Product Information:-

  • Journals
  • Books
  • Case Studies
  • Regional information
Real World Research - #RealWorldResearch
Request a service from our experts.

Cross-cultural Knowledge Management for organizational efficacy: The Role of Stakeholder Causal Scope Analysis


Special issue call for papers from European Business Review

The ScholarOne site will not be accepting submissions for this issue until March 2019.

 

Guest editors


Professor Zhanna Belyaeva, Ural Federal University, Russia; EuroMed Academy of Business, EU (Zh.s.belyaeva@urfu.ru

Professor Demetris Vrontis, University of Nicosia, Cyprus; EuroMed Academy of Business, EU (vrontis.d@unic.ac.cy)

Dr. Riad Shams, Ural Federal University, Russia; EuroMed Academy of Business, EU (Riad.Shams@urfu.ru)

Professor Alkis Thrassou, University of Nicosia, Cyprus; EuroMed Academy of Business, EU (thrassou.a@unic.ac.cy)  

Professor Antonino Galati (supervising guest editor), University of Plermo, Italy; EuroMed Academy of Business, EU (antonino.galati@unipa.it)

The rationale

 

Culture is the combination of shared philosophy that differentiates people between various groups (Hofstede, 1991). Therefore, individuals from different cultures/groups would react differently to a single phenomenon. For example, in terms of gesture, people from different cultures use the thumb finger to communicate with their non-verbal expressions; however, the same signal may convey dissimilar meaning to people of different cultures (Kita, 2009). Similarly, organizational knowledge management initiatives in diverse socio-economic settings, including government, non-government and business practices would lead to a detrimental outcome or would not be able to convey the right message, at the right time to the right target audience prolifically, if the cross-cultural issues are not considered in such initiatives. For example, an ad/promotional flyer of a business/brand that contains a culturally consistent dialogue and corresponding image draws the most constructive responses, in comparison to the promotional efforts that contain different dialogues and images (Teng et. al., 2014). Furthermore, a specific organizational procedure that would be appropriate for the target audience of one culture would not be suitable for the target audience of another culture (Hofstede, 1984). Therefore, considering the cross-cultural issues is especially important for organizational knowledge management, aiming to the cross-cultural target audience (Huang et. al., 2013). 

Culture is also acknowledged as the blend of values, beliefs and assumptions that an individual inherits from her/his early childhood environment (Hofstede et. al., 2010). These cultural philosophies engrained in people’s mind in their childhood, and influence their decision making, which appears as a dimension of difference in human behaviour from culture to culture (Steenkamp, 2001; Steenkamp and Kumar, 1999). Following this cultural mindset on different cultural philosophies, different stakeholders, e.g. customers evaluate the alternate competitive value propositions (Kotler, 2003), in relation to their value anticipation. Stakeholders are overwhelmed with information about the competitive value propositions today (Berner and Tonder, 2003). These stakeholder information, stakeholder knowledge and stakeholders’ mobility, income and search costs form/reform stakeholders’ expectation about their estimated value on a particular issue to act on it (Kotler, 2003), which persuasively impact on their value perceptions about the available competitive offerings. Since, the society is culturally broaden its horizons; in today’s multicultural society, considering ethnic dimensions play a crucial role in effective organizational knowledge management, related to different business and non-business decision makings (Bent et. al., 2007; Chan, 2006; Ownbey and Horridge, 1997). 

The discussion thus far acknowledges that considering the cross-cultural issues in organizational knowledge management is important for effective sense making across the different cultural settings; however, there are “barriers to knowledge management (KM) due to various national cultural dimensions” (Ray, 2014, p. 45), which are under-researched. For example, only “few studies have investigated either on the real differences in the factors of knowledge transfer within different cultural contexts or the reasons behind these differences” (Hua Li, et al., 2014, p. 279). Focusing on the cross-cultural global setting, “recent studies show that still a lot of KM projects fail (Coakes et al, 2010) and not all…factors are clearly understood” (Pawlowski and Bick, 2012, p. 1). Researchers argue that “the current understanding of when and how knowledge transfer leads…(to) success is still limited” (Ahammad et al., 2016, p. 66). Furthermore, we do not have adequate understanding on managing and transferring knowledge effectively in the multi-cultural organizations (Hajro et al., 2017). 

“Insight into organizational responses to stakeholder claims and influence attempts is critical to understand the challenges currently facing managers and organizations” (Weitzner and Deutsch, 2015, p. 1337). However, the extant literature on organization – stakeholder relationships “does not provide much insight into organizational factors that lead organizations to attend to the different stakeholder or to implement stakeholder practices (cf. Bundy et al., 2013). Moreover, empirical work in the strategic management literature has failed to address these shortcomings” (Mena and Chabowski, 2015, p. 430). “Much remains unknown about how organizations learn about multiple stakeholders. This is unfortunate given the increasing importance organizations place on meeting their stakeholders’ demands” (Mena, Tomas and Hult, 2017, p. 177). For example, in terms of organizational transparency as stakeholder relationship management construct, Schnackenberg and Tomlinson (2016) argue that “it is not clear exactly how the construct should be conceptualized, how it relates to managing trust in the organization-stakeholder relationship, or how organizations manage it” (p. 1785). To respond to this significant research gap in organization – stakeholder relationships, relying on the organization-wide knowledge management processes, i.e. knowledge acquisition and knowledge distribution (Huber, 1991; Sinkula, 1994), focusing on the key stakeholders would be instrumental to unlock the potential progress of this under-researched area in organizational studies at the intersection of cross-cultural stakeholders’ knowledge management for improved organizational efficacy. 

Different stakeholder relationship management (SRM) constructs “are usually derived and enhanced through the cause and consequence of stakeholder relationships and interactions” (Shams, 2016a, p. 680). Such SRM constructs would include, but not limited to:

 

  • trust (Blenkhorn and Mackenzie, 1996; Moliner et al., 2007); 
  • satisfaction (Crosby et al., 1990; Macintosh, 2007); 
  • commitment (Dwyer et al., 1987; Patrick and Vesna, 2010);
  • communication (Gummesson, 1994; Parasuraman et al., 2005);
  • reciprocity and co-creation (Fontenot and Wilson, 1997; Eisingerich and Bell 2006);
  • reliability (Parasuraman et al., 1985; Bennett and Barkensjo, 2005);
  • responsiveness (Parasuraman et al., 1991; Bennett and Barkensjo, 2004);
  • bond (Wilson and Mummalaneni, 1986; Lang and Colgate, 2003);
  • loyalty (Berry, 1995; Dimitriadis and Stevens, 2008) and so forth. 

Analysing the “cause and consequence of stakeholder relationships and interactions as a stakeholder causal scope (SCS)” (Shams, 2016b, p. 141) would be instrumental to recognise the diverse scopes and (existing and emergent) extents of stakeholder relationships, based on trust, satisfaction, commitment and other SRM constructs. For example, such relationship building opportunities could be acknowledged in cross-cultural settings, based on an organization’s interactions and learning experience with their stakeholders (e.g. service encounter) to acquire knowledge about the stakeholders, in order to improve their organizational efficacy. From this context, this special issue aims to contribute to this under-researched area of cross-cultural issues in organizational knowledge management to enrich our understanding on how analysing SCS and/or different SRM constructs in a cross-cultural organizational setting would be instrumental to improve organizational efficacy, based on effective cross-cultural stakeholders’ knowledge management.

The topicality


This special issue welcomes empirical (quantitative, qualitative or mixed method) and conceptual studies that have a solid conceptualization, analysis and synthesis, based on the different SCS issues and/or (extant/emergent) SRM constructs in the cross-cultural settings, in order to contribute to our understanding on how analysing SCSs would be valuable for proactive and prolific knowledge management in a cross-cultural organizational setting. In particular, this special issue invites research articles from diverse perspectives of cross-cultural KM initiatives that bridge the discussed knowledge gap at the intersection of cross-cultural stakeholders’ knowledge management for improved organizational efficacy, in order to propel theoretical conceptions and practical propositions in this under-researched area, centred on prolific stakeholder engagement, through both, the implications of cross-disciplinary theories on organizational KM practices, as well as practice-based theorization. The following might be relevant, but not exhaustive topics:

  • stakeholder-focused organizational culture and communication strategy for effective organizational knowledge management (OKM) for improved organizational efficacy in the cross-cultural settings; 
  • information technology, e-business and other online platforms for SCS analysis in the cross-cultural settings for meaningful OKM;
  • the intersection at the stakeholder theory and KM theory for proactive OKM targeting to the cross-cultural audience;
  • strategic management and SCS analysis in the cross-cultural settings for OKM;
  • SCS analysis and cross-cultural knowledge management in the conflict regions;
  • SCS analysis and cross-cultural knowledge management, targeting to specific groups of stakeholders, such as young people, elderly people, government and non-government agencies and so forth;
  • capacity building, framework development and testing for SCS analysis and cross-cultural knowledge management;
  • SRM constructs, SCS analysis and cross-cultural knowledge management;
  • SCS analysis related to corruption, lack of transparency and the misleading of cross-cultural stakeholders and its impact on OKM;
  • SCS analysis and cross-cultural knowledge management for sustained competitive advantage;
  • SCS analysis and cross-cultural knowledge management for socio-economic development and environmental protection;
  • political, economic, and legal influences on effective SCS analysis for enhanced OKM in the cross-cultural background;
  • the interplay between religious/spiritual beliefs and its impact on stakeholder-centred OKM in the cross-cultural settings;
  • the interplay between innovation management, stakeholder relationships and engagement and OKM in the cross-cultural background;
  • cross-disciplinary insights on SCS and cross-cultural OKM;
  • comparison (differences and similarities) among different cultures to develop cross-cultural insights for SCS analysis and cross-cultural OKM;
  • future research propositions on the role of SCS analysis for cross-cultural OKM and so forth. 

Important Dates

 
Online manuscript portal opens: March 31, 2019;

Manuscript submission deadline:  April 30, 2019 (earlier submission is encouraged);

First comments (initial acceptance/rejection) on manuscripts:  June 30, 2019;

Revision due: July 31, 2019;

Special issue will be published in late 2019 / early 2020. 

 

Special issue workshop


A special issue workshop will be organised in November 2018 at the Ural Federal University, Russia. Neither participating in this author workshop guarantees acceptance of a paper, nor participating in this workshop is a prerequisite for acceptance a paper for this special issue.

Author guidelines


All papers submitted to the European Business Review will undergo a double-blind peer review process. The manuscripts should be structured in line with the guidelines, available at http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/author_guidelines.htm?id=ebr . Please submit your manuscript through this web link https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ebrev , and select this special issue “Cross-cultural Knowledge Management” from the drop-down menu for your submission. Informal inquiries are valued and can be directed to the guest editors. 

References

Ahammad, M. F., Tarba, S. Y., Liu, Y. and Glaister, K. W. (2016). Knowledge transfer and cross-border acquisition performance: The impact of cultural distance and employee retention. International Business Review, 25 (1), 66-75. 

 


Bent, R., Seaman, C. and Emslie, L. (2007). Missed opportunities? Reaching the ethnic consumer market. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31 (2), 168-173.

 


Berry, L. L. (1995). Relationship marketing of services – Growing interest, emerging perspectives. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23 (4), 236-245.

 


Berner, A. and Tonder, C. L. V. (2003). The Postmodern Consumer: Implications of Changing Customer Expectations for Organisational Development in Service Organisation. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 29 (3), 1-10.

 


Bennett, R., and Barkensjo, A. (2004). Causes and consequences of donor perceptions of the quality of the relationship marketing activities of charitable organisations.  Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 13 (2), 122-129.

 


Benett, R. and Barkensjo, A. (2005). Relationship quality, relationship marketing, and client perceptions of the levels of service quality of charitable organisations.  International Journal of Service Industry Management, 16 (1), 81-106.

 


Blenkhorn, D. and Mackenzie, H.F. (1996). Interdependence in relationship marketing. Australasian Marketing Journal, 4 (1), 25-30.

 


Bundy, J., Shropshire, C. and Buchholtz. A. K. (2013). Strategic cognition and issue salience: Toward an explanation of firm responsiveness to stakeholder concerns. Academy of Management Review, 38 (3), 352 – 376. 

 


Chan. A. M. (2006). Tapping the multicultural market in Australia. In Rao, C. P. (Ed.), Marketing and multicultural diversity. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

 


Coakes, E., Amar, A.D., and Luisa Granados,M.L. (2010). Knowledge management, strategy, and technology: a global snapshot. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 23 (3), 282 – 304.

 


Crosby, L. A., Kenneth, E. R. and Deborah, C. (1990). Relationship quality in services selling: An interpersonal influence perspective.  Journal of Marketing, 54, 68-81. 

 


Dimitriadis, S. and Stevens, E. (2008). Integrated customer relationship management for service activities: An internal/external gap model. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 18 (5), 496-511.

 


Dwyer, F. R., Schurr, P. H. and Oh, S. (1987). Developing buyerseller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 51, 11-28. 

 


Eisingerich, A. B. and Bell, S. J. (2006). Relationship marketing in the financial services industry: The importance of customer education, participation and problem management for customer loyalty. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 10 (4), 86-97.

 


Fontenot, R. and Wilson, E. (1997). Relational exchange: A review of selected models for a prediction matrix of relationship activities. Journal of Business Research, 39 (1), 5-12.

 


Gummesson, E., (1994). Making relationship marketing operational. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 5 (5), 5-20.

 


Hajro, A., Gibson, C. B. and Pudelko, M. (2017). Knowledge Exchange Processes in Multicultural Teams: Linking Organizational Diversity Climates to Teams’ Effectiveness. The Academy of Management Journal. 60 (1), 345-372.

 


Hofstede, G. (1984). Culture's consequences: international differences in work-related values. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. 

 


Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York: McGraw Hill.

 


Hua Li, J., Chang, X. R., Lin, L. and Ma, Y. L. (2014). Meta-analytic comparison on the influencing factors of knowledge transfer in different cultural contexts. Journal of Knowledge Management, 18 (2), 278-306.

 

 

 

Huang, Y., Oppewal, H. and Mavondo, F. (2013). The influence of ethnic attributes on ethnic consumer choice of service outlet. European Journal of Marketing, 47 (5/6), 877-898.

 


Buber, G. P. (1991). Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures. Organization Science, 2 (1), 88 – 115. 

 


Kita, S. (2009). Cross-cultural variation of speech-accompanying gesture: A review. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24 (2), 145-167.

 


Kotler, P. (2003). Marketing management, International edn. Sydney: Prentice Hall.

 


Lang, B. and Colgate, M. (2003). Relationship quality, on-line banking and the information technology gap. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 21 (1), 29-37.

 


Macintosh, G. (2007). Customer orientation, relationship quality, and relational benefits to the firm. Journal of Services Marketing, 21 (3), 150-159.

 


Mena, J. A. and Chabowski, B. R. (2015). The role of organizational learning in stakeholder marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43 (4), 429 – 452. 

 


Mena, J. A., Tomas, G. and Hult. M. (2017). Stakeholder-focused organizational learning, responsiveness and innovation/imitation. In: Campbell, C. L. (Ed.), The customer is not always right? Marketing orientationsin a dynamic business world. Developments in Marketing Science: Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science. Springer, Cham. 

 


Moliner, M.A., Sánchez, J., Rodriguez, R.M. and Callarisa, L. (2007). Relationship quality with a travel agency: The influence of the postpurchase perceived value of a tourism package. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 7 (3-4), 194-211.

 


Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. and Berry L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49, 41-50.

 


Parasuraman, A., Berry L. L. and Zeithaml, V. A. (1991). Refinement and reassessment of the SERVQUAL scale. Journal of Retailing, 67, 420-450.

 


Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. and Malhotra, A. (2005). E-S-QUAL-A multiple-item scale for assessing electronic service quality. Journal of Service Research, 7 (3), 213-233.

 


Patrick, V. and Vesna, Z. (2010). Relationship quality evaluation in retailers’ relationships with consumers. European Journal of Marketing, 44 (9-10), 1334-1365.

 


Pawlowski, J. and Bick, M. (2012). The Global Knowledge Management Framework: Towards a Theory for Knowledge Management in Globally Distributed Settings. The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management Volume, 10 (1), 92-108.

 


Ownbey, S. F. and Horridge, P. E. (1997). Acculturation levels and shopping orientations of Asian-American consumers. Psychology and Marketing, 14 (1), 1-18.

 

Ray, D. (2014). Overcoming cross-cultural barriers to knowledge management using social media. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 27 (1), 45-55. 

 


Schnackenberg, A. K. and Tomlinson, E. C. (2016). Organizational transparency: A new perspective on managing trust in organization-stakeholder relationships. Journal of Management, 42 (7), 1784 – 1810. 

 


Shams, S. M. R. (2016a). Capacity building for sustained competitive advantage: A conceptual framework. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 34 (5), 671 – 691.

 


Shams, S. M. R. (2016b). Branding destination image: A stakeholder causal scope analysis for internationalisation of destinations. Tourism Planning & Development, 13 (2), 140-153.

 


Sinkula, J. M. (1994). Market information processing and organizational learning. Journal of Marketing, 58 (1), 35 – 45. 

 


Solli-Sæther, H., Karlsen, J. T. and Oorschot, K. E. V. (2015). Strategic and Cultural Misalignment: Knowledge Sharing Barriers in Project Networks. Project Management Journal. 46 (3), 49–60.

 


Steenkamp, J. B. E.M. and Kumar, N. (1999). A meta-analysis of satisfaction in marketing channel relationships. Journal of Marketing Research, 36, (2), 223-238.

 


Steenkamp, J. B. E. M. (2001). The role of national culture in international marketing research. International Marketing Review, 18 (1), 30 – 44.

 


Teng, L., Ye, N., Yu, Y. and Wu, X. (2014). Effects of culturally verbal and visual congruency/incongruency across cultures in a competitive advertising context. Journal of Business Research, 67, 288–294. 

 

Weitzner, D. and Deutsch, Y. (2015). Understanding motivation and social influence in stakeholder prioritization. Organizational Studies, 36 (1), 1337 – 1360. 

 


Wilson, D. T. and Mummalaneni, V. (1986). Bonding and commitment in buyer-seller relationships: A preliminary conceptualisation.  Industrial Marketing and Purchasing, 1 (3), 44-58.