Dynamics of knowledge sharing in professional service teams

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING NATIONAL ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY  NGUYEN LAN NGOC DYNAMICS OF KNOWLEDGE SHARING IN PROFESSIONAL SERVICE TEAMS PHD DISSERTATION SPECIALIZATION: BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Hanoi – 2022 MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING NATIONAL ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY  NGUYEN LAN NGOC DYNAMICS OF KNOWLEDGE SHARING IN PROFESSIONAL SERVICE TEAMS SPECIALIZATION: BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION SPECIALIZATION CODE: 9340101 PHD DISSERTATION Supervisor: Assoc Prof Dr Phan Thi Thuc Anh Hanoi - 2022 DECLARATION I have read and understood the University’s policy on plagiarism I hereby declare on my honor that this research proposal is my own work and does not violate the regulations on good academic practices PhD candidate i Table of Contents INTRODUCTION .1 Rationale Research objectives and research questions Subjects and scope of the research Original contributions of the research Structure of the dissertation CHAPTER – LITERATURE REVIEW 12 1.1 Overview of work teams and project teams 12 1.1.1 Definitions and types of work teams 12 1.1.2 Definitions and characteristics of project teams 14 1.2 Overview of knowledge, knowledge sharing, team knowledge sharing 15 1.2.1 Definitions and Types of knowledge 15 1.2.2 Definitions of knowledge sharing, team knowledge sharing, and dynamics of team knowledge sharing 19 1.2.3 Roles of team knowledge sharing 23 1.2.4 Factors influencing team knowledge sharing 28 1.3 Overview of motivation and motivations of team knowledge sharing 39 1.4 Overview of professional service firms 40 1.4.1 Definition and types of professional service firms 40 1.4.2 Importance of team knowledge sharing in professional service firms 41 1.5 Research Gaps in Team knowledge sharing literature 43 SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 46 CHAPTER – THEORETICAL FOUNDATION 47 2.1 Rationales for the choice of Groups as complex systems theory and Incentive theory 47 2.2 Key ideas of Groups as complex systems theory and Incentive theory .48 2.2.1 Key ideas of Group as complex systems theory 48 2.2.2 Key ideas of Incentive theory 51 2.3 Applications of Groups as complex systems theory and Incentive theory in prior studies 52 2.3.1 Application of Groups as complex system theory in prior studies 52 2.3.2 Application of Incentive theory in prior studies 55 2.4 Applications of Groups as complex systems theory and Incentive theory for Dynamics of Knowledge sharing in professional service project teams 56 2.4.1 Modes of project life in professional service project teams 57 2.4.2 Team knowledge sharing and Functions of professional service project teams 57 2.4.3 Team knowledge sharing and Composition of professional service project teams 60 2.4.4 Team knowledge sharing and the causal dynamics in professional service project teams 61 SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 62 CHAPTER – RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 64 3.1 Reasons for choosing the exploratory sequential mixed methods research 64 3.2 Mixed method research design 65 3.2.1 Research context – Audit industry in Vietnam and audit project teams 65 3.2.2 General mixed methods research design 69 3.3 Qualitative data collection and data analysis 72 3.3.1 Qualitative data collection procedures 73 3.3.2 Qualitative data analysis 79 3.3.3 Data quality procedures 85 3.4 Quantitative data collection and data analysis 87 3.4.1 Sample 87 3.4.2 Data collection 87 3.4.3 Measures 88 3.4.4 Data analysis 92 SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 92 CHAPTER – FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS 93 4.1 Qualitative data analysis and findings 93 4.1.1 Interactions of team knowledge sharing elements at Stage – Planning 93 4.1.2 Interactions of team knowledge sharing elements at Stage – Execution 99 4.1.3 Interactions of team knowledge sharing elements at Stage – Completion 105 4.1.4 General model of Team knowledge sharing dynamics 108 4.2 Quantitative data analysis and findings 110 4.2.1 Hypothesis development 111 4.2.2 Measure reliability and validity .117 4.2.3 Hypothesis testing 119 SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 131 CHAPTER – DISCUSSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 132 5.1 Discussions 132 5.2 Theoretical implications 140 5.3 Practical implications 143 5.3.1 Recommendations for team leaders or project leaders at team level 143 5.3.2 Recommendations for team members at individual level 146 5.3.3 Recommendations for top managers at organization level 147 SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 150 CONCLUSION .151 REFERENCES 153 APPENDIX 1: INTERVIEW GUIDE 184 APPENDIX 2: SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE 186 APPENDIX 3: EXAMPLE OF PRELIMINARY MANUAL CODING PROCESS 190 APPENDIX 4: EXAMPLE OF CODING LEVEL 191 APPENDIX 5: EXAMPLE OF CODING LEVEL 192 APPENDIX 6: EXAMPLE OF CODING LEVEL 193 APPENDIX 7: EXAMPLES OF THE CODING RESULTS .194 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1.1: Summary of representative studies on taxonomy of knowledge .16 Table 1.2: A summary of the empirical studies on the roles of team knowledge sharing 27 Table 1.3: A summary of empirical studies on factors influencing knowledge sharing within teams 32 Table 3.1: Number of audit firms in Vietnam in the period 2019–2020 .66 Table 3.2: Workforce of audit firms in Vietnam in the period 2019–2020 67 Table 3.3: Data collection methods 74 Table 3.4: Profile of Interviewees 76 Table 3.5: Definitions and coding scheme 84 Table 3.6: Profile of respondents .88 Table 3.7: Measurement scales of variables .90 Table 4.1: Summary of hypotheses on Team Knowledge sharing Dynamics 116 Table 4.2: Validity and Reliability of Variables .117 Table 4.3: Pearson correlations 119 Table 4.4: Mauchly’s test of sphericity 120 Table 4.5: Univariate tests 122 Table 4.6: Pairwise comparisons 127 Table 4.7: Summary of the research findings 130 Figure 3.1: The exploratory mixed methods research design .70 Figure 4.1: Model of Team knowledge sharing dynamics .109 INTRODUCTION Rationale In the era of knowledge economy, knowledge sharing is central to firms’ growth and success (Cavaliere & Lombardi, 2015; Prusak & Davenport, 1998) As a significant constituent of knowledge management (Riege, 2005), knowledge sharing helps individuals to contribute to knowledge application, innovation, and achieving sustainable competitive advantage (Jackson et al., 2006) Knowledge sharing has been found to be positively related with reduced production costs, faster completion of new product development projects, team performance, firm innovation capabilities, and firm performance including sales growth and revenue from new products and services (Arthur & Huntley, 2005; Collins & Smith, 2006; Cummings, 2001; Lin, 2007; Mesmer- Magnus & DeChurch, 2009) Thus, a large body of research has produced extensive explanations of the knowledge sharing processes (e.g., Bruton et al., 2007; Huang et al., 2008; Lin, 2011; Ma & Yu, 2010; Sechi et al., 2011) It has done so using various angles, levels of analysis, and by paying attention to various selected aspects (Kepczyk, 2000; Sergeeva & Andreeva, 2016) The previous studies have made significant contributions to our understanding of knowledge sharing within organizations Particularly, in the context of team which is considered as the crucial building block in today’s knowledge-based organizations, knowledge sharing is an important factor affecting team performance because for attainment of common goals, team members with unevenly distributed expertise and knowledge need to interact regularly and depend on each other In professional service firms, where most work is done by project teams delivering customized client services, project teams are becoming more commonly used to take advantage of resources and enhance competitive advantages (Batistič & Kenda, 2018; Fu et al., 2021) Professional service firms have received widespread attention from both practitioners and researchers because professional services are an increasingly important driver of economic activity in the knowledge economy (Hertog, 2000; Kox, 2004), and in this setting, the process of sharing knowledge has been identified as a key source of competitive advantage (Carmel, 2005) Processes within project teams for coordinating resources to solve problems, implement procedures, and complete tasks has attracted the attention of both researchers and practitioners in the past decade (Carter et al., 2019) Among these processes, there are an increasing number of studies on the importance of productive knowledge sharing behavior (Zhang & Min, 2019) that plays significant roles in team performance and project delivery (Ahmad & Karim, 2019; Calamel et al., 2012) Professional service firms are characterized by knowledge intensity, low capital intensity, and professionalized workforce (Von Nordenflycht, 2010), and categorized into technology developers, professional campuses, neo professional service firms and classical professional service firms (von Nordenflycht, 2014) On the base of technical aspect, technology developers, professional campuses are technical professional service firms with enough capital, they can invest in unique machinery, tools or equipment to deliver services Neo professional service firms and classical professional service firms are nontechnical professional service firms which rely more on their internal and external management of knowledge However, most empirical studies of knowledge sharing are focused on technical professional service firms or technological perspective (Wang & Noe, 2010) Among the non-technical professional service firms, audit firms have the most comprehensive characteristics of professional service firms Knowledge sharing is especially vital in auditing firms, as these firms depend on the quality of services provided by their professionals to succeed (Curtis & Taylor, 2018; Vera ‐Munoz et al., 2006) To be specific, audit firms are put under high pressure to improve quality, efficiency, and effectiveness of audit process because of regulatory environment, updating auditing standards, and scandal events related to financial fraud Furthermore, in each audit engagement, knowledge about the client’s environment, industry, business model, and operations are typically distributed unevenly among audit team members (Harding & Trotman, 1999; Kerr & Murthy, 2004) Therefore, knowledge sharing capability of industry-specific trends, accounting, auditing, regulatory issues determine the outcome of the audit services Despite the potential importance of knowledge sharing to auditing firms, accounting practitioners and scholars have made little progress in understanding its anatomy (Vera‐Munoz et al., 2006) APPENDIX 3: Example of Preliminary manual coding process 192 APPENDIX 4: Example of Coding level APPENDIX 5: Example of Coding Level APPENDIX 6: Example of Coding Level APPENDIX 7: Examples of the Coding Results Stage Motivation Calculative Types of K Client-based Mechanisms Instruction Interviews Partner – Local 9: Partner and Manager carried a survey the internal control, had meeting, and interviewed clients before client acceptance and contract signing, they are the first source of information about client After teaming, they send the information to Senior in charge and emphasize the risks that should be focused on Senior – Local 9: Partner study and meet the client first then impart the information and his evaluation to Senior: client size, revenue, location, organizational structure, main products, investment, and anything that does not make sense he notifies from the financial statement Partner – Local 10: In case of auditing the corporations or business groups, I always remind team members on internal transactions and relationships of stakeholders that may have transfer pricing problem Or with client firms in tax free zones or rural areas, I notify them that the clients may sell other commercial goods rather than rather than registered agricultural and farming products Only high-level and Stage Motivation Types of K Mechanisms Interviews experienced auditors could recognize such issues I actively notify the whole team members in the kick-off meeting Senior – Big-4 1: In team meeting, I present about overview of client business, last year auditing issues, potential risks in current year, factors affecting materiality level (industry, product/service, business environment) which are reviewed and approved by manager and partner Staffs just listen and take notes They hardly have questions Senior – Big-4 4: Partner, Director, Manager share their experience and evaluation on potential risks of the client Each client, product/service, and industry have distinctive and typical issues on accounting standards For example: a very big multi-sector corporation (real estate, banking, construction, manufacturing) or complex industry (gas and oil, electricity, airlines) Partners in my firm have very long experience and very different views from us With their experience, they can identify the risks that team should pay more attention Calculative Client-based Review Senior – Big-4 1: After Senior in charge makes a preliminary plan, Manager and Partner review and comments Their mostly comment Stage Motivation Types of K Mechanisms Interviews on potential risks of clients These ideas are very useful for Senior, especially new Senior or first year client Because Partner and managers had meeting with client’s board of management, they have the thorough grasp of situations and information about client Calculative Technical Review Senior – Big-4 3: Manager and Partner comment on the materiality level They assess whether the materiality level proposed by Senior are suitable and rational They also comment on the audit scoping, what Senior should focus when conducts Test of controls and test of details Reviewing and giving feedback back and forth are the knowledge sharing of an audit team Calculative Technical Co-problem Senior – Big-4 1: Especially with new staff, I often check their solving progress I handle the pending issues with them For example, accounting software, data exporting, contra accounts Manager – Big-4 2: Because their jobs are directly interdependent, the staffs need exchanging and sharing to get sufficient data, information to conduct their parts For example, auditing revenue section needs data of inventory section Staff in charge of Sales section discusses with the one in charge of Receivable section to Stage Motivation Types of K Mechanisms Interviews check the accuracy Staff in charge of long-term prepaid expense discusses with the one on operating expense to check whether the long-term and short-term expense allocation are recorded into expenses sufficiently Staff – Local 11: When we have anything in queries or ambiguity, we bring them to discuss together For example, some legal documents related to tax return are not clear, we analyze and discuss to come to an agreement to handle the issues of our client The other discussions relate to accounting, auditing techniques, or legal regulations Manager – International 5: The staffs also exchange on auditing and accounting software, excel and other IT skills Senior – International 5: I discuss with other team members when we find out technical abnormalities If I not involve closely with them, they will carry out the unnecessary things or lack of important things that may cause deadline missing In the end, the partner and manager will incriminate me first, then badly impacts on my performance evaluation Stage Motivation Types of K Mechanisms Interviews Senior – Big4 3: After testing procedures, we figure out several issues I and the staff discuss and solve the issues together Sometimes, with complex issues that is out of my knowledge, I must raise to higher-levels and discuss with Manager and Partner The complex issues often relate to recording transactions In accounting, with on transaction accountants can twist to match with their firm’s purposes For example, I have one contract that must be recorded in revenue this year I can record it next year to avoid tax So, whether we put it in the audit opinion, whether we accept their argument Manager – International 6: I am always supportive, available to answer their questions because if they not finish their parts, I cannot complete mine in very short time I have support them, I cannot bite off more than I can chew Staff – Big-4 1: Senior is very enthusiastic and supportive because only when I can proceed my task smoothly and effectively, he can complete his audit report He helps me so that I help him Stage Motivation Types of K Mechanisms Interviews Senior – Big-4 4: If we ask the high levels too much, they may not like and think that we are weak, less competent We may be evaluated as bad performance Senior – Big-4 2: There are Seniors that they not care about sharing knowledge or coaching staff Because they are too busy They make trade-off It is more effective when they it themselves than Calculative Technical Review spend time training staff They are result-oriented Senior – Big-4 3: After collecting all working paper of staff, I analyze and integrate into audit report and opinions, then send them to manager then partner for review Manager and partner make comments and questions on the unclear and abnormal issues Calculative Managerial Co-problem Manager – International 7: Some clients are very prissy, especially solving their accountants are shrewish, often shout at our staffs They are scared and demotivated Communication with clients is very important However, our main objective is completing the job, meeting deadline We need to handle with it Senior – Big-4 1: When a staff says “I can’t get documents from clients” I hardly talk directly to the clients to ask for documents and Stage Motivation Types of K Mechanisms Interviews data for staff I ask them the reasons and gradually solve the problem with them, steps by steps Staff – Big-4 3: Time management is important for us We are often flooded with jobs in audit season Some seniors help and guide us to organize jobs, what should be prioritized Normative Technical Co-problem Manager – Big-4 1: Everybody implicitly understand it Seniors see solving that when they were associates, they were helped and shared experience from the higher levels Now they the same with their associates Senior – Big-4 1: The partners and managers ask and encourage the sharing culture However, we may follow or not It depends The main reason we share is that everyone does so we do, too I ask and you Affective Technical Co-problem share He asks me, so I share Staff – Big-4 2: I think the firm should have more teambuilding solving activities, go out together, especially for Seniors and staff If we are bonding or know each other in advance, in working time, it is easier to ask or communicate If not, it is so stressful Stage Motivation Types of K Mechanisms Interviews Staff – Big-4 3: If I hate someone, I won’t ask them or even discuss Staff – Local 12: In university and in family, nobody gives any scolding At work, I am reprimanded soundly I am afraid of asking Manager – Big-4 4: I like to work with staffs that are careful, responsible, progressive Good impression They may make fast track I want to invest on them I appreciate and share with them more than the ones who are not Manager – International 6: In fieldwork, they sit with each other in week, exchange a lot With the jobs in different cities, they work then eat with each other In the hotels, even they stay up late to work together The team spirit increases Affective Managerial Co-problem Senior – Big-4 1: How to communicate with clients is very solving important to get data The clients are busy with their own stuff, how to communicate effectively is an art We have different ways to approach different styles of people (quiet, flighty) Some seniors help staff to talk with clients Some not, but let them it themselves If I bond with you, I will show you If not, you need to it yourself Stage Motivation Types of K Mechanisms Interviews Senior – Big-4 2: If you have a bonding team, the work will be much less stressful We can share about any kinds of difficulties, what you are concerning, what distracts you from the work Staff – Local 10: We often work far from home We are young and about the same age We encourage each other and share experience about how to manage our working tasks, our personal stuffs It is easy Calculative Practical judgement Demonstration Observation to understand We coordinate in more effective teamwork Senior – Local: After reviewing, partner and manager analyze and discuss with us about the details of complex issues, they want to find out the solutions that could make both sides happy Before the meeting with client, manager prepares what we are going to present to client, mainly quantifying adjusting entries and how they impact audit opinion, how to back-up Because we provide services, we have to satisfy client, but we have to protect ourselves… In the meeting, just our partner, sometimes manager, talk with the director and chief accountant of the client Stage Motivation Types of K Mechanisms Interviews Senior – Big-4 4: The most challenging job in completion phase is meeting with client and agreeing on anomaly issues and adjusting entries Whatever they do, we have to qualify the report and make audit opinions Some clients know clearly what they have done are wrong and not follow standards But they have their own business rationale and not agree to adjust entries That is very stressful In the meeting, partner and manager has to negotiate with client, come up with new ideas, and propose solutions to client They have to find the regulations in standards that could be applied to such situations but not violate the law, and at the same time, they could keep the relationship with client Manager – Big-4 2: Client may not agree to adjust in accounting system They rely on legal regulations and we do, too However, sometimes, the law is very ambiguous, vague Each one has their own understanding and interpretations In that situation, we have to involve and rely on the experience of the partner Stage Motivation Types of K Mechanisms Interviews Partner – Local 11: Clients often not want the audit opinions I have to persuade them It is stressful! How to balance the business profit, comply with regulations, standards, and professional ethics I have to make wise decisions Calculative Practical Reflection and Senior – Local 12: When partner and manger comments on the draft judgement practice report, if I just copy their ideas without analysis and self-reflection, I will not understand the reasons underlie them and nature of the problems I have to question myself, explain and draw lessons from their decisions so that in the next jobs, I can avoid the mistakes and propose accurate solutions Senior – Big-4 3: Making final decisions in meeting with client are headache, so difficult Just Partner has enough experience and power to dealt with them It is science and art To be successful with this profession, we need this ability The situations are very diverse, unique, case by case ... sharing in professional service project teams 56 2.4.1 Modes of project life in professional service project teams 57 2.4.2 Team knowledge sharing and Functions of professional service project teams. .. team knowledge sharing, and dynamics of team knowledge sharing 19 1.2.3 Roles of team knowledge sharing 23 1.2.4 Factors influencing team knowledge sharing 28 1.3 Overview of motivation... motivations of team knowledge sharing 39 1.4 Overview of professional service firms 40 1.4.1 Definition and types of professional service firms 40 1.4.2 Importance of team knowledge sharing in