Barriers to Knowledge Transfer

Many empirical research studies have explored the multitude of barriers that impede the flow of knowledge. My own dissertation research indicated that the barriers include: (a) heavy workload, (b) no standard practice for tacit knowledge management, (c) lack of time, (d) insufficient overhead budget, and (e) lack of trust between the sender and receiver as primary barriers to knowledge transfer. Respondents perceived the complex nature of technical knowledge as an impediment to knowledge transfer. The findings indicated that employees consider lack of management focus and support of knowledge transfer the primary impediments to knowledge sharing. Organizational leaders are responsible for the allocation of resources, creation of the organizational culture, and the generation of organizational policies and procedures. The comments of Generation X employees indicated not only does the organizational climate discourage knowledge sharing, but also employees who do feel compelled to find the time to transfer knowledge do not receive favorable recognition or appreciation.

In 1994, the APQC, a nonprofit organization that researches global best practices, sponsored a research study led by Dr. Gabriel Szulanski that studied the phases and barriers to knowledge transfer within organizations. The results of the study indicated knowledge could linger within an organization for years without sharing or recognition. Even when recognition of the knowledge occurred, the transfer of knowledge could still take more than 2 years for adoption at other sites. The research indicated four primary impediments to the transfer of organization knowledge: (a) ignorance, (b) no absorptive capacity, (c) lack of preexisting relationships, and (d) lack of motivation.

Burgess (What motivates employees to transfer knowledge outside their work unit? Journal of Business Communication, 2005) studied the underlying reasons behind employees’ willingness to transfer knowledge outside their work unit. Burgess determined factors affecting employee motivation were categorizable with respect to individual, interpersonal, relational, and group-level motives. The primary motivational barriers to knowledge transfer were a lack of extrinsic rewards, stronger levels of group versus organizational identification, reciprocity norms, and the view of knowledge as a means of achieving upward organizational mobility.

Sun and Scott (An investigation of barriers to knowledge transfer. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2005) investigated the barriers to knowledge transfer at four levels of learning in an organization: individual, team, organizational, and interorganizational. Sun and Scott reported key sources of barriers at the four learning levels included the following: (a) individual—fear of loss of ownership and control of knowledge; (b) team—team climate, external influence of the organizational climate in the team interaction, and the influence of systems and structures within the organization; (c) organization—organizational climate, organizational relationships, and the systems and structures of the organization; and (d) interorganizational level—fear of uncontrolled knowledge disclosure resulting in the loss of core competencies.

Argote (Organizational learning: Creating, retaining and transferring knowledge. New York: Kluwer Academic) suggested individuals may not have motivation to share their knowledge with others, particularly if the knowledge is unique, and knowledge is difficult to transfer as a result of competition between work groups and differences in context. The technical and social complexities of knowledge are also barriers to knowledge transfer.

In a review of knowledge management literature and knowledge-sharing barriers, Riege (Three-dozen knowledge-sharing barriers managers must consider. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2005) summarized three dozen knowledge-sharing barriers organizations should acknowledge and consider. Barriers to knowledge can exist at the individual, organizational, and technology levels. At the individual level, barriers include poor communication skills, a lack of social networks, national cultural differences, lack of trust, lack of time, and overemphasis of position statuses. Barriers at the organizational level can include the physical environment, availability of informal and formal meeting spaces, economic viability, and the lack of infrastructure and resources. Technology barriers may include unrealistic expectations of information technology (IT) systems, difficulties in using technology-based systems, and an unwillingness to use the technology systems because of a mismatch with need requirements.

T. H. Davenport and Prusak (Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know Boston: Harvard Business School Press) described seven cultural factors or frictions that impede the transfer of knowledge: (a) lack of trust; (b) different cultures, vocabularies, or frames of reference; (c) lack of time and meeting places or a narrow idea of productive work; (d) knowledge owners receive status and rewards; (e) lack of absorptive capacity in recipients; (f) the belief that knowledge is prerogative of particular groups, or not-invented-here syndrome; and (g) intolerance for mistakes or need for help. T. H. Davenport and Prusak concluded organizations focused too much attention on the hard aspects of knowledge transfer and should focus more attention on the soft or human aspects of knowledge transfer.

There were many common findings among the research studies. A lack of time was a common thread as well as the relationship between the sender and receiver of the knowledge with a lack of trust being the most frequently cited knowledge transfer barrier. Organizational members may be ignorant of possessing knowledge that may be helpful to others and many in the organization are unaware of who possesses the knowledge they seek. Absorptive capacity is absent when employees lack the time, money, and management support necessary to pursue the knowledge. When individuals lack a connection or bond, no basis exists for trusting the other individual and incorporating their knowledge into work and routines. If individuals do not see a compelling reason to share knowledge, they will not make the effort to pursue the knowledge transfer process.