How to Influence the Job Rotation of the Employee on Intelectual Risk in the Service Industry
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences Online: 2015-06-22 ISSN: 2300-2697, Vol. 54, pp 8-15 doi:10.18052/www.scipress.com/ILSHS.54.8 CC BY 4.0. Published by SciPress Ltd, Switzerland, 2015 How to influence the Job rotation of the employee on intelectual risk in the service industry Muhammad Ibrar Department of Business Adminstration (Human Resource Management) E-mail address: [email protected] Keywords: Intellectual capital risks, Intellectual capital management, Knowledge attrition, Job rotation,Intellectual capital, Multinational companies ABSTRACT Purpose: This study aims to stress on the phenomenon of intellectual capital (IC) risks. More precisely, the perception of such risks in the context of the job rotation process often applied in multinational corporations (MNCs) is to be investigated. Design/methodology: Seven semi-structured interviews are conducted in an exemplary knowledge- intensive MNC operating in the construction industry. Six interviews among top managers and five interviews among participants in the job rotation process are carried out to gain insights from different perspectives. Findings: The study emphasize the influence of time pressure on the perception of the variety of IC-related risks in general and of those related to the job rotation process. As a result, the risks are not tackled even though the managers are aware of some of them. Research limitations/implication: The data were collected in one organization, making inferences about the findings not possible. Future studies should consider multiple organizations. Practical implications: A list of potential IC risks triggered during the job rotation process is presented and suggestions to tackle them are discussed. Furthermore, the findings can contribute to the further development of an overall overview of IC risks. Originality/value: The study condemn fresh insights into the relationship between IC risks and job rotation as perceived by different organization members. 1. INTRODUCTION This study focus which the intellectual capital (IC) is a significant resource and vital production factor; of a companies need to integrate the management of intellectual capital (IC) into the core of their strategic efforts. However, many companies lack understanding about the requirements for managing IC and the complexity involved, not surprisingly, the majority of corporate initiatives focusing on the management of IC/knowledge have only moderate success (Hislop, 2005). IC management entails difficulties because it does not only involve decisions from managers and allocation of resources as it is the case in many other management issues. IC is created or exploited by human beings and is therefore influenced by individuals and their mindsets, organizational values and beliefs as well as the full commitment of all organization members. Companies thatRETRACTEDRETRACTED fail to properly manage their IC to secure its value-creation potential undergo significant risks. For example loss of expertise or reinvention of knows how. Therefore, the need to carefully manage the risky side of IC is high too. Manager’s and entrepreneurs cannot afford to neglect IC risks even though they might be more familiar with financial capital and the risks related to this asset category. According to Kupiet al.(2008), the attention to IC risk management in companies is poor. One reasonfor this can be a lack of awareness related to the implications of IC risks. As a result,such risks are seldom identified, monitored and reported.It can be proceeded from the assumption that particularly multinational corporations(MNCs) need to engage in IC risk management. A This paper is an open access paper published under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences Vol. 54 9 multinational corporation “consists ofa group of geographically dispersed and goal-disparate organizations that include itsheadquarters and the different national subsidiaries” (Ghoshal and Bartlett, 1990, p. 603).Such MNCs face more challenges to stay competitive and keep up with dynamic changes in international markets given their size and organizational structure compared to smaller internationally operating companies. Increasing administration effort leads to numerous hierarchical levels with many specialists. Particularly, the costs and effort for communication, control and coordination are high (Gooderham and Nordhaug, 2003). To remain competitive, MNCs need to create and leverage distinctive organizational capabilities. To tackle this issue MNCs can refer to different approaches. One of the common measure applied by MNCs is job rotation. Even though the job rotation process can be viewed as advantageous for IC management, it also entails risks. The change from the predecessor to the successor is a critical stage. If the predecessor documented no knowledge, the “newcomer” needs to fight his or her way to necessary knowledge to fulfil tasks satisfactorily. Such an undefined handling of knowledge can be risky: knowledge gets lost during the job rotation process. This brief discussion illustrates the importance of having suitable measures in place to tackle IC risks as well as the close link between IC risks and job rotation. Although IC has been studied extensively, this is not the case with risks related to IC. Against this background, the study’s aim is to shed light on the managerial perception of IC risks. Specifically, it is targeted on establishing an understanding about IC risks caused by the job rotation process. Consequently, the study addresses three research Research Questions: RQ1.Is IC risk already in the minds of managers? RQ2.Are managers aware of IC related risks during job rotation? RQ3.What are the IC related risks experienced by rotating employees? Following a review of previous literature and methodology employed in the study, thefindings are presented. The final section discusses and presents the main themes emerging from the findings. 2. Litrature Review According to Stam (2009), IC is the difference between intellectual assets andintellectual liabilities. Such liabilities are often overlooked by organizations and can even lead to bankruptcy if they remain unrecognized. Consequently, intellectual liabilities can be viewed as the main source of competitive disadvantage and value deterioration. Subsequently, each category of IC risk is briefly discussed to outline its possible impact on companies. 2.1 Human capital risks. According to Kupi et al.(2008), particularly the risks related to human capital should be taken into consideration. For example, staff turnover or long-term absence of key employees can lead to significant implications regarding a firm’s productivity (Durst and Wilhelm, 2011). Especially in large companies like MNCs some people might consider their job as a springboard into future careers and only intend working there for a few years. Such employees constantly search for new career opportunities – especially if they come across unfavourable working conditions in their current job. A study about job tenure in the Pakistan revealed that by 2001, half of all employees worked for four years or less for the same organization (Macaulay, 2003). On the other hand, in big organizations employees might be less willing to share knowledge due to the “safetyRETRACTED mentality” and competition between organizational units or individuals. In firms with numerousRETRACTED staff there might be less trust towards others and therefore also less collaboration. Hence, firms are pressured to permanently develop certain expertise once more, which in turn means that they lose critical time compared to their competitors. In a knowledge driven environment, firms cannot afford to lose key employees and their expertise particularly against the background that the battle for talents in certain industries will become tougher (Dess and Shaw, 2001). Moreover, it becomes problematic if outgoing knowledge is used against them (Stovel and Bontis, 2002). Firms need to take measures to reduce voluntary turnover and enhance employee retention (Hislop, 2005). However, as the retention of organization members is not possible forever, the firm’s management should plan for staff replacement in due time (Durst and Wilhelm, 2011b). 10 ILSHS Volume 54 2.2 Structural capital risks. According to Stam (2009), “structural liabilities” are destructive forces emerging from structural capital. Such risks are caused if organizational structures or processes are inappropriate or too complicated ). Top management homogeneity, weak planning processes, poor knowledge infrastructure, organizational inertia, complex structure, or a knowledge unfriendly culture belong to this category. Common work practices and organizational routines have often become a pleasant ritual in the firm but do no longer suit the organization’s needs and have turned to obsolete inefficiencies. Structural capital is very much interrelated with human capital (Carsonet al., 2004). Structural capital risks might be caused if the components of IC are poorly understood and managed (Zhou and Fink, 2003). Furthermore, some structural capital risks might be related to poor workplace organization or an insufficient information infrastructure. This also includes the poor documentation of relevant knowledge, resulting in a higher lead time in projects for example (Singh and Soltani, 2010). 2.3 Relational capital risks.