Leonard Barnett and Edward Carter
7. Summary of key results and findings st
nd
rd
1 Research Question Characteristics of intercultural interactions
2 Research Question Cultural Factors influencing interactions
3 Research Question Impacts on KM
Positive experience of customers
Particularism, communitarianism, ascribed status Ascribed status, face, ‘zone of tolerance’
Status - affects knowledge transfer, criticism Communitarianism – knowledge sharing and construction, , devaluing written word
Friendliness and the “smile’
Lack of proactivity and initiative
External locus of control, ascribed status
Management, responsibility and accountability
Communication, long time orientation
Communication
High/low context, neutral/affective
Status
asc status, ethnocentricity
Relationships
Particularism, personal relationshipbased communication, rel mgt, in and out groups
Reluctance to innovate, criticize In/out groups knowledge sharing determined by group membership, ethnicity
th
4 Research Question Intercultural competence and KM
Culturally speaking, one size does not fit all Intercultural Competence is essential for practitioners
Various models, including Trompenaars and others described briefly in this study
Particularism informal relationship preferred to impersonal, universalist and written rules High/low context Words, emails and online verbal KM applications less valued , high context management of information, much left unsaid ‘face’ and communication, learning, criticism, knowledge sharing
Figure 1: Summary Of Key Results And Findings
8. Conclusion and areas for future research This research demonstrates that one size does not fit all and that considerable intercultural competence is required of KM practitioners. KM, particularly knowledge sharing, transfer, development and innovation must account for cultural characteristics where applications are deployed. Practice should include a thorough cultural assessment to adapt KM systems in an interculturally competent fashion.
15