Cultural Issues in Knowledge Management – a Case Study of Unilever Global Essay Example

exchange also become of huge significance.

Study of cultural issues in knowledge management contributes to the ability of international teams to effectively work with knowledge, understand each other and cooperate (Holden, 2002, pp. xiii-xv). For instance, Unilever is a global company which is increasingly considering knowledge management a critical issue within the organization. The company has a separate Knowledge Management Group and the purpose of the group is to develop Unilever and to promote it as a learning organization in which the activities are integrated.

The company focuses mainly on contribution toward its strategic goals and objectives through a framework of activities such as creation, sharing, acquisition, capturing, and transfer of knowledge. Cathy Bautista, Head of Unilever's Knowledge Management Group, has identified two reasons for exploring the issue of importance of knowledge management. “Firstly, as a group it is helpful to have a structured way of organising the what and the how of knowledge acquisition. Secondly, the team knows that to be able to give a better advice and support to their customers, they must excel at what they do” (Unilever, 2011).

Literature Review The impact of culture on knowledge management is under study from the perspective of organizational culture. Containing such elements as values, norms, beliefs, organizational culture is inevitably influenced by cultural identities represented within a managerial teem (Retna ; Bryson, 2007, pp. 176-178). Almeida, Grant and Phene (2002, p. 74) describe the difficulties that General Motors and Toyota faced when being in alliance and sharing knowledge and argue that they were connected with incompatibility of corporate cultures belonging to different cultural backgrounds.

The role of national culture in formation of organizational culture is also studied in

(DeLong ; Fahey, 2000) and (Jarvenpaa ; Staples, 2001). A deep insight into the connection between culture and knowledge management through organizational culture is conducted by Leidner, Alavi and Kayworth (2006): the research includes case study and discussion. Anantatmula (2010) investigated how knowledge is managed within global projects considering cultural differences among its participants. However, the “culture-knowledge management” link can be studied not at the level of an organization only, but also at the level of an individual.

Particularly, it is argued that knowledge workers representing different cultures may have different approaches to collecting, creating, processing, representing, using and sharing knowledge (Retna ; Bryson, 2007). Fink and Holden (2007) mark that such criteria as individualism/collectivism, masculinity/femininity predetermine knowledge workers’ different way of thinking. A broad list of such criteria is offered by Geert Hofstede who made significant contribution to understanding cultural differences (1987).

Fink and Holden refer to Gupta and Govindarajan’s model that includes five cultural factors: 1) “perceived value of knowledge”, 2) “motivation to share knowledge”, 3) “the richness of communication channels”, 4) “motivation to learn and adopt new knowledge”, 5) “ability to recognize the value of new knowledge” (p. 70). Kivrak, Ross and Arslan (2009) present the result of study that implied interviewing managers about influence of cultural differences on the knowledge management process. Holden (2002) offers a range of case studies devoted to cultural issues in knowledge management.

Moreover, case study related to knowledge management in Unilever presented by Pos, Linse and Aben (2005) is studied. Considering this learning, networked organisation perspective as a terminus a quo, Unilever has put a host of knowledge-management processes and programs in place across the company. Most of the

literature shows the company’s knowledge management initiatives are quite appreciated as the company has analysed certain factors that can affect its efforts of managing and sustaining knowledge.

There are gaps in examining the cultural influences on knowledge management of Unilever and exploring how to resolve those issues within the context of Unilever organisational culture. This study is undertaken to fill those gaps and consider cultural influences from the organizational perspective and at individual also. Research Aim The aim of study is to define and analyze cultural factors that strongly impact the knowledge management process of Unilever. The outcomes of the study are the ways through which Unilever can solve the cultural issues so as to organize its knowledge management processes.

This study takes into account both organizational as well as individual perspectives with respect to cultural factors. Research Questions The following study questions are expected to be answered: 1. What cultural issues Unilever is facing today in managing knowledge within organizational settings? To what extent is the company getting affected by the cultural factors? 2. How individuals’ behaviors impact the company’s knowledge management initiatives? 3. What role does the company management play in addressing the cultural issues and exploring how knowledge can be acquired and possibly patterned to benefit the company?

Methodology and Research Sample It is planned to study the works of scholars who work in the fields of knowledge management and cross-cultural management so as to apply the concepts and models to Unilever culture. A questionnaire was sent to Unilever’s Knowledge Management Group which aims to explore the knowledge management activities at Unilever. To undertake the research, an interview with 10 managers responsible for knowledge management

in multicultural teams of knowledge workers of different organizations was conducted.

Conducting interviews with 10 managers of global organizations of same size as Unilever was enough to show the practicality of concepts of knowledge management as most of the concepts are interrelated, universally acknowledged and the initiatives for knowledge management were similar in some organisations. The focus of the research is to explore the cultural impacts on Unilever’s knowledge management. In addition to interviews, an unobtrusive observation of work of a multicultural team of 10 knowledge workers was conducted.

The knowledge management teams were observed for 3 days in order to see the variations in working moods and task completion orientation. The reason of the interviews and the unobtrusive observation is to find out the practical implications of knowledge management in global organisational settings so as to compare the results with that of Unilever. All the study methods helped to analyse the current situation at Unilever and make recommendations to resolve the cultural issues so as to foster knowledge management process at Unilever. Practical Applications

The study results can be used by scholars and managers for elaboration of practices aimed at effective application of cultural differences in managing knowledge in Unilever. This study takes into account the gaps in exploring cultural factors that have created hindrance in effectiveness of knowledge management at Unilever, and also proposes ways through which those gaps can be filled by implementing the outcomes of the study in organizational settings. The research can be applied to any other global organisation where objectives and strategies are integrated and consider knowledge management as a key driver of change.

The implementation of the research findings, the organisations can

focus cultural factors and resolve the issues for betterment of knowledge management which can bring other benefits to the organisations. References 1. Adekola, A. ; Sergi, B. (2007). Global Business Management: A Cross-Cultural Perspective. Burlington, VT: Ashgate. 2. Almeida, P. , Grant, R. , ; Phene, A. (2002). Knowledge Acquisition through Alliances: Opportunities and Challenges. In Gannon, M. J. , ; Newman, K. L. (Eds. ), The Blackwell Handbook of Cross-Cultural Management (67-77). Oxford (UK); Malden (MA): Blackwell Business. 3. Anantatmula, V.

S. Impact of Cultural Differences on Knowledge Management in Golbal Projects. The Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 40(3/4), 239-253. 4. DeLong, D. W. , ; Beers, M. C. (1998). Successful Knowledge Management. Sloan Management Review, 39(2), 43-57. 5. Fink, G. , ; Holden, N. (2007). Cultural Stretch: Knowledge Transfer and Disconcerting Resistance to Absorption and Application. In Pauleen, D. J. (Ed. ), Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Knowledge Management. Westport, Connecticut: Libraries Unlimited. 6. Halverson, C. B. , ; Tirmizi, S. A. (2009). Effective Multicultural Teams: Theory and Practice.

New York: Springer, 2008. 7. Hofstede, G. (1987). Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. Beverly Hills, Calif. : Sage. 8. Holden, N. (2002). Cross-Cultural Management: A Knowledge Management Perspective. Harlow: Financial Times/Prentice Hall. 9. Jarvenpaa, S. L. , ; Staples, S. D. (2001). Exploring Perceptions of Organizational Ownership of Information and Expertise. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 151-183. 10. Kivrak, S. , Ross, A. , ; Gokhan, A. (2009). Impacts of Cultural Differences on Knowledge Management Practices in Construction.

Fifth International Conference on Construction in the 21st Century “Collaboration and Integration in Engineering, Management and Technology”. May 20-22, 2009, Istanbul, Turkey. 11. Leidner, D. ,

Alavi, M. , ; Kayworth, T. (2006). The Role of Culture in Knowledge Management: A Case Study of Two Global Firms. International Journal of E-Collaboration, 2(1), 17-40. 12. Pos, Anita; Linse, Klazien; and Aben, Manfred. (2005). Unilever: Leveraging community value. Wilmington Publishing ; Information Ltd, Wilmington Group PLC. (online). Cited 25 January 2012. From: http://www. ikmagazine. com/xq/asp/sid. 0/articleid. D8FDB40-41CB-4278-90E3-FA955C7A1CF4/eTitle. CASE_STUDY_Unilever/qx/display. htm 13. Retna, K. S. , ; Bryson, J. E. Asian Organizations Meet North American Management Theory: The Case of Singapore and Senge. In Pauleen, D. J. (Ed. ), Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Knowledge Management. Westport, Connecticut: Libraries Unlimited. 14. Roembke, L. (2000). Building Credible Multicultural Teams. Pasadena, Calif. : William Carey Library. 15. Unilever, (2011). Managing risk, Det Norske Veritas. (online). Cited 25 January 2012. From: http://www. dnv. com/services/consulting/knowledge_management/meet_our_customers/Unilever. asp