The paper “ The Role of Knowledge Integration in the Creation of Competitive Advantage for Any Firm” is a creative example of the essay on management. In any organization, effective management is dependent on how the diverse business units in the company contribute to the firm as a whole. In turn, this determines the detailed knowledge integration requirements. For instance, an organization can be viewed as a collection of independent businesses that are entirely different, with interdependence amongst themselves due to financial factors. As a result, the corporate environment will be made up of inter-unit relationships that are minimal, and thus decision making is dependent on a knowledge scheme that is sparse.
This is so because knowledge integration needs are limited to the exchange of structured and well defined financial statements. On the other hand, some corporate environments might be much more demanding in relation to knowledge integration needs, in attempting to achieve corporate effectiveness. For instance, a company can aim at achieving economies of scale in its purchasing decisions or in trying to coordinate its research and development activities, so as to achieve synergies that are essential for attaining competitive advantage (Hamel & Prahalad 1990, p. 82).
This means that an organization should have a proper knowledge flow management system across the diverse business units in the organization. From these short examples, it is evident that precise knowledge integration requirements rely heavily on the conditions present in an organization. Additionally, the actions that a company can take to achieve corporate effectiveness are exceedingly contingent. On one hand, every company is faced with specific technical conditions, and, on the other hand, learning capabilities, culture, and tradition differ significantly form one company to another and even from one business unit to another. This paper aims at discussing the concept of knowledge integration in organizations.
In particular, the paper discusses the concept of knowledge integration from a firm’ s viewpoint, to identify the issues facing firms as they seek to integrate knowledge and the reasons why knowledge integration is so crucial to maintaining competitive advantage.
Andreau, R & Sieber, S 2005, ‘Knowledge integration across organizations: how different types of knowledge suggest different integration trajectories’. Knowledge and process management, Vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 153-160.
Blacker, F, 1995, ‘Knowledge, knowledge work and organizations; an overview and interpretation’. Organization studies. Vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 1022-1042.
Boiset, M, Information space; a framework for learning in organizations, institutions, and cultures, Routledge, London.
Ciborra, S & Andreau, R, 2001, sharing knowledge across boundaries, Journal of information technology, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 73-81.
Clark, K, & Henderson, R 1990, ‘Architectural innovation; the reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms.’ Administrative science quarterly, vol. 35, pp. 9-31.
Demsetz, H, 1991, The theory of the firm revisited, in Winter, S, & Williamson, E, The nature of the firm, Oxford University press, New York.
Grant, M 1991, ‘The resource based theory of competitive advantage; implications for strategy formulation,’ California management review, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 114-135.
Grant, R, M, 1996, ‘Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments; organizational capability as knowledge integration’. Organization science, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 375-387.
Grant, M, & Spender, C, 1996, knowledge and the firm; overview. Strategic management journal, Vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 5-9.
Hamel, G, & Prahalad, K 1990, ‘The core competencies of the corporation,’ Harvard business review, pp. 79-91.
Hodgetts, M, 1999, ‘A conversation with Michael E. Porter: a significant extension toward operational improvement and positioning’, Organizational dynamics, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 24-33.
Levitt, B, & March, G, 1988, ‘Organizational learning’. Annual review of sociology, Vol. 14, pp. 319-340.
Liebeskind, P, Brewer, N, Zucker, L, & Oliver, A, 1996, “Social networks, learning, and flexibility; sourcing scientific knowledge in new biotechnology firms’. Organizational science, vol. 7, no.4, pp. 428-443.
Linn, C 2006, The Knowledge Integration Perspective on Learning and Instruction. Sawyer, R. In The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Malone, S, & Edvinssson, L, 1997, Intellectual capital; realizing your company’s true value by finding its hidden brain power, Harper business, New York.
March, G, 1991, ‘Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning.’ Organizational science, vol. 2, no. 1, pp.71-87.
Murray, S 1995, Learning as Knowledge Integration. University of Texas, Austin.
Nonaka, I, 1991, The knowledge-creating company. Harvard business review, vol. 69. no.6, pp. 96-104.
Porter, E, 1991, The competitive advantage of nations, Free press, New York.
Prahalad, K, & Connor, K, 1996, ‘A resource-based theory of the firm; knowledge versus opportunism’. Organization science. Vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 477-501.
Quinn, J, B 1992, Intelligence enterprise, Free press, New York.
Richardson, J 1996, Vertical integration and rapid response in fashion apparel, Organizational science, vol. 7, no. 4, 400-412.
Sieber, S & Andreu, R 2000, Learning trajectories: the ultimate requirement for effective knowledge management. University or Warwick, UK.
Snow, C & Hassen, J 1996, ‘Responding to hyper competition; the structure and processes of a regional learning network organization, Organization science, Vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 413-427.
Spender, C, 1994, Organizational knowledge, collective practice, and Penrose rents, International business review, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 353-367.
Starbuck, H, 1992, ‘Learning by knowledge-intensive firms’ Journal of management studies, Vol. 29, pp. 713-739.
Takeuchi, H, & Nonaka, I, 1995, The knowledge-creating company. Oxford University press, New York.
Volberda, W, 1996, ‘Towards the flexible form; how to remain vital in hypercompetitive environments,’ Organizational science, Vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 359-374.