research-article

Organizational culture in knowledge creation, creativity and innovation: Towards the Freiraum model

Authors:

Jan Auernhammer,

Hazel HallAuthors Info & Claims

Journal of Information Science, Volume 40, Issue 2

Pages 154 - 166

Published: 01 April 2014 Publication History

Abstract

This paper draws on findings from an in-depth case study of practices related to the meeting of organizational goals pertinent to knowledge creation, creativity and innovation performance. Overall a mixed methods approach that used both quantitative and qualitative data was adopted in empirical research conducted within a large German manufacturing firm. A quantitative analysis of survey data highlighted factors necessary to nurture an environment conducive to knowledge creation, creativity and innovation. The organization should: be open to change; encourage and value free communication and new and/or unusual ideas; tolerate mistakes; and nurture intrinsically motivated staff. It should be supported by leaders who promote these characteristics as shared values, while challenging and empowering their staff to generate new ideas in a drive to further innovation. Further analysis of focus group and interview data in the same case study identified three main determinants that underpin knowledge creation and creativity: (1) structured 'space' that creates expertise and experience of individuals while working in routine; (2) willingness to innovate - individuals' propensity to experiment with ideas, even at risk of failure; and (3) authorized and dedicated 'space' designated specifically for individuals to explore new ideas ('Freiraum'). These findings have contributed to the development of a new articulation of the organization of creativity and innovation. It draws on established concepts from the domain of knowledge and creativity management, and extends these to deepen our understanding of how aspects of organizational culture, including leadership and social conditions, influence organizational performance in terms of (1) improving knowledge creation processes related to creativity, and (2) fostering innovation.

References

[1]

Nonaka I,Takeuchi HThe knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press; 1995:

[2]

Nonaka I,Konno N.The concept of 'Ba': Building a foundation for knowledge creation.California Management Review. 1998;40 (3): 40-54

[3]

López-Nicolás C,Meroño-Cerdán AL.Strategic knowledge management, innovation and performance.International Journal of Information Management. 2011;31 (6): 502-509

[4]

Mueller J.The interactive relationship of corporate culture and knowledge management: A review.Review of Managerial Science. 2012;6:183-201

[5]

Dalkir KKnowledge management in theory and practice. <ed>2</ed>nd edn.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2011.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2011:

[6]

Jashapara AKnowledge management: An integrated approach. <ed>2</ed>nd edn.London: Pearson, 2011.London: Pearson; 2011:

[7]

Janssen O.Job demands, perceptions of effort-reward fairness and innovative work behaviour.Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 2000;73:287-302

[8]

Benson R,Stacie B,Richard B.Overcoming barriers to knowledge sharing in virtual teams.Organizational Dynamics. 2007;36 (3): 259-273

[9]

Lin CH,Wu JC.Exploring barriers to knowledge flow at different knowledge management maturity stages.Information and Management. 2012;49 (1): 10-23

[10]

Alavi M,Kayworth TR,Leidner D.An empirical investigation of the influence of organizational culture on knowledge management practices.Journal of Management Information Systems. 2005-2006;22 (3): 191-224

[11]

Hall H,Goody M.KM culture and compromise - Interventions to promote knowledge sharing supported by technology in corporate environments.Journal of Information Science. 2007;33 (2): 181-188

[12]

Jashapara A.The emerging discourse of knowledge management: A new dawn for information science research.Journal of Information Science. 2004;31 (2): 136-148

[13]

Kayworth T,Leidner DHandbook on knowledge management; knowledge matters. Holspapple CW, ed. Berlin: Springer; 2003:233-252.

[14]

Boisot MKnowledge assets. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1998:

[15]

Von Krogh G,Roos JOrganizational epistemology. New York: St Martin's Press; 1995:

[16]

EkbiaHKlingR. Power in knowledge management in late modern times, http://ils.indiana.edu/faculty/hekbia/web/other/EkbiaKling_PowerKM.pdf (2003, accessed 10 June 2013).

[17]

Detlor B,Ruhi U,Turel Bergeron P,Choo CW,Heaton L,Paquette S.The effect of knowledge management context on knowledge management practices: An empirical investigation.Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management. 2006;4 (2): 117-128

[18]

Chua AYK,Banerjee S.Customer knowledge management via social media: The case of Starbucks.Journal of Knowledge Management. 2013;17 (2): 237-249

[19]

Nakano D,Muniz J,Batista ED.Engaging environments: tacit knowledge sharing on the shop floor.Journal of Knowledge Management. 2013;17 (2): 290-306

[20]

Oluikpe P.Developing a corporate knowledge management strategy.Journal of Knowledge Management. 2012;16 (6): 862-878

[21]

Amin A,Roberts JCommunity, economic creativity, and organization. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008:

[22]

Amin A,Roberts J.Knowing in action: beyond communities of practice.Research Policy. 2008;37 (2): 353-369

[23]

Davenport E,Hall H.Organizational knowledge and communities of practice.Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. 2002;36:171-227

[24]

Hall H,Graham D.Creation and recreation: motivating collaboration to generate knowledge capital in online communities.International Journal of Information Management. 2004;24 (3): 235-246

[25]

Wenger ECommunities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998:

[26]

Wenger E,McDermott RA,Snyder WCultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press; 2002:

[27]

Amabile TMThe motivation for creativity in organizations. Boston, MA: Harvard; 1996:

[28]

Amabile TM.How to kill creativity.Harvard Business Review. 1998;76 (5): 76-87

[29]

Bendixen PKreativität und Unternehmensorganisation. Köln: Kiepenheuer und Witsch; 1976:

[30]

Csíkszentmihályi MTheories of creativity. Runco MAAlbert RS, ed. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1990:190-214.

[31]

Csíkszentmihályi MCreativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: HarperCollins; 1996:

[32]

Jaworski J,Zurlino FInnovationskultur: vom Leidensdruck zur Leidenschaft; wie Top-Unternehmen ihre Organisation mobilisieren. Frankfurt am Main: Campus-Verlag; 2009:

[33]

Nooteboom BLearning and innovation in organizations and economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2000:

[34]

Sawyer RKGroup genius: The creative power of collaboration. New York: Basic Books; 2007:

[35]

Sutton RIWeird ideas that work: How to build a creative company. New York: Free Press; 2007:

[36]

Teece DJDynamic capabilities and strategic management: Organizing for innovation and growth. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009:

[37]

Tidd J,Bessant JRManaging innovation integrating technological, market and organizational change. Chichester: Wiley; 2010:

[38]

Woodman RW,Sawyer JE,Griffin RW.Toward a theory of organizational creativity.Academy of Management Review. 1993;18 (2): 293-321

[39]

Zhou J,Shalley CEHandbook of organizational creativity. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2008:

[40]

Grant RM.Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: organizational capability as knowledge integration.Organization Science. 1996;7 (4): 375-387

[41]

Tsoukas H.The firm as a distributed knowledge system: a constructionist approach.Strategic Management Journal. 1996;17:11-25

[42]

Von Krogh G,Roos JManaging knowledge: Perspectives on cooperation and competition. London: Sage; 1996:

[43]

Choo CWThe knowing organization: How organizations use information to construct meaning, create knowledge, and make decisions. New York: Oxford University Press; 2006:

[44]

Nonaka I,Toyama R,Hirata TManaging flow: A process theory of the knowledge-based firm. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2008:

[45]

Stonehouse GH,Pemberton JD.Learning and knowledge management in the intelligent organisation.Participation and Empowerment. 1999;7 (5): 131-144

[46]

Pemberton JD,Stonehouse GH.Organisational learning and knowledge assets - an essential partnership.The Learning Organisation. 2000;7 (4): 184-194

[47]

Pemberton JD,Stonehouse GHInnovations of knowledge management. Montano B, ed. London: IRM Press; 2005:99-123.

[48]

Argyris C,Schön DAOrganizational learning II : Theory, method and practice. Wokingham: Addison-Wesley; 1996:

[49]

Argyris COn organizational learning. Oxford: Blackwell Business; 1999:

[50]

Chesbrough HWOpen innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston, MA: Harvard; 2003:

[51]

Chesbrough HWOpen business models: How to thrive in the new innovation landscape. Boston, MA: Harvard; 2006:

[52]

Von Hippel EThe sources of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998:

[53]

Von Hippel EDemocratizing innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2005:

[54]

Prahalad CK,Ramaswamy V.Co-opting customer competence.Harvard Business Review. 2000;78:79-90

[55]

Ramaswamy V,Gouillart FJThe power of co-creation: Build it with them to boost growth, productivity, and profits. New York: Free Press; 2010:

[56]

Bakken T,Hernes T,Wiik EAutopoiesis in organization theory and practice. Magalhães RSanchez R, ed. Bingley: Emerald; 2009:169-182.

[57]

Bakken T,Hernes T,Wiik EAutopoiesis in organization theory and practice. Magalhães RSanchez R, ed. Bingley: Emerald; 2009:69-88.

[58]

Hernes T,Bakken T.Implications of self-reference: Niklas Luhmann's autopoiesis and organization theory.Organization Studies. 2003;24 (9): 1511-1535

[59]

Hernes TUnderstanding organization as process: Theory for a tangled world. London: Routledge; 2007:

[60]

Luhmann NOrganisation und Entscheidung. Opladen: Westdt. Verl; 2000:

[61]

Maula MOrganizations as learning systems: 'Living composition' as an enabling infrastructure. London: Elsevier; 2006:

[62]

Magalhães R,Sanchez RAutopoiesis in organization theory and practice. Bingley: Emerald; 2009:

[63]

ZelenyM. Knowledge-information circulation through the enterprise: Forward to the roots of knowledge management. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3327, 2004, pp. 22-33.

Digital Library

[64]

Zeleny M.Knowledge-information autopoietic cycle: Towards the wisdom systems.International Journal of Management and Decision Making. 2006 2006;7 (1): 3-18

[65]

Daft RL,Weick KE.Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems.Academy of Management Review. 1984;9 (2): 284-295

[66]

Weick KESensemaking in organizations. London: Sage; 1995:

[67]

Hernes TThe spatial construction of organization. Amsterdam: Benjamins; 2004:

[68]

Hernes T.Studying composite boundaries: a framework of analysis.Human Relations. 2004;57 (1): 9-29

[69]

Crang M,Thrift NThinking space. London: Routledge; 2000:

[70]

Thrift N.Re-inventing invention: New tendencies in capitalist commodification.Economy and Society. 2006;35 (2): 279-306

[71]

Thrift NNon-representational theory: Space, politics, affect. London: Routledge; 2008:

[72]

Smircich L.Concepts of culture and organizational analysis.Administrative Science Quarterly. 1983;28 (3): 339-358

[73]

Senge PMThe fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. <ed>2</ed>nd edn.New York: Doubleday/Currency, 2006.New York: Doubleday/Currency; 2006:

[74]

Beer S.The viable system model: its provenance, development, methodology and pathology.Journal of the Operational Research Society. 1984;35 (1): 7-25

[75]

Beer SDiagnosing the system for organizations. Chichester: Wiley; 1985:

[76]

Lahtinen J.Local social knowledge management: A case study of social learning and knowledge sharing across organizational boundaries.Journal of Information Science. 2013;:

[77]

Beer SBrain of the firm. <ed>2</ed>nd edn.New York: Wiley.New York: Wiley;

[78]

Snowden D.Complex acts of knowing: Paradox and descriptive self-awareness.Journal of Knowledge Management. 2000;6 (2): 1-33

[79]

Whitehead ANProcess and reality. Griffin DRSherburne DW, ed. New York: the Free Press; 1978:

[80]

Nonaka I,Von Krogh G,Voelpel S.Organizational knowledge creation theory: Evolutionary paths and future advances.Organization Studies. 2006;27 (8): 1179-1208

[81]

Bereiter CEducation and mind in the knowledge age. Mahwah, NJ: L Erlbaum Associates; 2002:

[82]

Engeström YPerspectives on activity theory. Engeström YMiettinen RPunamäki R-L, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1999:377-406.

[83]

Gourlay S,Nurse AChallenges and issues in knowledge management. Buono AFPoulfelt FHandelshøjskolen K, ed. Greenwich, CT: Information Age; 2005:293-316.

[84]

Mueller JS,Melwani S,Goncalo JA.The bias against creativity: Why people desire but reject creative ideas.Psychological Science. 2012;23 (1): 13-17

[85]

West MA.Ideas are ten a penny: It's team implementation not idea generation that counts.Applied Psychology. 2002;51:411-424

[86]

Barbour RSDoing focus groups. London: Sage; 2007:

[87]

Alexander C,Ishikawa S,Silverstein MA pattern language: Towns, buildings, construction. New York: Oxford University Press; 1977:

[88]

Coplien JOThe patterns handbook: Techniques, strategies, and applications. Rising L, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998:

[89]

Coplien JOEnterprise information systems VI. Seruca ICordeiro JHammoudi SFilipe J, ed. Dordrecht: Springer; 2006:

[90]

Giddens AConstitution of society: Outline on the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press; 1984:

[91]

Bakken T,Hernes T.Organizing is both a verb and a noun: Weick meets Whitehead.Organization Studies. 2006;27 (11): 1599-1616

[92]

Field APDiscovering statistics using SPSS. London: Sage; 2005:

[93]

Brand A.Knowledge management and innovation at 3M.Journal of Knowledge Management. 1998;2 (1): 17-22

[94]

BickJ. The Google way: Give engineers room. New York Times, 21October2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/21/jobs/21pre.html?_r=0 (accessed 1 July 2013).

[95]

Morgan GImages of organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2006:

[96]

Flyvberg BMaking social science matter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2001:

[97]

Rising LThe patterns handbook: Techniques, strategies, and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998:

[98]

Wang W-T,Belardo S.The role of knowledge management in achieving effective crisis management: A case study.Journal of Information Science. 2009;35 (6): 635-659

Cited By

Kaffashan Kakhki MMalakooti Asl NNamdar Joyame E(2024)Modelling the effect of perceived organisational policies on knowledge management in librariesJournal of Information Science10.1177/0165551522109633050:2(498-514)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1177/01655515221096330
Meyer EShankar KWillis MSharma SSawyer S(2019)The social informatics of knowledgeJournal of the Association for Information Science and Technology10.1002/asi.2420570:4(307-312)Online publication date: 5-Mar-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1002/asi.24205
Rasmussen LHall H(2016)The adoption process in management innovationJournal of Information Science10.1177/016555151562503242:3(356-368)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1177/0165551515625032

Organizational culture in knowledge creation, creativity and innovation: Towards the Freiraum model
1. Applied computing

Recommendations

How to be an Innovative Organization - Developing a Culture of Innovation in Organizations
ICCTD '09: Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Computer Technology and Development - Volume 02

Innovation & creativity are the valuable intangible assets which play a vital role in the transformation of business & society. The emergence of globalization & increasing competition created a threat for the organizations to survive in market and ...
Innovation and knowledge creation: How are these concepts related?

Innovation and knowledge creation-these two concepts have a strong relationship but this relationship has not been examined systematically. This paper reviews the important theoretical work in both streams of research, highlighting the fundamental ...
Organizational Innovation and Substandard Performance: When is Necessity the Mother of Innovation?

This study extends earlier empirical research into organizational decline which has found that substandard performance stimulates innovation in a wide range of manufacturing industries. Using data from 74 U.S. high technology firms, this research ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Journal of Information Science

Journal of Information Science Volume 40, Issue 2

April 2014

139 pages

ISSN:0165-5515

Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

Sage Publications, Inc.

United States

Publication History

Published: 01 April 2014

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

3
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 09 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Kaffashan Kakhki MMalakooti Asl NNamdar Joyame E(2024)Modelling the effect of perceived organisational policies on knowledge management in librariesJournal of Information Science10.1177/0165551522109633050:2(498-514)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1177/01655515221096330
Meyer EShankar KWillis MSharma SSawyer S(2019)The social informatics of knowledgeJournal of the Association for Information Science and Technology10.1002/asi.2420570:4(307-312)Online publication date: 5-Mar-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1002/asi.24205
Rasmussen LHall H(2016)The adoption process in management innovationJournal of Information Science10.1177/016555151562503242:3(356-368)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2016
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1177/0165551515625032

View Options

View options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents