Linking knowledge management, organizational learning and memory

(1)

Journal

of

Innovation

&

Knowledge

https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-innovation-and-knowledge

Conceptual

paper

Linking

knowledge

management,

organizational

learning

and

memory

Helder

de

Jesus

Ginja

Antunes

a,b,∗

_,

_Paulo

_Gonc¸

_alves

_Pinheiro

c,d

a_C-MAST/UBI_–_Centre_for_Mechanical_and_Aerospace_Science_and_Technology,_R&D_Centre_Funded_by_the_Multiannual_Funding_Programme_of_R&D_Centers_of_FCT_–_Portuguese FoundationforScienceandTechnology,MinistryofEducationandScience,Portugal

b_University_of_Beira_Interior,_Department_of_Management_and_Economics_(DGE),_Faculty_of_Social_and_Human_Sciences,_University_of_Beira_Interior,_Estrada_do_Sineiro,_s/n.,_6200-209 Covilhã,Portugal

c_NECE-UBI_–_Research_Centre_in_Business_Sciences,_R&D_Centre_Funded_by_the_Multiannual_Funding_Programme_of_R&D_Centers_of_FCT_–_Portuguese_Foundation_for_Science_and Technology,MinistryofEducationandScience,Portugal

d_University_of_Beira_Interior,_Department_of_Management_and_Economics_(DGE),_Faculdade_de_Ciências_Sociais_e_Humanas,_Universidade_da_Beira_Interior,_Estrada_do_Sineiro,_s/n, 6200-209Covilhã,Portugal

a

r

t

i

c

l

e

i

n

f

o

Articlehistory: Received16April2018 Accepted24April2019 Availableonlinexxx JELclassiﬁcation: M1 M15 Keywords: Knowledgemanagement Organizationallearning Memory

Systematicliteraturereview

a

b

s

t

r

a

c

t

Theobjectiveofthisresearchistounderstandthelinkandevolutionbetweentheconceptsofknowledge management,organizationallearningandmemory.Seekingabetterclarificationofconcepts,discussing theminthetheoreticalfield,understandingtheirevolutioninthelastdecades.Asystematicliterature reviewwasdevelopedbysynthesizingconcepts.Fromtwodatabases,atotalof2511scientificarticles between1960and2017wereanalyzed,dividedintotwostudies.Organizationallearningisseenasa dynamicprocessbasedonknowledgeandistranslatedthroughvariouslevelsofactivity.Theability ofanorganizationtouseandleveragetheknowledgeisheavilydependentonitsHumanResources, whichareeffectivelywhocreates,sharesandusesthatknowledge.Knowledgemanagementisseen asthemanagementoftheprocessesofcreation,storage,access,anddisseminationoftheintellectual resourcesofanorganization.Organizationsmustconsideryourmainobjectiveasincreasingthecapacity ofindividualsandorganizationalknowledgeenhancers.Managersshouldpayspecialattentiontothe moregeneralknowledgeassociatedwiththecontextofthefirm,asitsupportstheintroductionofvarious typesofinnovation.KnowledgecanbeencouragedbyasetofcollaborativepracticesofHRM.Wecan considerorganizationallearningasaprocessandorganizationalmemoryasthecorrespondingoutput. Thus,establishingtherelationshipthattheorganizationalmemoryisaconsequenceoforganizational learning.

Keyconceptsthatcanbeusedinthenewfutureresearcharesummarized,highlightingitsapplication anddiagnosisfororganizations,fomentingthestrategicdecision-making.

Introduction

Sincethe1990s,theeconomyismarkedbytheopeningofnew marketsandadvancesintechnologies.Therearemajorchallenges intheﬁeld oforganizationalscienceswhereyesterday’s organi-zationalknowledgeandstrategiescannotguarantee tomorrow’s success (Senge, 1990). Organizational challenges in companies requirelearning and creativity to increase resources,skills and learninginbusinessorganizationstosustainthecompany’s com-petitiveadvantages(Barney,1991;DeGeus,1988;Garvin,1993;

Mahoney,2001;Peteraf,1993;Wernerfelt,1984).

∗ Correspondingauthor.

E-mailaddress:helder.antunes@ubi.pt(H.d.J.G.Antunes).

Inthisresearch,thelearningoforganizationsishighlighted,due toitsroletoimproveresultsandperformance(Fernandes,2007). Organizationallearninghaditsdevelopmentintheﬁeldof busi-ness sciences, research,and thebecomean important research topicfromthe1990s.Theorganizationthatcontinuallyexpands itscapabilitiescreatesitsownfuture(Senge,1990).

Itisnecessarytoanalyzeanddiagnosethecurrentstateofan organization,asabasisthatshouldguideitschange(Marsick&

Watkins,2003).Learningmustbeguidedandintegratedintothe

systems,practices,andstructuresoftheorganization,tobeshared, causingchangesinperformance.So,oneshouldnotconsideronly theindividuallearningtosupportorganizationallearningsystem

(Marsick&Watkins,2003).

Althoughthedeﬁnitionsoforganizationallearning vary con-siderably, there is a consensus that theorganizational learning

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2019.04.002

(2)

representsaspecialmodeloforganizationalculturepromotedby theattentiongiventothechangeandthewayinwhichitoccurs

(Cox, Irby,&Bowen,2006), theﬂexibilityand opennesstonew

waysofwork,dependingonthegoalsoftheOrganizationandofits performancetargets(Marsick&Watkins,2003).

Thetwo growingtheoreticallines of organizational learning andlearning organizationemergebyconsideringtheindividual knowledgeperspectivefororganizationalknowledgei.e.theshift fromthelevelsofactionofindividualknowledgetoorganizational knowledge (Fiol & Lyles, 1985; Shrivastava, 1983). The learner organization appears,the continuous increase of the skills and knowledge of individuals, promoting collective learning condi-tioningorganizational learning(Senge,1990), andalsobuilding organizationalmemoryasHuberassuggestedin1991.

Themaintheoretical linesof organizationallearning arethe behaviouralapproachin companies(Cyert&March,1963); the-oriesofaction(Argyris&Schon,1978,1996;Argyris,1977)andthe theoryofcognitiveandbehaviouralchanges(Fiol&Lyles,1985).

Senge(1990)proposesandidentiﬁesthedifﬁcultiesthat

organi-zationsencounterinordertodevelopnewlearning,identifiesseven typesofdifficultiesidentifiedinmanagers:(i)confusionofidentity; (ii)avoidassumingresponsibilities;(iii)notfaceproblems immedi-ately;(iv)analyzeeventsonacase-by-casebasis;(v)nervousness; (vi)lackofinformationaboutdecisions;(vii)involvementinpower relations(Senge,1990).

Huber(1991)identiﬁesinhisresearchworkfourorganizational

learningprocesses:(i)acquisitionofknowledge,howitisobtained; (ii)distributionofinformation;(iii)informationinterpretation,and (iv)organizationalmemory,astheprocessofinformationsharing, isthetransitionfromtheindividualtothecollectivelevel,building organizationalmemory(Huber,1991).However,wemust empha-sizethat organizational learning and its difﬁculties,knowledge managementinthecompanyandorganizationalmemoryhavea relativelyrecentdevelopmentintheirareaofstudy.Itisnecessary tocontinue researching,deepeningconceptsand disseminating information,questioningtheformsoflearning,theirsharingof con-tent,theformofthisstorageinorganizationsandthecontribution tothesuccessfulbusiness.

Theobjective of this researchis to understandthelink and evolutionbetweentheconceptsofknowledgemanagement, orga-nizationallearningandmemory.Seekingabetterclariﬁcationof concepts,discussingtheminthetheoreticalﬁeld,understanding theirevolutionanditslinkageinthelastdecades.

Infirstsection,weintroduceandlisttheideasthatdefinethe problemofstudyandtheconceptualframework.Insectiontwo a literature review considering theconcepts, its evolution and interactionwithorganizationaltopics.synthesiswiththe method-ologicaloptions,asystematicreviewoftheliterature.Insection threeispresentedthemethodology.Insectionfourtheresultsare discussed.Finally,sectionfiveispresentedthefinalconsiderations, limitationstothestudyandfutureresearchlines.

Literature

Managementandknowledgeprocessesinorganizations

Inthisstudy,wefollowthedeﬁnitionknowledgemanagement asthemanagementof theprocessesofcreation,storage,access anddisseminationoftheintellectualresourcesofanorganization

(Song,Nerur,&Teng,2007).Knowledgemanagementin

organiza-tions,accordingtoGarcia-PerezandMitra(2008)isdeﬁnedasaset offourtypesofprocesses:(1)acquisitionofknowledge.Involves theprocessesofcreationandknowledge-building;(2)conversion ofknowledge.Thestorageofusefulinformationinrepositoriesthat

facilitateaccessofindividualstotheattention;(3)applicationof knowledge.Thisisthewayisexploredandappliedknowledge;(4) Protectionofknowledge(Garcia-PerezandAyres,2009,2015).

Huber(1991)alsodescribesfourconstructionsofknowledge

management:knowledgeacquisition;thedistributionof informa-tion;theinterpretationofinformationandorganizationalmemory. In organizations that bet onthe implementationof knowledge managementsystemsandpracticestomonetizeandimprove exist-ingknowledge in theorganization. Thepredominant trend has beenthefocusonsupportinginformation sharingtechnologies, assumingtheimportanceofstudyingsocialnetworks,knowledge ﬂowsandidentifyingstrategiestoimprovethem(Cross,Borgatti,

& Parker, 2002; Storberg-Walker & Gubbins, 2007). Schwier,

Campbell,andKenny(2004)arguethattheuseoftheterm

knowl-edgemanagement sometimesisnot adequate,showthat many knowledge management projects are information management projects.Thisisbecausetheyareonlyfocusedoncoding,storage, anddistributionofinformation(Schwieretal.,2004).Theability ofanorganizationtouseandleveragetheknowledgeisheavily dependentonitsHumanResources,whichareeffectivelywho cre-ate,shareanduseknowledge(Ipe,2003).Theuseofknowledgeis onlypossiblewhenindividualscansharetheirknowledgeandcan generatenew,fromtheknowledgeofothers(Devezas,Linstone,&

Santos,2007).Itisalsorecognizedtheimportanceofsharingfor

theinterconnectionbetweentheknowledgeattheindividuallevel andorganizationallevel,knowledgeandlearningbothlevels(Ipe,

2003).

Ontheotherhand,sincemuchoftheorganizationalknowledge liesintheindividuallevel,thatacquiresandcomplementsitsdaily activitiesandfunctions.Ifnotpromotedacultureofknowledge sharing,therisk,iftheindividualleavestheOrganization,tolose thisspeciﬁcknowledge ortheriskofthis knowledgenotbeing properlytakenadvantageofsinceitisnolongeraccessibletoothers (Ipe,2003).Knowledgeistheresultoflearning,canmanifestitself inchangesinbehaviourorlackofcognitions(Argote,2013). Knowl-edgecanbecharacterizedalongvariousdimensions(Windhager etal.,2013),fromexplicitknowledgetotacitknowledge(Kogut&

Zander,1992;Nonaka&VonKrogh,2009;Nonaka,1994;Polanyi,

1962).

Knowledgecreation theorydescribesknowledge asmeaning whereindividualsforpersonalsensitivityandexperience,the abil-itytodeﬁnea situationand actaccordingly. Theorganizational knowledgecreationtheoryproposesthatthenewknowledgeis createdthroughprocessesoftacitandexplicitconversion: social-ization,externalization,combination,andinternalization(Erden,

Von Krogh, &Nonaka, 2008; Nonaka, Toyama, &Konno, 2000;

Nonaka,1994).AndrewsandDelahaye(2000)intheirstudyof

psy-chosocialprocesses ofﬁltercreation ofknowledgesuggest that individualsintuitivelyadoptﬁlteringstrategies.Inhisstudy,the researchersdescribe situations whereindividuals didnot share theirown knowledge lightly.The perceivedreliability was dis-tinctly perception-based than thecolleagues werelikely to do, withcommerciallysensitiveinformation.Thepsychosocialfactor emergesclearlyasthatwhichdetermineswhowerewillingtoshare theirownknowledge in theproductionof itsresearchservices

(Andrews&Delahaye,2000).

Additionally, Nielsen and Nielsen (2009) examined results related to international strategic alliances (ISAs) knowledge, demonstrate that learning and innovation can occur simul-taneously but result from different combinations of partner characteristics,knowledgecharacteristics,andrelationalquality. Whiletacitknowledgecaninhibitknowledgetransferand learn-ing,itcanalsoincreaseﬁrms’abilitytoinnovate(Nielsen&Nielsen,

(3)

Theconceptofmemoryandorganizationalimprovisation

Theconceptoforganizationalmemoryappearsfragmentedby severalauthorslikeWalshandUngson(1991),Anand,Manz,and

Glick(1998),MoormanandMiner(1998)orBarnierandSutton

(2008),withgreatpotentialfordevelopmentintheﬁeldofstudy.

Thestructureoftheorganizationalmemoryappearslinkedto infor-mationprocesses, acquisition,retention and recovery(Walsh &

Ungson,1991).Organizationalmemoryis deﬁnedashow

orga-nizationsstoreknowledgefor futureuse(Cyert&March,1963;

Huber,1991;Levitt&March,1988;Stein&Zwass,1995).

Individ-ualcognitiveactivitiestranslatedbytheacquisitionofknowledge withinanorganization,contributetotheconstructionof organiza-tionalmemory(Walsh&Ungson,1991).Theprocessesofsharing organizationalinterpretationsystemsoutperformtheindividual level.Thisisoneofthereasonswhyanorganizationpreserving theknowledgeofthepastevenwhenkeystaffleavethe

Organiza-tion(Weick&Gilﬁllan,1971).Replacethelostknowledgegainedby

experience,raisesnewchallenges(Dunham&Burt,2011;Strack,

Baier,&Fahlander,2008).Theconceptoforganizationalmemory,

clarifythelocusoforganizational memory, theretention struc-ture;theprocessesofacquisition,storageandretrievalonretention structure;andthememoryusageasaconsequenceonperformance andresults(Walsh&Ungson,1991).

ThetransactionalmemorymodelwasdevelopedbyWegner,

Giuliano,andHertel(1985),Wegner(1987),Wegner,Erber,and

Raymond(1991),BarnierandSutton(2008).Integratedthe

infor-mationretainedinmemoryofagroupintotwocomponents,the informationstoredbythemembersofthegroupintheirindividual memoriesandthedirectoriesheldbymembersofthegroupthat identiﬁedtheexistence,locationandrecoverymediathe informa-tionheldbyotherindividuals(Anandetal.,1998).

Themodelproposesthat theencoding, storageand retrieval ofinformationofthegroupareprovidedbyvarious communica-tioninteractionsortransactionsbetweenmembersofthegroup. Theinformationstoredinthememoriesofindividualmembersof thegroupcanbegroupedintointernalandexternalcomponents. Theinternalcomponentconsistsofinformationknownpersonally bythemembersofthegroup.Theexternalcomponentconsistsof information,notknownpersonallybythemembers,butthatcan beretrievedwhenneeded(Anandetal.,1998).

Organizationalimprovisationdependsnotonlyonwhat hap-pensbutalsoaboutthetemporalorderinwhichthingshappen.The timeintervalbetweeneventstendstothecompositionandlimit convergeswiththeimplementation(Moorman &Miner, 1998). Whentheimprovisationalactivityinvolvessomedegreeof inno-vation, happens when the activity goes beyond the automatic repetitionofanexistingroutine(Vera&Crossan,2004).

Thememoryissuggestedtoanalysecollectiveimprovisation

(Cohen, 1991; Huber, 1991; Walsh & Ungson, 1991).

Procedu-ral memory is a memory “forhow things are done” (Cohen &

Bacdayan, 1994) or memory to “things you can do” (Berliner,

2009).Thus, theproceduralmemoryinvolvesskillsor routines, oftenrepresentstacitknowledgeforindividualsandorganizations

(Cohen &Bacdayan,1994; Cohen,1991; Nonaka,1990; Winter,

1987).

Declarative memory in improvisation is “memory for facts, eventsorpropositions”(Anderson,1983;Cohen,1991).So,unlike proceduralmemoryinvolvesthememoryofroutineorskill,the declarativememorymaybemoregeneral.Consideringthe

sugges-tionofAnderson(1983)inthedeclarativeknowledgestemsfrom

abaseoftransferbetweendifferentusesofthesameknowledge. Theorganizationalproceduralanddeclarativememoryshows effectsonresultsofimprovisation.It issuggestedthat the pro-ceduralmemorymustenhancetheimprovisation,efﬁciencyand speed,reducingyournews.Declarativememory,however,should

increasetheeffectivenessoforganizationalcorrelationandnovelty, whilereducesyourspeed(Moorman&Miner,1998).

Knowledgeﬂowsandbusinessperformance

Consideringthetheoryofresources(RBV),thecompanyisa uniquesetoffeaturesandcapabilitiesthatcansustainyour com-petitiveadvantage(Barney,1991;Mahoney,2001;Peteraf,1993;

Wernerfelt,1984).Whenresourcesarevaluable,rare,inimitable,

andirreplaceable,cangeneratesustainedcompetitiveadvantage

(Barney,1991).Thestockofthecompany’sassetsresultsof

strate-giesofchoicesmadeovertimebyitsmanagers,sospeciﬁc,strategic spendingshouldbeviewedasinvestmentsinstrategicassets(Hall,

Griliches,&Hausman,1984;Telser,1961).Thefocusonresources

andstrategicassetshasledtoanextensionofRBV,towardsthe knowledge-basedopinionoftheﬁrm(KBV).Thus,knowledgeis thestrategicallymostimportantintangibleresourceofthe

com-pany(Spender&Grant,1996).Howthecompanycreates,transfers

andusesknowledge,manufacturesimpactsonyourperformance andyourabilitytocompetewithinasector(Grant,1996;Nonaka,

Byosiere,Borucki,&Konno,1994;Nonaka,1994;Spender&Grant,

1996).

Themodelofstocksandflowsoforganizationalknowledgeis animportantcontributiontoKBV(DeCarolis&Deeds,1999).The modelhassignificantvalueinthemanagementofacompany,as itoffersconcreteideasaboutaprofileofstrategicinvestmentsin knowledge,tosucceed in each sector.Themodel ofstocksand flowsofknowledgeprovidesacompetitiveadvantagedependson thecontinuousaccumulationofstocksofknowledge(DeCarolis&

Deeds,1999).Erden,Klang,Sydler,andvonKrogh(2014)develop

a studythat testsa newmodel in biopharmaceuticcompanies, showinghowtheflowofknowledgehasanimpactonthe com-pany’sperformanceandresults.Theresultsofthestudyshowthat managerstoavoidperformancelossesmustmakeaprudent invest-mentinR&D,strategicalliancesthatimprovethequalityofservices andmaygranttothecompanyabetterfinancialperformance.To tryastrategyofpursuingvariousalliances,thismayprovetobe moreeffective,togetbetteranddifferenttypesofknowledgeflows

(Erdenetal.,2014).

Theﬂowofknowledgeandinformationstoredarecentralissues formanyauthorsrangingfromtheresource-basedview(Barney, 2001)forfeatures andcapabilities(Eisenhardt &Martin,2000a;

Grant,1996),learningorganization(Huber,1991;March,Sproull,

&Tamuz, 1991),or socio-cognitiveapproaches (Akgün, Lynn,&

Byrne,2003).Theselinesofactionrecognizetheﬂowsof

infor-mationandmemoryasrelatedconceptsembeddedinabroader approachtoorganizationallearning.Knowledgestocksandﬂows ofinformation arethetwoentriestotheprocesses (acquisition ofinformation,dissemination,interpretation,useandstorage)of organizationallearning(Kyriakopoulos&deRuyter,2004). Orga-nizationalmemoryconsideredasastrategy,gainfocusonprocesses

(Hargadon&Sutton,1997).The“ﬁveinternalBins”,thatcontribute

totheeaseoforganizationalmemoryretention,varyingonyour abilitytoretaininformationdecision(Walsh&Ungson,1991),or theshapesassociatedwithmemoryretention(Moorman&Miner, 1998)Inadditiontothestoredknowledge,gatherandusethe infor-mationfortheinnovationinprocessisalsoimportant,accordingto theinformationofproductinnovationandresearchontheadoption ofinnovations(Rogers,1985).Informationfrominternalsources mirrorsexistingassumptionsand,thus,thescopeofinformation will probably belimited to theset of partners or competitors, orsupplychainoforganization(Huber,1991;Day,1994).Access toexternalsources, instead,can providenewcontextsof infor-mationchallengingtheassumptionsestablished(Kyriakopoulos&

deRuyter,2004).Internalinformationﬂowsoccurwhenateam

(4)

includinginternalexperts,orR&Dorthesalesforce(Huber,1991). Thetransmissionofinformationtotheteamhasbeennotedasa factorinthepositiveimpactoncompanyperformance(Jaworski&

Kohli,1993;Katz&Tushman,1981;Moorman,1995).The

investi-gationshowedthatthepartiesexternalinformationhasapositive impactonﬁnancialperformance or innovationin thecompany

(Jaworski&Kohli,1993;Katz&Tushman,1981;Moorman,1995).

KyriakopoulosanddeRuyter(2004)establishedinyourwork

acurvilinearrelationshipbetweenproceduralmemoryandnew resultsontheproduct,aswellasapositiverelationshipbetween declarative memory and financial performance. This approach allowsyoutoisolatetheeffectoftwodifferenttypesofmemory. Theroleofmemorysuchasrecording,file,recentproductreview objectivesandmanagementmeasuressupportdeclarativememory arenotlinkedtopreviousdefinitionsoftheconceptofdeclarative memory(Kyriakopoulos&deRuyter,2004).Internalinformation flowstoenhancefinancialsuccess,howeveralsorestrictthe cre-ativityinthepresenceofstrongproceduralmemory.Inaddition, whileexternalinformationflowspromotebothfinancialsuccess andcreativity,alsodiminishthecreativityinthepresenceofstrong proceduralmemory(Kyriakopoulos&deRuyter,2004).Theauthors underscore the importance of designing memory systems that allowlessuseofstandardproceduralmemory,aswellastherapid deploymentofdeclarativememory.Companiescanuseprocedural memorytoaccesspriorknowledgeGeneralandquicklyuseitin newapplications(Kyriakopoulos&deRuyter,2004).

HumanResourceManagement(HRM)playsakeyrolein help-ingtoachieveorganizationaldesiredresultsthroughyourpossible weightonthebehaviourand employeeskills(Bowen&Ostroff, 2004).Sotheperspective ofknowledge and HRMappear tobe highlycomplementaryapproaches,and integratethemmustbe apriorityontheagendaofanyinvestigation(Minbaeva,Foss,&

Snell,2009).Thus,organizationsobtainefﬁcientvaluebymanaging

theirknowledge,atthesametime,astheygeneratenew knowl-edgeorcreativecombinationsofexistingknowledge,leadingto newproductsorservices(Ebbers&Wijnberg,2009).

Organizationallearningasadynamiccapabilities,collaborative practicesorHumanResourceManagement(HRM)

Theindividualperspectivebasedontheinvestigationof individ-uallearningisdevelopedby(Shrivastava,1983).Severalmodels have emerged pointing the individual learning processes and transferredlatertotheorganizationallearning.Fernandes(2007)

considerstwoperspectivescanbeidentiﬁedinindividuallearning approach:behaviouriststheoriesandcognitivetheories.

ArgyrisandSchon(1978)concludethatthereisno

organiza-tionallearningwithoutindividuallearning,whereasorganizations onlylearnthankstotheexperiences andactionsof individuals. However,itmaybethatindividualslearnandnotanorganization.

Simon(1991)alsoemphasizedtheindividualroleintheprocesses

ofknowledge,pointsoutthatalltheorganizationallearningthis on“headoftheindividual”(Ipe,2003;Simon,1991).InTable1we developtwolinesofthelearningorganizationandorganizational learning.

Organizationallearningit’sseenasadynamicprocess,basedon knowledge.It’stranslatedthroughthevariouslevelsofaction,from theindividualleveltothegroupandorganizationallevel, retak-ingtheinitialprocess(Crossan,Lane,&White,1999;Jerez-Gomez,

2005;Simon,1991).Consideringthedynamiccapabilities,the

orga-nizationallearningconceptcanbetreatedashowtoincorporate dynamiccapabilitiesintheinternalprocessesofthecompany.In historicalperspective,organizationallearningiswellrecognizedas anessentialelementforsustainedcompetitiveness.Theimpactof dynamiccapabilitiesinthecompany’sperformanceis mediated

by internalprocesses within theorganization or more tangible resourcesthat can bereconﬁgured by thedynamic capabilities

(Giniuniene&Jurksiene,2015).

Eisenhardt and Martin (2000b) suggest that dynamic

capa-bilitiesbecomemoreevident throughthelearning processthat generatesnewknowledge.Consideringtheinternalenvironment ofthecompany,organizationallearningisoneofthemain inter-nalprocesseswithintheorganization,contributestomediatethe relationshipbetweendynamiccapabilitiesandperformanceofthe company(Eisenhardt&Martin,2000b).Theresourceandthe abil-itytochangedeﬁnesthedynamiccapabilitiesandcanmanifest themselvesthroughprocessesoforganizationallearning(Breznik

&Hisrich,2014).Inthisway,thedynamiccapabilitiesthroughthe

mediationoforganizationallearningprocessesbecomethemain sourceofcompetitiveadvantage(Shane&Venkataraman,2000).

The positive impact of organizational learning and dynamic capabilities, in the performance of the company, is also medi-atedby innovation(Giniuniene &Jurksiene,2015).Breznikand

Hisrich(2014) arguethat innovation isa result of thelearning

process.Otherauthorsalsosuggestthatorganizationalknowledge, andorganizationallearning,allowthestrengtheningofinnovation throughtheacquisition,sharing,developmentandtransformation ofknowledge(Huber,1991;Jiménez-Jiménez&Sanz-Valle,2011). Collaborative practices of HRM refer to a set of practices intendedtoencouragetheexchangeofknowledgebetweenthe variousmembersofanorganization.Theyincludetheselectionof candidateswithskillsofteamwork,enablingthesharingof knowl-edge tosolveproblemsor create newideasand organizational incentives to achieve group results. Organizational knowledge referstotheamountofexperienceandinformationaccumulated duringthelifeofacompanythatcanbebroughtoncurrent

activi-ties(Moorman&Miner,1997).

Knowledgeandinformationareusuallyfoundindifferent indi-viduals.Thismeansthatorganizationsmustconsideryourmain objectiveasincreasingthecapacityofindividualsand organiza-tionalknowledgeenhancers,whichwillinvolvethedevelopment ofstrictstrategicmanagementofpeople(Theriou&Chatzoglou, 2009).Encourageinternalcollaborationbetweenthemembersof anorganizationcanbeapowerfulresourceforthegenerationof organizationalknowledge,asinteractionallowstheknowledgeof severalindividualstobecombined,whichisessentialforthe con-versionofknowledgeindividualincollectiveknowledge.

Nieves,Quintana,andOsorio(2016)inyourstudyanalysethe

resultsofinnovationinserviceorganizations,combiningtwo the-oreticalapproaches:HRMandperspectiveofknowledge.Although HRMandknowledgeofresourceshavebeenstudiedin knowledge-intensiveserviceorganizations,fewstudieshaveaddressedthese constructsinotherorganizationsintheservicesector.The objec-tiveof thisstudywastohelpsolvethisempiricalgapandthus contributetotheknowledgeabout driversof innovationinthe field of services. The results show the important role of the collaborativepracticesofHRMinnovationactivityofhotel com-panies.These practices ofproduct innovationinfluencedirectly andindirectly,butdonothaveadirectinfluenceontheinnovation process.

Managers should payspecial attention tothe more general knowledgeassociatedwiththecontextoftheﬁrm,asitsupportsthe introductionofvarioustypesofinnovation.Bothtypesof knowl-edgecanbeencouragedbyasetofcollaborativepracticesofHRM

(Nievesetal.,2016).

Therelationship betweenlearning and organizational mem-orypointedoutthatorganizationalmemoryisaconsequenceof organizationallearning.Therefore,wecanconsiderorganizational learningastheprocessandorganizationalmemoryasthe corre-spondingoutput(Huang, 2013;Huang, Chuang,&Cheri, 2016).

(5)

Table1

Organizationallearningversuslearningorganizationorlearner.

Mainlinesandtheoriesoforganizationallearning Authors Mainlinesandtheoriesoflearningorganization Authors

Theprocessoforganizationallearningenables

organizationstochangedecision-making

rules,introducingamodelthatisresponsible

forchangesinorganizationscausingchanges

indevelopmentalstages.

(Cyert&March,

1963)

Proposesakindoforganizationhecalledlearnerorganization, characterizedbyhavingmoresuccessthanother

organizations,learningfaster,showingacapacitytoadaptby creatingfuturealternatives.Theﬁvedisciplinesforbuilding learningorganizations:(i)systemicthinking,showingthe globalandcollectivethinking,pointingouttheperceptionsof theOrganization;(ii)personaldomain,valuingthereal personalaspirations,withmoreopentoothers,takinginto accountthecommitmentandthegrowthoftheOrganization; (iii)mentalmodelsbyencouragingpeopletoputasidetheold waysofthinking;(iv)thesharedvision,promotingplansin whichallparticipateandagree,and(v)grouplearning, involvingworkteams,allowsgroupstocreateamindsetthat followstheprinciplesofeachMember

(Senge,1990;Kofman

&Senge,1993)

Theprocessoforganizationallearning,the simpleleveloforganizationallearning, enablingtheOrganizationtodetectthe errorsandﬁxthem,wherebodieshavethe capacitytomaintainstabilityinchanging contexts.Themostcomplexlevel, double-looplearningisproposed,which allowsthedetectionoferrorsandstrategies, andalsorelatetheseerrorswiththenorms thatputintoquestionthefunctioningofthe organization.Knownasthetheoriesof action.

(Argyris,1977;

Argyris&Schon,

1978;Argyris&

Schon,1996)

Theperspectiveofsystemicthinking,proposethree characteristicssothatthelearningorganizationsmaintaina highyield:thecommitmenttoknowledge;themechanismof renewalandopennessinrelationtotheexternalenvironment

(Mills&Friesen,1992)

Foursituationsthatreﬂecttheorganizational learning:(i)afewcognitiveandbehavioral changes;(ii)afewchangestothecognitive levelandmajorchangestothebehavioral level;(iii)majorchangesandfewcognitive behavioralchangesand(iv)majorchangesto thecognitivelevelandmajorchangestothe behaviorallevel,wherecompaniescanlearn morequickly.

(Fiol&Lyles,1985) Thestrategicperspectivethatconsidersthatlearning

organizationshavemoreideasthanotherorganizations.The learneristheorganizationabletogenerate,acquireand transferknowledgebychangingyourbehaviour

(Garvin,1993)

Proposesandidentifiesthedifficultiesthat organizationsaretodevelopnewlearning, identifiesseventypesofdifficulties identifiedinthemanagers:(i)mistaken identity;(ii)avoidassumingresponsibilities; (iii)donotfaceimmediateproblems;(iv) analyzeeventson;(v)nervousness;(vi)lack ofinformationaboutdecisions;(vii) involvementinpowerrelations

(Senge,1990;

Senge,

Cambron-McCabe,

Lucas,Smith,&

Dutton,2012)

Inductivetypologyoflearningorganizationbasedonfour possibleunderstandingsandcharacterizationsoflearner organization:theorganizationallearningandlearningatwork, emphasizingtheprocessesinorganizations;thelearning climateandstructureasformsoforganization

(Örtenblad,2002)

Organizationallearningprocesses:(i) acquisitionofknowledge,thewayitis obtained;(ii)distributionofinformation; (iii)interpretationoftheinformationand (iv)theorganizationalmemory,asthe informationsharingprocess,isthetransition fromtheindividualleveltothecollectiveby buildingorganizationalmemory

(Huber,1991) TheDimensionsoftheLearningOrganizationQuestionnaire

(DLOQ),asaninstrumentofmeasurementwherechangemust occuratalllevels,individual,group,organizationaland engaging,improvingperformance.severalstudiesthat measurethedimensionsoflearnerorganizationorganizations, demonstratedacorrelationbetweenthedimensionsandthe knowledgeandﬁnancialperformance,basedonalackof individuals.Somestudieshavedemonstratedandvalidated theDLOQ,wherethedimensionsoforganizationalculture explainthevarianceoftheresultsintheknowledgeand ﬁnancialperformancevariables

(Watkins&Marsick,

1993;Hernandez,

2003;Marsick&

Watkins,2003;Yang,

2003;Yang,Watkins,&

Marsick,2004;Song,

Joo,&Chermack,2009;

Menezes,Guimarães,&

Bido,2011;Mbassana,

2014)

Ownsource.

Organizationalmemoryprocessesincludetheacquisition, preser-vation,maintenanceandrecovery(Stein&Zwass,1995).

Methodology

Thisstudyfollowedamethodologyofasystematicreviewof theliterature(Wright,Brand,Dunn,&Spindler,2007).Twostudies wereelaboratedwithdifferentresearchequationswiththetermsof OrganizationalLearning,KnowledgeandOrganizationalMemory. Inthefirststudy(S1)weusedasearchequationwiththeterms “OrganizationalLearning”and“knowledge”asresearchtopicsin WebofKnowledge,wefound1582resultsappliedtothesearch filters,byresearchareas,sotheareawaschosenbusinesseconomy with1335referencesofscientificarticles.

In the second study (S2), we used a search equation with the terms “Organizational Memory” as a search topic (Jenkin,

Madhvani, Signal, &Bowers, 2014).We found1716 resultsfor

searchﬁltersbysearcharea,sowechosetheareaofsocialsciences with1176referencesofscientiﬁcarticlesinWebofKnowledge. Withstudy1andstudy2,analyzeswereperformedusingthe soft-wareNvivoandVOSviewer,basedontherepetitionandsimilarity oftermsandwords.

Duringouranalysis,theitemswerecopied/senttotheEndNote X8software,articlesfromstudy1andstudy2.Duplicates were eliminated,andthetitlesandabstractsofthescientiﬁcpaperswere analyzed,consideringtheresearchobjectivesandquality(Q1,Q2 andQ3),resultinginatotalof289articlesandreferences(Jenkin etal.,2014).Atthisstage,theScopusdatabasewasalsoincluded. 57 articleswere chosen, which were analyzed considering the

(6)

Fig.1. Totalofcitationspertheyearof1335articlesanalyzed(1991–2017). Source:WebofScience.

conceptsoftheﬁeldofstudyandaconceptualsynthesisbetween theoreticalandempiricalarticles(Wrightetal.,2007).

Aftersynthesizingthemesandanalyzingtextsofscientiﬁc arti-cles,atotalof95referencesexamined,treatedandreferencedin thisstudy(Jenkinetal.,2014)resultedinthepresentstudy.The includedarticles,whichwereaddedinviewofthequalitycriteria toreinforcetheconcepts,constructednewequationswiththemain theme“OrganizationalLearning”,“knowledge”and“organizational memory”.

Datacollection

Inthefirststudy(S1)wefound1582resultsappliedtothesearch filters,byresearchareas,sowaschosentheareaofbusiness eco-nomicswith1335referencesofscientificarticles.Fig.1showsthe totalnumberofcitationsperyearintheperiodof1991–2017.

Withthehelpof theVOSviewersoftware,an analysisbased onthetitlesandabstractsofauthors.Basedonthetotalcountof words,withtheoccurrenceofrepetitionexceeds10,VOSviewer wereselectedinatotalof26termswithaviewtosplittingwords inassociationforclusters.So,5clustershavebeendetectedwith itemsidentiﬁedinTable2.

Thenetworkingoftheclustersandthevisualizationofdensity peritemwereanalyzed,canbeseeninFig.2.

Through,NVivosoftwarewasalsomadeananalysisbasedon exactmatchof100wordsmorerepeatedwords,Fig.3.

Table2

DivisionoftermsforclustersbyAssociation.VOSviewerSource.

Cluster1 Cluster2 Cluster3 Cluster4 Cluster5

Firm Process Article Case Learning

Innovation Paper Concept Effect Model

Knowledge Project Framework Experience

Management Relationship Knowledge

Management

Learning Organization

Strategy Research Organizational

Learning

Organization

Study Role Practice

Theory

Basedonthefrequencyof25mostrepeatedwords,acluster

analysiswaselaborated,illustratedinFig.4.Basedonthisdivision

byclusters,thekeywordsofthisarticlewerechosenandarticulated thefollowingthematicareasofliteraturereviewwerecompared thetwoclustersoptionsintwodifferentprogramsandanalyzed thepiecharthavingbycriterionthecoefﬁcientofPearsonshown inFig.4.

In thesecond study(S2) withtheconcept of organizational memory,wefound1716resultsappliedtothesearchﬁlters,by researchareas,sowaschosentheareaofSocialScienceswith1176 referencesofscientiﬁcarticles.Weanalyzethetotalpublications andnumberofcitationsperyearintheperiodof1991–2017.

WiththehelpoftheVOSviewersoftware,ananalysisbasedon thetitlesandabstractsofauthors1176articlesfromtheﬁeldof study.Basedonthetotalcountofwords,withtheoccurrenceof repetitionexceeds10,VOSviewerwereselectedinatotal of22 termswithaviewtosplittingwordsinassociationforclusters.So, 3clustershavebeendetected5.Thenetworkingoftheclustersand thevisualizationofdensityperitemisillustratedinFig.5.

Through,NVivosoftwarewasalsomadeananalysisbasedon exactmatchof100wordsmorerepeatedwords.

Results

Inthecontinuationofouranalysis,wecomparedandcontrasted ourresultsinstudy1(S1)andstudy2(S2)consideringtheobjective oftheresearch.

Researchonorganizationallearninghasbeenunder develop-mentsincethe1960swhilethisstudyconveystheexpansionin thisﬁeldofstudyespeciallysince2009.

Fig.2. Visualizationofthedensityofeachitem. Source:VOSviewer.

(7)

Fig.3. 100exactlymostrepeatedwords. Source:NVIVO. Firms Processes Systems Innovation Product Role Transfer Learning Organizational Knowledge Management Organizations Study Information Based Research Organization Firms New Process Technology Development Performance Strategic Model Role T ransf er Lear n ing Organizational Kno wledge Management Organizations Study Information Based Research Organization Fir ms Ne w Process T echnology De velopment Model Perf ormance Strategic Firm Processes Systems Inno vation Product

Fig.4. Clusteranalysis,thefrequencyof25mostrepeatedwords,thePearson cor-relationcoefﬁcient.

Source:NVIVO.

Intheperiodanalyzedbetween1991and2016,thetotalnumber ofcitationsof1335publicationsalsoincreasedsteadilytoreach anoveralltotalof40,248articlescitations(39,250excludingthe citationsthemselves).

Fortheperiodunderreview,thethreecountrieswithmore pub-licationstheUSAwith36%ofthegroupofscientiﬁcarticles,England with9.8%followedbySpainwithaboutof7.8%.Thejournalswith morepublicationswere:ManagementLearning4.8%;Organization Sciencewith3.6%;IndustrialMarketingManagementwith2.4%and StrategicManagementJournalwith2.3%.

Knowledgemanagementspanstheprocessesofcreation, stor-age,accessanddisseminationoftheintellectualresourcesofan organization.Whenresourcesarevaluable,rare,inimitable,and irreplaceable, they are able to generate sustained competitive advantage.

Thereisnoindividualorganizational learningwhereas orga-nizations only learn thanks to the experiences and actions of individuals.Theabilityofanorganizationtouseandleverageits knowledgeisheavilydependentonitsHumanResources,which areeffectivelythosewhocreate,shareandusethatknowledge.

Thestockofknowledgestemsfromtheresults,asassetsofthe company,andfromthestrategicchoices madeover timebyits managers.Thefocusonresourcesandstrategicassetshasledtoan extensionofthetheoryoforganizationalresources(RBV),towards knowledge-basedopinionsofﬁrms(KBV).Thus,knowledgeisthe moststrategicallyimportantintangibleresourceofanycompany.

Knowledgeissustainedbysharingandsupportingtechnologies. Theprocessesandconstructions,theinterconnectionsbetweenthe acquisitionsof knowledge alignwithits distributionand inter-pretationwhileretentiontakesplacethroughtheorganizational memory.Networksandknowledgeflowssurroundknowledgeand learningaswellasorganizationallearningasadynamiccapability. Knowledgeandlearning,framedbytheirmanagementandsharing, determinethecreationofnewknowledge.Technologiestoenable betteraccesstoinformationandprovidebetteridentificationof organizationalorganizations,thusfacilitatingthestudyofsocial networksandknowledgeflows.

Themostrepeatedandusedtermsandwordsintheﬁrststudy wereaggregatedintoﬁveclustersofassociation,withtheterms “organizationallearning”and “knowledge”displayingthe great-est densityor the highest exact repetition ofwords. Following the terms “organization”, “knowledge management”, “process”,

Knowledge Process Memory Effect Experiment Study Paper Organizational learning Organization Organizational memory Research Role Theory Article Evidence Knowledge management VOSviewer

Fig.5.Visualizationofthedensityofeachitem. Source:VOSviewer.

(8)

“study”and“learningorganization”mayalsoserveaskeywords andasequationsforfutureresearchinthisﬁeldofstudy.

Ourresultssuggestthatthetwogrowingtheoreticallines con-tinues toexist in thepresent state-of-the-art, we suggest as a synthesisforfuturestudiesworksonthemaintrendsandevolution, theworksandauthorspresentedinTable1.

Thestructureoftheorganizationalmemoryappearslinkedto information processes, acquisition, retention and recovery. The informationstoredinthememoriesofindividualmembersofthe groupcanbegroupedintointernalandexternalcomponents.

Knowledgeandinformationareusuallyfoundindifferent indi-viduals.Thismeansthatorganizationsmustconsideryourmain objectiveasincreasingthecapacityofindividuals and organiza-tionalknowledgeenhancers,whichwillinvolvethedevelopment ofstrictstrategicmanagementofpeople.

Weemphasizetheimportantroleofthecollaborativepractices ofHRMinnovationactivity.Managersshouldpayspecialattention tothemoregeneralknowledgeassociatedwiththecontextofthe ﬁrm,asitsupportstheintroductionofvarioustypesofinnovation. Bothtypesofknowledgecanbeencouragedbyasetofcollaborative practicesofHRM.

Conclusions

Themainaimof thisresearchis tounderstandthelink and evolutionbetweentheconceptsofknowledgemanagement, orga-nizationallearningandmemory.Seekingabetterclariﬁcationof concepts,discussingtheminthetheoreticalﬁeld,understanding theirevolutioninthelastdecades.

Thisworkwasdividedintotwomajoranalyzesexploringthree conceptsthatareinterconnectedintheresearch.Thisworkalso followsotherempiricalstudieswheretheauthorsneededto ana-lyzethethreemainconcepts(OrganizationalLearning,Knowledge andMemory)theirevolutionandinterconnectioninthecontext ofbusiness organizations. Toachieve this, we dida systematic reviewoftheliterature.Twodatabaseswerechosen.Weanalyzed atotal(S1+S2)of2511scientiﬁcarticlesbetween1960and2017, betweentheoreticalandempiricalarticles.

Theresearchonorganizationallearninghasdevelopedsincethe 1960s,asevidencedinthisworkinrecentyears,peakingmainly from2009.Itisnecessarytoanalyzeanddiagnosethecurrentstate ofanorganizationandguidethechange,exploringthe organiza-tionallearningandthememory,knowledgeandperformanceof thecompany.

Anorganization’sabilitytouseandleverageknowledgeishighly dependentonitshumanresources,whicheffectivelycreate,share, and usethat knowledge. HumanResource Management(HRM) playsakeyroleinhelpingachievethedesiredorganizationalresults throughits possiblebearing onemployeebehaviour andskills; organizationsgain efﬁcientvaluebymanagingknowledge, gen-eratingnewknowledgeorcreativecombinations.Fromexisting knowledgeleadingtonewproductsorservices.

Thereisnoindividualorganizationallearning,however, orga-nizations only learn thanks to the experiences and actions of individuals. The focus on resources and strategic assets led to anextensionoforganizationalresourcetheory(RBV)towardthe knowledge-basedenterprise(KBV).Thus,knowledgeisthemost strategicallyimportantintangibleresourceofthecompany.The technologiessupportthesharingofinformation,providingthebest identiﬁcationoforganizationalstrategies,facilitatingthestudyof socialnetworksandknowledgeﬂows.

Thestructureoforganizationalmemoryappearstobelinkedto processesofinformation,acquisition,retentionandretrieval. Orga-nizationalmemoryisdeﬁnedasorganizationsstoreknowledgefor futureuse.Itreplacesthelostknowledgegainedbyexperience,

createsnew challenges. The concept of organizational memory clariﬁesthelocusoforganizationalmemory,itsretentionstructure, acquisition,storageandretrievalprocesses.Theuseofmemorywill consequentlyinﬂuencetheperformanceandresultsofthe organi-zation.

Organizationalimprovisationdependsnotonlyonwhat hap-pensbutalsoonthetemporalorderinwhichthingshappen.When theimprovisationactivityinvolvessomedegreeofinnovation,it happenswhenthisactivitygoesbeyondtheautomaticrepetition ofanexistingroutine.

Organizationsshouldconsidertheirmainobjectiveas increas-ing the capacity of individuals and organizational knowledge promoters,whichwillinvolvethedevelopmentofstrictstrategic managementofpeople.Encouraginginternalcollaborationamong membersofanorganizationcanbeapowerfulresourcefor gen-eratingorganizationalknowledgebecauseinteractionallowsthe knowledgeofseveralindividualstobecombined,whichisessential fortheconversionofindividualknowledgeintocollective knowl-edge.

Managers should payspecial attention tothe more general knowledgeassociatedwiththecompanycontextasitsupportsthe introductionofvarioustypesofinnovation.Bothtypesof knowl-edgecanbeencouragedbyasetofcollaborativeHRMpractices.

Therelationship betweenlearning and organizational mem-oryhaspointedoutthatorganizationalmemoryisaconsequence oforganizationallearning. Therefore,wecanconsider organiza-tional learning as a process and organizational memory asthe correspondingoutput.Organizationalmemoryprocessesinclude acquisition,preservation,maintenance,andretrieval.

Limitations

Thestudyhascertainlimitations.Inadditiontothelimitations inherentinthistypeofstudy,arethenumberofarticlesreviewed andconsulteddatabases,aswellastheequationsandsearchﬁlters, whichledtotheresults.

Futureresearch

Infutureresearch,wesuggestedgreaterevidenceofempirical studiesinorganizations,positioninganddifferentactivitysectors, aswellasgroupsof employees.Also,suggestsfurther develop-mentofinstrumentsformeasurementoforganizationallearning, adaptedconsiderablytothehumanelementwithitsown charac-teristics.

Wealsoconsiderimportantcasestudiesonhoworganizations usememoryasavehicleorlearning,unlearningandrelearning.

References

Akgün,A.E.,Lynn,G.S.,&Byrne,J.C.(2003).Organizationallearning:A

socio-cognitiveframework.HumanRelations,56(7),839–868.

Anand,V.,Manz,C.C.,&Glick,W.H.(1998).Anorganizationalmemoryapproach: Toinformationmanagement.AcademyofManagementReview,23(4),796–809.

http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/259063

Anderson,J.(1983).Cognitivescienceseries.Thearchitectureofcognition.Hillsdale,

NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.

Andrews,K.M.,&Delahaye,B.L.(2000).Inﬂuencesonknowledgeprocessesin organizationallearning:Thepsychosocialﬁlter.JournalofManagementStudies, 37(6),797–810.http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00204

Argote,L.(2013).Organizationlearning:Atheoreticalframeworkorganizational

learning.pp.31–56.Springer.

Argyris,C.(1977).Doublelooplearninginorganizations.HarvardBusinessReview,

55(5),115–125.

Argyris,C.,&Schon,D.(1978).Organizaionallearning;atheoryofactionperspective.

RetrievedfromMassachusetts.

Argyris,C.,&Schon,D.A.(1996).OrganizationallearningII:Theory,method,and

pratice(A.-W.P.CompanyEd.).Addison-WesleyPublishingCompany.

Barney,J.(1991).Firmresourcesandsustainedcompetitiveadvantage.Journalof

(9)

Barney,J.B.(2001).Resource-basedtheoriesofcompetitiveadvantage:Aten-year

retrospectiveontheresource-basedview.JournalofManagement,27(6),

643–650.

Barnier,A.J.,&Sutton,J.(2008).Fromindividualtocollectivememory:Theoretical

andempiricalperspectives.

Berliner,P.F.(2009).Thinkinginjazz:Theinﬁniteartofimprovisation.Universityof

ChicagoPress.

Bowen,D.E.,&Ostroff,C.(2004).UnderstandingHRM–Firmperformance

linkages:Theroleofthe“strength”oftheHRMsystem.Academyof

ManagementReview,29(2),203–221.

Breznik,L.,&D.Hisrich,R.(2014).Dynamiccapabilitiesvs.innovationcapability:

Aretheyrelated?JournalofSmallBusinessandEnterpriseDevelopment,21(3),

368–384.

Cohen,M.D.(1991).Individuallearningandorganizationalroutine:Emerging

connections.OrganizationScience,2(1),135–139.

Cohen,M.D.,&Bacdayan,P.(1994).Organizationalroutinesarestoredas

proceduralmemory:Evidencefromalaboratorystudy.OrganizationScience,

5(4),554–568.

Cox,M.,Irby,D.M.,&Bowen,J.L.(2006).Educationalstrategiestopromoteclinical

diagnosticreasoning.NewEnglandJournalofMedicine,355(21),2217–2225.

Cross,R.,Borgatti,S.P.,&Parker,A.(2002).Makinginvisibleworkvisible:Using

socialnetworkanalysistosupportstrategiccollaboration.California

Crossan,M.,Lane,H.W.,&White,R.E.(1999).Anorganizationallearning framework:Fromintuitiontoinstitution.AcademyofManagementReview, 24(3),522–537.http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.1999.2202135

Cyert,R.M.,&March,J.G.(1963).Abehavioraltheoryoftheﬁrm.EnglewoodCliffs,

NJ.pp.2.

Day,G.S.(1994).Thecapabilitiesofmarket-drivenorganizations.Journalof

Marketing,37–52.

DeGeus,A.P.(1988).Planningaslearning.HarvardBusinessReview,70–74.

DeCarolis,D.M.,&Deeds,D.L.(1999).Theimpactofstocksandﬂowsof

organizationalknowledgeonﬁrmperformance:Anempiricalinvestigationof

thebiotechnologyindustry.StrategicManagementJournal,20(10),953–968.

Devezas,T.C.,Linstone,H.A.,&Santos,H.J.S.(2007).ThegrowthoftheInternet,

longwaves,andglobalchange.GlobalizationasEvolutionaryProcess:Modeling

GlobalChange,310–335.

Dunham,A.H.,&Burt,C.D.(2011).Organizationalmemoryandempowerment.

JournalofKnowledgeManagement,15(5),851–868.

Ebbers,J.J.,&Wijnberg,N.M.(2009).Organizationalmemory:Fromexpectations

memorytoproceduralmemory.BritishJournalofManagement,20(4),478–490.

Eisenhardt,K.M.,&Martin,J.A.(2000a).Dynamiccapabilities:Whatarethey?

StrategicManagementJournal,21(10–11),1105–1121.

Eisenhardt,K.M.,&Martin,J.A.(2000b).Dynamiccapabilities:Whatarethey?

StrategicManagementJournal,1105–1121.

Erden,Z.,VonKrogh,G.,&Nonaka,I.(2008).Thequalityofgrouptacitknowledge.

JournalofStrategicInformationSystems,17(1),4–18.

Erden,Z.,Klang,D.,Sydler,R.,&vonKrogh,G.(2014).Knowledge-ﬂowsandﬁrm performance.JournalofBusinessResearch,67(1),2777–2785.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.09.001

Fernandes,A.(2007).Tipologiadaaprendizagemorganizacional.Teoriaseestudos.

Lisboa.LivrosHorizonte.

Fiol,C.M.,&Lyles,M.A.(1985).Organizationallearning.AcademyofManagement Review,10(4),803–813.http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1985.4279103

Garcia-Perez,A.,&Ayres,R.(2009).Collaborativedevelopmentofknowledge

representations–Anovelapproachtoknowledgeelicitationandtransfer.

ElectronicJournalofKnowledgeManagement,7(1),55–62.

Garcia-Perez,A.,&Ayres,R.(2015).Wikifailure:Thelimitationsoftechnologyfor

knowledgesharing.LeadingIssuesinKnowledgeManagement,VolumeTwo,2,

242.

Garcia-Perez,A.,&Mitra,A.(2008).Tacitknowledgeelicitationandmeasurementin

researchorganisations:Amethodologicalapproach.

Garvin,D.A.(1993).Manufacturingstrategicplanning.CaliforniaManagement

Review,35(4),85.

Giniuniene,J.,&Jurksiene,L.(2015).Dynamiccapabilities,innovationand

organizationallearning:Interrelationsandimpactonﬁrmperformance.

Procedia-SocialandBehavioralSciences,213,985–991.

Grant,R.M.(1996).Towardaknowledge-basedtheoryoftheﬁrm.Strategic

ManagementJournal,17(S2),109–122.

Hall,B.H.,Griliches,Z.,&Hausman,J.A.(1984).PatentsandR&D:Istherealag?

Cambridge,MA,USA:NationalBureauofEconomicResearch.

Hargadon,A.,&Sutton,R.I.(1997).Technologybrokeringandinnovationina

productdevelopmentﬁrm.AdministrativeScienceQuarterly,716–749.

Hernandez,M.(2003).Assessingtacitknowledgetransferanddimensionsofa

learningenvironmentinColombianbusinesses.AdvancesinDevelopingHuman

Resources,5(2),215–221.

Huang,J.-J.(2013).Organizationalknowledge,learningandmemory–A perspectiveofanimmunesystem.KnowledgeManagementResearch&Practice, 11(3),230–240.http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2011.48

Huang,C.-C.,Chuang,H.-F.,&Cheri,S.-Y.(2016).Corporatememory:Designto betterreduce,reuseandrecycle.Computers&IndustrialEngineering,91,48–65.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2015.10.016

Huber,G.P.(1991).Organizationallearning:Thecontributingprocessesandthe

literatures.OrganizationScience,2(1),88–115.

Ipe,M.(2003).Knowledgesharinginorganizations:Aconceptualframework.

HumanResourceDevelopmentReview,2(4),337–359.

Jaworski,B.J.,&Kohli,A.K.(1993).Marketorientation:Antecedentsand

consequences.JournalofMarketing,53–70.

Jenkin,G.,Madhvani,N.,Signal,L.,&Bowers,S.(2014).Asystematicreviewof

persuasivemarketingtechniquestopromotefoodtochildrenontelevision.

ObesityReviews,15(4),281–293.

Jerez-Gomez,P.,Cespedes-Lorente,J.,&Valle-Cabrera,R.(2005).Organizational learningcapability:Aproposalofmeasurement.JournalofBusinessResearch, 58(6),715–725.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2003.11.002

Jiménez-Jiménez,D.,&Sanz-Valle,R.(2011).Innovation,organizationallearning,

andperformance.JournalofBusinessResearch,64(4),408–417.

Katz,R.,&Tushman,M.(1981).Aninvestigationintothemanagerialrolesand

careerpathsofgatekeepersandprojectsupervisorsinamajorR&Dfacility.

R&DManagement,11(3),103–110.

Kofman,F.,&Senge,P.M.(1993).Communitiesofcommitment:Theheartof

learningorganizations.OrganizationalDynamics,22(2),5–23.

Kogut,B.,&Zander,U.(1992).Knowledgeoftheﬁrm,combinativecapabilities,and

thereplicationoftechnology.OrganizationScience,3(3),383–397.

Kyriakopoulos,K.,&deRuyter,K.(2004).Knowledgestocksandinformationﬂows innewproductdevelopment.JournalofManagementStudies,41(8),

1469–1498.http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00482.x

Levitt,B.,&March,J.G.(1988).Organizationallearning.AnnualReviewofSociology,

14(1),319–338.

Mahoney,J.T.(2001).Aresource-basedtheoryofsustainablerents.Journalof

Management,27(6),651–660.

March,J.G.,Sproull,L.S.,&Tamuz,M.(1991).Learningfromsamplesofoneor

fewer.OrganizationScience,2(1),1–13.

Marsick,V.J.,&Watkins,K.E.(2003).Demonstratingthevalueofanorganization’s

learningculture:Thedimensionsofthelearningorganizationquestionnaire.

AdvancesinDevelopingHumanResources,5(2),132–151.

Mbassana,M.E.(2014).Validatingthedimensionsofthelearningorganization

questionnaire(DLOQ)intheRwandancontext.EuropeanJournalofBusiness,

EconomicsandAccountancy,2,15–26.

Menezes,E.A.C.,Guimarães,T.d.A.,&Bido,D.d.S.(2011).Dimensionsoflearning

inorganizations:ValidationoftheDimensionsoftheLearningOrganization

Questionnaire(DLOQ)intheBraziliancontext.RAM.RevistadeAdministrac¸ão

Mackenzie,12(2),4–29.

Mills,D.Q.,&Friesen,B.(1992).Thelearningorganization.EuropeanManagement

Journal,10(2),146–156.

Minbaeva,D.,Foss,N.,&Snell,S.(2009).Bringingtheknowledgeperspectiveinto

HRM.HumanResourceManagement,48(4),477–483.

Moorman,C.(1995).Organizationalmarketinformationprocesses:Cultural

antecedentsandnewproductoutcomes.JournalofMarketingResearch,

318–335.

Moorman,C.,&Miner,A.S.(1997).Theimpactoforganizationalmemoryonnew

productperformanceandcreativity.JournalofMarketingResearch,91–106.

Moorman,C.,&Miner,A.S.(1998).Organizationalimprovisationand

organizationalmemory.AcademyofManagementReview,23(4),698–723.

Nielsen,B.B.,&Nielsen,S.(2009).Learningandinnovationininternational strategicalliances:Anempiricaltestoftheroleoftrustandtacitness.Journalof ManagementStudies,46(6),1031–1056.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00840.x

Nieves,J.,Quintana,A.,&Osorio,J.(2016).Organizationalknowledgeand collaborativehumanresourcepracticesasdeterminantsofinnovation. KnowledgeManagementResearch&Practice,14(3),237–245.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2014.26

Nonaka,I.(1990).Redundant,overlappingorganization:AJapaneseapproachto

managingtheinnovationprocess.CaliforniaManagementReview,32(3),

27–38.

Nonaka,I.(1994).Adynamictheoryoforganizationalknowledgecreation.

OrganizationScience,5(1),14–37.

Nonaka,I.,&VonKrogh,G.(2009).Perspective-tacitknowledgeandknowledge

conversion:Controversyandadvancementinorganizationalknowledge

creationtheory.OrganizationScience,20(3),635–652.

Nonaka,I.,Byosiere,P.,Borucki,C.C.,&Konno,N.(1994).Organizational

knowledgecreationtheory:Aﬁrstcomprehensivetest.InternationalBusiness

Review,3(4),337–351.

Nonaka,I.,Toyama,R.,&Konno,N.(2000).SECI,Baandleadership:Auniﬁed

modelofdynamicknowledgecreation.LongRangePlanning,33(1),5–34.

Örtenblad,A.(2002).Atypologyoftheideaoflearningorganization.Management

Learning,33(2),213–230.

Peteraf,M.A.(1993).Thecornerstonesofcompetitiveadvantage:A

resource-basedview.StrategicManagementJournal,14(3),179–191.

Polanyi,M.(1962).Tacitknowing:Itsbearingonsomeproblemsofphilosophy.

ReviewsofModernPhysics,34(4),601.

Rogers,R.W.(1985).Attitudechangeandinformationintegrationinfearappeals.

PsychologicalReports,56(1),179–182.

Schwier,R.A.,Campbell,K.,&Kenny,R.(2004).Instructionaldesigners’

observationsaboutidentity,communitiesofpracticeandchangeagency.

AustralasianJournalofEducationalTechnology,20(1),69–100.

Senge,P.(1990).Theﬁfthdiscipline:Theartandpracticeoforganizationallearning,

NewYork.

Senge,P.M.,Cambron-McCabe,N.,Lucas,T.,Smith,B.,&Dutton,J.(2012).Schools

thatlearn:Aﬁfthdisciplineﬁeldbookforeducators,parents,andeveryone

whocaresabouteducation.CrownBusiness.

Shane,S.,&Venkataraman,S.(2000).Thepromiseofentrepreneurshipasaﬁeldof

(10)

Shrivastava,P.(1983).ATypologyofOrganizationalLearningSystemsJournalof

ManagementStudies,20(1),7–28.

Simon,H.A.(1991).Boundedrationalityandorganizationallearning.Organization

Science,2(1),125–134.

Song,S.,Nerur,S.,&Teng,J.T.(2007).Anexploratorystudyontherolesofnetwork

structureandknowledgeprocessingorientationinworkunitknowledge

management.ACMSIGMISDatabase,38(2),8–26.

Song,J.H.,Joo,B.K.B.,&Chermack,T.J.(2009).Thedimensionsoflearning

organizationquestionnaire(DLOQ):AvalidationstudyinaKoreancontext.

HumanResourceDevelopmentQuarterly,20(1),43–64.

Spender,J.C.,&Grant,R.M.(1996).Knowledgeandtheﬁrm:Overview.Strategic

ManagementJournal,17(S2),5–9.

Stein,E.W.,&Zwass,V.(1995).Actualizingorganizationalmemorywith

informationsystems.InformationSystemsResearch,6(2),85–117.

Storberg-Walker,J.,&Gubbins,C.(2007).Socialnetworksasaconceptualand

empiricaltooltounderstandand“do”HRD.AdvancesinDevelopingHuman

Resources,9(3),291–310.

Strack,R.,Baier,J.,&Fahlander,A.(2008).Managingdemographicrisk.Harvard

BusinessReview,86(2),119–128,138.

Telser,L.G.(1961).Howmuchdoesitpaywhomtoadvertise?AmericanEconomic

Review,51(2),194–205.

Theriou,G.N.,&Chatzoglou,P.D.(2009).ExploringthebestHRM

practices–performancerelationship:Anempiricalapproach.Journalof

WorkplaceLearning,21(8),614–646.

Vera,D.,&Crossan,M.(2004).Theatricalimprovisation:Lessonsfororganizations.

OrganizationStudies,25(5),727–749.

Walsh,J.P.,&Ungson,G.R.(1991).Organizationalmemory.Academyof

Watkins,K.E.,&Marsick,V.J.(1993).Sculptingthelearningorganization:Lessons

intheartandscienceofsystemicchange.ERIC.

Wegner,D.M.(1987).Transactivememory:Acontemporaryanalysisofthegroup

mind.InTheoriesofgroupbehavior.pp.185–208.Springer.

Wegner,D.M.,Giuliano,T.,&Hertel,P.T.(1985).Cognitiveinterdependenceinclose

relationships:Compatibleandincompatiblerelationships.pp.253–276.Springer.

Wegner,D.M.,Erber,R.,&Raymond,P.(1991).Transactivememoryinclose

relationships.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,61(6),923.

Weick,K.E.,&Gilﬁllan,D.P.(1971).Fateofarbitrarytraditionsinalaboratory

microculture.JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,17(2),179.

Wernerfelt,B.(1984).Aresource-basedviewoftheﬁrm.StrategicManagement

Journal,5(2),171–180.

Windhager,F.,Smuc,M.,Zenk,L.,Federico,P.,Pfeffer,J.,&Aigner,W.(2013).On

visualizingknowledgeﬂowsatauniversitydepartment.Procedia-Socialand

BehavioralSciences,100,127–143.

Winter,S.(1987).InD.Teece(Ed.),Knowledgeandcompetenceasstrategicassets,in

“TheCompetitiveChallenge:StrategiesforIndustrialInnovationandRenewal”.

Balinger:Cambridge,Massachusetts.

Wright,R.W.,Brand,R.A.,Dunn,W.,&Spindler,K.P.(2007).Howtowritea

systematicreview.ClinicalOrthopaedicsandRelatedResearch,455,23–29.

Yang,B.(2003).Identifyingvalidandreliablemeasuresfordimensionsofa

learningculture.AdvancesinDevelopingHumanResources,5(2),152–162.

Yang,B.,Watkins,K.E.,&Marsick,V.J.(2004).Theconstructofthelearning

organization:Dimensions,measurement,andvalidation.HumanResource