formal and informal. Lina Girdauskienė and Asta Savanevičienė / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 41 ( 2012 ) 15 – 22 19

3. Research methodology

3.1. Research Goal

This research aims to identify what are the features of knowledge transfer in a creative organization and how this process is impacted by leadership. Trying to examine how the leadership makes an impact on knowledge transfer in creative organization and achieve the objective of this study, two hypotheses were formulated:

H1: Leadership impact on knowledge transfer is low in a creative organization H2: Transformational leadership effects informal, transactional leadership formal knowledge transfer in a creative organization.

3.2. Sample and Data Collection

Televisionindustry was selected as a research object because it isthe mosteconomicallydeveloped creative industry with the largestamount of creativeorganizations. The empirical quantitative research was achieved in 2009 during the period of May to August 2009. At first the pilot research was made with3 experts - respondents, trying to find out the weakness of constructed questionnaire. After the analyses of questionnaire evaluation and implemented improvements, 300 copies were sent to all Lithuanian television producing companies. A total of 128 participants returned usable questionnaires but 16 of them were excluded because their answers were considered as incomplete. A total of 112 usable questionnaires were considered valid because they represented 37 percent response rate. Respondents were grouped by professional experience to creators (53), administrators (14) and a mixed experience group (45). The mixed experience group combined respondents with different type of experience and functions, for example, TV producer, which used to work as administrator, stage director, sound and view montage director, screenplay etc or cameraman, which has experience in screenplay, view montage, administrator of project group etc.

3.3 Measures

Respondents were asked to answer how leadership affects knowledge transfer in their own organizations in order to identify the impact of leadership on knowledge transfer. The scheme of leadership impact on knowledge transfer in a creative organization was used as the conceptual framework. Nominal scale for respondents age, work experience and professions identification (demographic data) and range scale (Likert scale, semantic differential) were applied. Likert scale was constructed from six levels for the more precise evaluation and in order to avoid the abuse of the answer Don‘t know or Have no opinion. A 6 point Likert scale was applied to measure how leaders impact knowledge transfer in creative organization, choices ranking from 1 Never to 6 Always. Using descriptivestatistics variables grouping characteristics, species were analyzed, data variation and concentration were evaluated and the results presented in statistic tables and graphics form. 97per cent of questionnaire questions were ranged, so nonparametric statistic methods (medianMe and mode Mo) were applied in order to compute the results. The Cronbach’s alpha for the knowledge transfer sample was 0,759. 20 Lina Girdauskienė and Asta Savanevičienė / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 41 ( 2012 ) 15 – 22

Table 1. Research measures Measures Indicators Knowledge transfer Knowledge transfer place and time Knowledge transfer method Transformational leadership Organizational culture Management methods Transactional leadership IT Organizational structure Organizational learning

4. Analysis and Results

Creators, administrators and the group of mixed experience assess the meaning of knowledge almost equally (Figure 2). The concept knowledge is considered to be more important in two target groups – administrators and the group of mixed experience. Such situation could be explained by the managerial role of administrators and mixed group: they are responsible for ensuring sustainable production and control of the results. More valuable routine knowledge in creators group is for the main reason - project based work what causes creators mobility; necessity to gain routine knowledge through limited period of time and learning on work. So creators understand the mean of organizational knowing – embedded routine knowledge.

Figure 2. The mean of shared knowledge Figure 3 . Knowledge transfer characteristicsin a creative organization, Me type in a creative organization, Me

Knowledge transfer is common process in creative organizations. The results show, that knowledge is shared Often(Mo = 4). Knowledge transfer could be analyzed in the three perspectives: knowledge sharing place, time and way. It was detected that all target groups rarely share and transfer knowledge in a formal way (specially organized places and time as meetings, learning cources etc). Knowledge transfer is an informal process in a creative organization, when creators, administrators and the group of mixed experience share knowledge informally, solving the concrete problem. Although creators like to share knowledge, they do not use ICT (knowledge sharing in intranet is VeryRare, Me=2.5, knowledge Rarely (Me=3.26) is transferred by ICT) because of their creative origin. On the contrary to creators administrators and the group of mixed experience use ICT Very often (Me=5) as well as face to face (Me=5).

Lina Girdauskienė and Asta Savanevičienė / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 41 ( 2012 ) 15 – 22 21

Figure 3 . The leadership impact on knowledge transfer Figure 4. Transformational and transactional leadership in three in creative organization, frequency Me different employees groups, significance Mo

Empirical research results evidence the low impact of leadership on knowledge transfer (the leadership makes an influence on knowledge transfer Very Rare) in a creative organization and approve hypothesis H1. Figure 4 could explain such a low impact from the leadership behaviour perspective. It demonstrates differences of significance between transactional and transformational leadership in three employees groups. Transformational leadership makes the highest impact (Very often Mo=4.4) on creators (they inspire creators). The low impact of transactional leadership (Rare Mo=2) one more time shows that creators are not used to be managed and controlled and that causes the lack of the formal impact of leadership on knowledge transfer. The influence of transactional and transformational leadership on administrators is not significant (transformational leadership Mo=3.75, transactional Mo=3) as in the group of mixed experience (transformational leadership Mo=3.2, transactional Mo=4). It could be stated that hypothesis H2 is approved and lead to conclusion that too low impact of transactional leadership is one of the main problems for successful knowledge transfer in a creative organization.

Conclusions

Scientific literature analysis and empirical research confirmed that creative organization project based activity creates proper conditions for knowledge transfer. Creative organizations, hiring and employing talents and creative people, acquire their embodied knowledge and are able to disseminate within organization to all its employees. Knowledge transfer is a common process in a creative organization, which is mostly implemented informally by sharing knowledge face to face, solving the concrete problems. The role of leadership was evaluated as low both formal and informal. Transformational and transactional behaviour of leaders affects different employees’ groups in different way – transformational leadership is more important for creators and administrators groups while transactional leadership is more significant forthe group of mixed experience. Too low impact of transactional leadership causes the lack of formal knowledge transfer. The leaders, trying to improve formal knowledge transfer, should apply such strategies as development of the learning organization, opening horizontal communication channels with proper ICT instruments. Informal knowledge transfer could be improved by promoting networking and communities of practice.

References

[1] Al-Alawi, A. I., Al-Marzooqi, N.,Y., Mohammed, Y.,F. Organizational culture and knowledge sharing: critical success factors. Journal of Knowledge management Vol. 11, No. 2, 2007, p. 22-42. 22 Lina Girdauskienė and Asta Savanevičienė / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 41 ( 2012 ) 15 – 22

[2] Amabile, T.M. Discovering the unknowable, managing the unmanageable. In Ford, C.M. and Gioia, I.A (Eds), Creative Actions in Organizations: Ivory Tower Visions&Real World Voices, Sage, London, 1995, p. 77-81. [3] Cangemi, J., Miller, R. Breaking out of the boxes in the organizations: Structuring a positive climate for the development in the workplace. Journal of Management Development. Vol. 26, No.5, 2007, p. 410-410. [4] Christensen, K. S., Bang, H.G. Knowledge management in a project oriented organization: three perspectives. Journal of Knowledge Management. Vol. 7, No. 3, 2003, p.116-128. [5] Claver-Corte´ s E., P. Zaragoza-Sa´ez, E.Pertusa-Ortega. Organizational structure features supporting knowledge management processes. Journal of Knowledge Management. Vol.11, No.4, 2007, p. 45-57. [6] Cook, S.D.N. and Brown, J.S., Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organizational science, Vol.10, No.4, 1999, p.381-400. [7] Cortes, E.C. et all. Organizational structure features supporting knowledge management processes. Journal of Knowledge Management. Vol.11, No.4, 2007, p.45-57. [8] Cross, R., Parker, A. Prusak, L. Knowing what we know: Supporting knowledge creation and sharing in social networking. IBM Institute for Knowledge Management. White Paper. 2000.ak [9] Dobni, C.Brooke . Measuring innovation culture in organizations. Vol. 11, No. 4, 2008, p.539-559. [10] Erkutlu, H.,The impact of leadership power bases on knowledge management. International 7th Knowledge, Economy &Management Congress Proceedings.2009. [11] Foos, T. et all. Tacit knowledge transfer and the knowledge disconnect. Journal of knowledge management. Vol. 10, No.1, 2006, p.6-18. [12] Girdauskiene, L., Savaneviciene, A. Knowledge management features in creative organization. Engineering Economics, Technology, Kaunas, 2010. [13] Goh, S.C. Managing effective knowledge transfer: an integrative framework and some practise implications”. Journal of Knowledge Management. Vol.6, No.1, 2002, p.23-30. [14] Grabner, G. The Project ecology of advertising: task, talents and teams. Regional studies. Vol.36, No.3, 2002, p. 245-262. [15] Hawryszkiewycz, I. Knowledge management. Organizing knowledge based enterprises. Palgrave Macmillan..2010. [16] Hislop, D. Knowledge management in organizations. Oxford University Press.2009. [17] Huang, C.C., Kuo, C.M. The transformation of semi structured knowledge in organization. Journal of Knowledge Management. Vol.7, No.4, 2003, p.106-123. [18] Ismail, M. Creative climate and learning organization factors: their contribution towards innovation. Leadership & Organization Development Journal.Vol. 26, No. 8, 2005, p. 639-654. [19] Keller, R.T. Cross – functional project groups in research and new product development: diversity, , job stress, and outcomes. In press, Academy of management Journal.2001. [20] Lee, C.C., Yang, J. Knowledge value chain. Journal of management Development.Vol.19, No.9, 2000,p. 783-793. [21] Li, M, Gao, F. Why Nonaka highlights tacit knowledge: a critical review. Journal of Knowledge Management. Vol.7 , No.4, 2003, p. 6-14. [22] Lytras, M.D., Pouloudi, A. Project management as a knowledge management primer: the learning infrastructure in knowledge- intensive organizations as knowledge transformations and beyond. The learning organization, Vol. 10, No.4, 2003, p.237-250. [23] Minu, I. Knowledge Sharing in Organizations:A Conceptual Framework. Human Resource Development Review. Vol. 2, No. 4, 2003, p. 337-359. [24] Mirvis, P.H. (1996). ,,Historical foundations of organization learning”. Journal of Organizational Change Management. Vol.9, No.1, p.13-31. [25] Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., Nagata,A. A Firm as a Knowledge creating Entity: A New Perspective on the Theory of the firm. Industrial and corporate change.Vol. 9, No 1., Oxford University Press. 2000. [26] O‘Deal, C.,Wiig, K., Odem. P. Benchmarking unveils emerging knowledge strategies. Benchmarking. An International Journal Vol.6, No.3, 1999, p.202-211. [27] Politis, J.D. The connection between trust and knowledge management: what are the implications for team performance. Journal of Knowledge Management. Vol.7, No 5. 2003, p. 55-66.