Knowledge Migration and the Transfer of HRM Knowledge in International Joint Ventures and HRD Alliances-- Paul Iles, July 9, 2003

47th Annual Meeting of the International Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS), Hersonissos, Crete, July 9, 2003.

July 9, 2003, 5:30 p.m., Special Integration Group on Organizational Transformation and Social Change

This digest was created in real-time during the meeting, based on the speaker's presentation(s) and comments from the audience. These should not be viewed as official transcripts of the meeting, but only as an interpretation by a single individual. Lapses, grammatical errors, and typing mistakes may not have been corrected. Questions about content should be directed to the originator. These notes have been contributed by David Ing (daviding@systemicbusiness.org) at the IBM Advanced Business Institute ( http://www.ibm.com/abi ).

Paul Iles, with Maurice Yolles and third author

Interested in knowledge transfer, particularly in HR.

• Cross-culture, from west to somewhere else.
• Chose Mauritus and Czech Republic.

Paper aims to:

• Critically review HRM knowledge -- as misconceived.
• Process is better seen as knowledge migration rather than knowledge transfer, and even more as knowledge translation.
• Alternative:  look as knowledge migration, by developing a viable systems model from Beer and Yolles.
• Will apply to Czech republic

Critique of knowledge transfer, particularly in HRM.

• Most take these from communication theory.
• A lot of work on ex-patriates as knowledge transfers, and re-patriates as knowledge back.
• Sender - encoder - receiver - decoder, with noise from language differences, etc.
• Often linked to hierarchical models of knowledge.
• See in terms of knowledge processes.

In terms of sender and receiver, knowledge source and knowledge sink.

• Each with actors, and knowledge.
• Transfer usually seen as one way.
• Argue that this view of knowledge is limiting.
• Knowledge intermediaries moves around both environments, estabilishing communications.

Knowledge migrations across culture -- problems.

• Culture seen as a commodity to be managed.
• Cultural differences, culture shock -- need to move on.
• Should consider culture as a knowledge resource.

Need to move beyond knolwedge flows as linear, but as emergent

• Need to consider culture in knowledge transfer.

Mauritus is upper-middle income, like Poland

• Moved from sugar plantation to textiles, tourism and financial services.
• Hindi, Chinese -- models something like Singapore.
• In practice, Hindu-dominated society.

Models like Westminister model, e.g. devolution of responsibilities to management, staffing by Public Service Commisiosion.

• HR decisions not by line managers
• Seniority.

Found little transfer of HR knowledge.

• Need government to change role.
• Line managers may abuse power.
• System may act as a brake on nepotism and patronage.
• Rather than transfer an American problem, need a culturally appropriate model.

Look at it from a VSM approach.

Another example:  Czech academic alliances.

• UK, Czech, Austria
• Different paradigms in management approaches.

Model:  Cognitive domain, (?) behavioural domain.

Need to develop a supersystem of actors.

Four phases.

Knowledge transfer:  Looking a cognitive interests and cognitive purpose.

Knowlege transfer is more helpful than watching flows.