HUMAN LEARNING - NATURAL DRIFT TO LOOSE COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE

HUMAN LEARNING - PROFESSOR CONCEDES CoP AS GOLD STANDARD IN EXECUTIVE DEVELOPMENT

 HUMAN LEARNING - 3,000 CoPS AT CATERPILLAR WORLDWIDE

MORE  IN  ARCHIVES...

RESEARCH NEWS NOTIFICATIONS...REGISTER

   RUSSIA'S ANTI-SHARING CULTURE TRANSFORMED
BY AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP
Michailova, S.and Husted, K.(2003) Knowledge-Sharing Hostility in Russian Firms. California Management Review Spring, Vol. 45 : 3, p59-78


Can leaders turn around knowledge hoarding cultures
to knowledge sharing ones ?

Researchers conclude that only an autocratic leadership style
can produce this major culture change in certain contexts.

Researchers from Denmark studied six Russian companies, all of which had severely defective knowledge sharing cultures. The six companies were Pharmacon, Texcorn, Foodcom, Opticom, Machincom and Buildcom. The researchers undertook 26 interviews, some of which included Western expatriate executives. Additionally, they studied annual reports, published material and meeting minutes, the latter of which provided strong clues regarding the willingness of individuals to declare their knowledge prowess. Obstructive beliefs and practices were identified and change management recommendations were made.

RESULTS

Classic obstacles to knowledge sharing were clearly observed across all companies.

But in severely defective knowledge sharing cultures radically different solutions need to be implemented from normal ones.

The researchers discovered that there are three major mental obstacles that need to be addressed if change management process will be a success: Individual Knowledge Hoarding, Mistakes Reprisals, and Not Invented Here.

A. INDIVIDUAL KNOWLEDGE HOARDING

Two traditional obstacles were present : (i) a worker's fear of decreasing their personal value through sharing knowledge with other people and (ii) an obsession with activities strictly related to their own performance by minimising all perceived secondary activities like knowledge sharing. But there were another three obstacles in addition to these two.

'These three features were found important by the majority of respondents, both Russians and Westerners.'

These included :

(iii) Developed avoidance strategies to cope with high uncertainty. In still a fairly highly politicised and punitive national and organisational culture (after centuries of suspicion and secrecy) it was best to be guarded with your opinions and convictions.

'Although people knew each other on the job, a preferable behavior was to say as little as possible through carefully selected words. Answering a question with a question was and still is a well-known and established practice and, more importantly, a mechanism against sharing information. Another preferred way of exchanging information was and still is by word of mouth. According to one respondent:

"Everybody in Russia was trained to keep things confidential."
               --Western manager, Buildcom '

(iv) Respecting formal power and resisting knowledge sharing across hierarchical levels. Employees should never share new knowledge for fear of showing up their manager's lack of knowledge. Likewise, managers should not listen to ideas from subordinates otherwise it may be perceived as a sign of ignorance and incompetence.

'In all six companies, Russian managers strongly expressed the view that they should always be more knowledgeable than their employees. This frequently prevents managers from approaching employees as sources of ideas and reliable knowledge...

Director: "I don't expect any ideas and solutions from my subordinates. I need information from them in order to command them. ... All ideas are born in my head. Employees have no sufficient qualification to come up with new ideas and if they do, I suppress them. It is me who is paid for ideas. I am the only one. So, it's me to come up with new ideas. ..."

Interviewer: "But you mentioned before that the policy of the company is to hire younger, well-educated specialists. They must be a valuable source of fresh and useful ideas. ..."

Director: "We have specialists, but we don't have ideas. I have seen specialists, but no ideas coming from them."

(v) Perceived negative consequences of communicating knowledge to subordinates. Knowledge obtained from Western colleagues is not passed down to operation levels even when it determines the success of the new project. Some managers do it for feasible reasons: employees cannot make decisions so it is pointless to share with them. For others they feel it would add to the undermining of their authority to do so, as mentioned earlier.

Recommendations I

A radical solution is needed to a radical transformation of a culture.

'The traditional means of dealing with knowledge-sharing hostility based on encouragement are worthless or even counterproductive in Russian organizations.'

Some of the 'obstacles' can be used as catalysts to developing a new working ethos.Figure one details the prescribed management actions. The fourth management action is evaluating (and developing) a manager's competence in knowledge sharing. So rather than just assigning and policing tasks, managers should share their expertise. Managers should be evaluated on their ability to share their knowledge with subordinates. The researchers suggest evaluating collaborative work practices such as the facilitation of internal seminars and involving employees in problem solving based on knowledge the managers possess.

Figure 1. Removing Knowledge Hoarding Mindset

Next...

1  |  2  |  3  |  4

3D Animated Flags--By 3DFlags.com