Leadership, culture, intellectual capital and knowledge processes for organizational innovativeness across industries: the case of Poland
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-02-2021-0047 |
| Published date | 21 October 2021 |
| Date | 21 October 2021 |
| Pages | 121-141 |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Knowledge management,HR & organizational behaviour,Organizational structure/dynamics,Accounting & finance,Accounting/accountancy,Behavioural accounting |
| Author | Wioleta Kucharska |
Leadership, culture, intellectual
capital and knowledge processes
for organizational innovativeness
across industries:
the case of Poland
Wioleta Kucharska
Management, Faculty of Management and Economics,
Gdansk University of Technology, Gdansk, Poland
Abstract
Purpose –This study aims to present the overview of intellectual capital creation micro-mechanisms
concerning formal and informal knowledge processes. The organizational culture, transformational leadership
and innovativeness are also included in the investigation as ascendants and consequences of the focal relation
of intellectual capital and knowledge processes.
Design/methodology/approach –Based on a sample of 1,418 Polish knowledge workers from the
construction, healthcare, higher education and information technology (IT) industries, the empirical model was
developed using the structural equation modeling (SEM) method.
Findings –The study exposes that the essence of transformational leadership innovativeness oriented is
developing all intellectual capital components. To do so, leaders must support both formal and informal
knowledge processes through the organizational culture of knowledge and learning. Furthermore, for best
results of the knowledge transformation into intellectual capital, the learning culture must be shaped by both
components: learning climate and acceptance of mistakes.
Practicalimplications –Presented findingscan bedirectly appliedto organizationsto enhanceinnovativeness.
Namely,leaderswho observethat the moreknowledge isformally managedin theirorganizations,the less effective
the knowledge exchange is-should put more effort into supporting informal knowledge processes to smoothly
develop human and relational intellectual capital components. Shortly, leaders mus t implement an authentic
learningculture, includingthe mistakes acceptance component,to use the fullorganizational potential to achieve
intellectual capital growth. Intellectual capital growth is essential for innovativeness.
Originality/value –This study presents the “big picture”of all intellectual capital creation micro-
mechanisms linking transformational leadership with organizational innovativeness and explains the
“knowledge paradox”identified by Mabey and Zhao (2017). This explanation assumes that intellectual capital
componentsare created informally (i.e. human andrelational ones) and formally (i.e. structural ones). Therefore,
for best effects, both formal and informal knowledge processes, must be supported. Furthermore, this study
exposes that the intensity of all explored micro-mechanisms is industry-specific.
Keywords Learning culture, Knowledge culture, Transformational leadership, Innovations, Intellectual
capital, Tacit knowledge, Knowledge processes, Healthcare industry, Higher education, IT industry,
Construction industry, Gender studies
Paper type Research paper
Leadership,
culture,
intellectual
capital
121
© Wioleta Kucharska. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and
create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full
attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://
creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
The presented research is a result of the project Tacit Knowledge Sharing Infl uence on
Innovativeness. The Sector Analysis No. UMO-2018/31/D/HS4/02623 is financed by the funds of the
National Science Center of Poland (Narodowe Centrum Nauki-NCN).
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/1469-1930.htm
Received 5 February 2021
Revised 22 April 2021
1 July 2021
27 September 2021
Accepted 1 October 2021
Journal of Intellectual Capital
Vol. 22 No. 7, 2021
pp. 121-141
Emerald Publishing Limited
1469-1930
DOI 10.1108/JIC-02-2021-0047
1. Introduction
Intellectual capital (IC) is a central focus of knowledge-driven companies today. It is believed
there is no knowledge without IC and vice versa (Rastogi, 2000). Therefore, studies exploring
this bidirectional relationship (Garcia-Perez et al.,2020) are vital for organizational
development because they strive to understand this relationship and they help
organizations shape their policies in favor of creating both knowledge and IC.
This study focuses on IC creation arising from knowledge processes and contributes to the
literature by demonstrating how tacit and explicit knowledge affect IC. This exploration is needed
to understand the contradiction identified by Mabey and Zhao (2017), who revealed that “the more
knowledge is formally managed, the less likely effective knowledge exchange will occur”(p. 43);
they named this phenomenon the “knowledge paradox.”Solving the mechanism of this paradox
is vital for knowledge management theory and practice; however, following Rastogi (2000) and
Garcia-Perez et al. (2020), this only seems possible through a more in-depth investigation of IC-
related and knowledge management–related organizational processes. This exploration is
needed because tacit and explicit knowledge forms are created differently across the organization,
which might affect IC. Specifically, this study aims to expose how informal processes of tacit
knowledge and formal processes of explicit knowledge influence each component of IC.
Both tacit and explicit knowledge are important in IC development. Moreover, while each
IC component (i.e. human, relational, structural and renewal) is vital for organizational
performance and development (Ahmed et al., 2019), they require different types of
organizational support (Matricano et al., 2020). This study provides an in-depth
exploration of how these four IC components contribute to organizational innovativeness
performance. Specifically, it shows how the components are created through formal and
informal knowledge processes when shaped by organizational culture and driven by
transformational leadership, resulting in IC followed by innovativeness. Moreover, Watkins
and Kim (2018) stated that if the assumption that organizational learning culture enhances
knowledge creation and innovation is empirically confirmed, it is a highly significant
discovery. Thus, the ambition to deliver this proof justifies this study’s profound complexity.
Further, in a comprehensive literature review, Bellucci et al. (2021) noted the urgent need
for studies conducting in-depth explorations of the interconnections between knowledge
management, IC, and market performance with innovation. This study, strongly inspired by
the literature presented above, directly responds to this call.
Moreover, it is argued that transformational leadership is a key factor in enh ancingl earning,
knowledge, and innovation relations (Klaic et al., 2020). Alrowwadet al. (2020) demonstrated that
transformational leadership affects innovation through IC and presented the general
mechanisms of this effect. This study aims to delve deeper to reveal the micromechanisms.
2. Theoretical framework
All of the factors mentioned so far are related. However, the “big picture”of all IC creation
micromechanisms linking transformational leadership with organizational innovativeness is
still missing. Moreover, the issue of how formal and informal knowledge processes shape IC and
theoverall relationshipbetweenleadershipand innovativenessremainsunexplored.While some
extant studies demonstrate a link between leadership, organizational innovativeness, and the
factors of culture, IC and knowledge processes (e.g. Pellegrini et al., 2020), they explainfocal parts
of the relationship rather than its entire structure. This study aims to fill this gap. A deeper
understanding of the essence of the aforementioned relati ons is important for transformational
leadership and innovativeness relation exploration, which is vital for learning organizations’
growth. Moreover, revealing these micromechanisms is critical for:
(1) understanding how particular IC components in organizations are developed as a
result of knowledge processes (Garcia-Perez et al., 2020;Matricano et al., 2020).
JIC
22,7
122
To continue reading
Request your trial