COORDINATING EXPERTISE ACROSS KNOWLEDGE BOUNDARIES IN OFFSHORE-OUTSOURCING PROJECTS: THE ROLE OF CODIFICATION

• 成果类型: Article
• 署名作者: Kotlarsky, Julia; Scarbrough, Harry; Oshri, Ilan
• 署名单位: Aston University; Keele University
• 刊物名称: MIS QUARTERLY
• ISSN/ISSBN: 0276-7783
• DOI: 10.25300/MISQ/2014/38.2.13
• 发表日期: 2014
• 页码: 607-+
• 关键词: ORGANIZATIONAL KNOWLEDGE; INFORMATION; TECHNOLOGY; teams; capabilities; collaboration; communities; PERSPECTIVE; performance; competence

摘要

The coordination of effort within and among different expert groups is a central feature of contemporary organizations. Within the existing literature, however, a dichotomy has emerged in our understanding of the role played by codification in coordinating expert groups. One strand of literature emphasizes codification as a process that supports coordination by enabling the storage and ready transfer of knowledge. In contrast, another strand highlights the persistent differences between expert groups that create boundaries to the transfer of knowledge, seeing coordination as dependent on the quality of the reciprocal interactions between groups and individuals. Our research helps to resolve such contested understandings of the coordinative role played by codification. By focusing on the offshore-outsourcing of knowledge-intensive services, we examine the role played by codification when expertise was coordinated between client staff and onsite and offshore vendor personnel in a large-scale outsourcing contract between TATA Consultancy Services (TCS) and ABN AMRO bank. A number of theoretical contributions flow from our analysis of the case study, helping to move our understanding beyond the dichotomized views of codification outlined above. First, our study adds to previous work where codification has been seen as a static concept by demonstrating the multiple, coexisting, and complementary roles that codification may play. We examine the dynamic nature of codification and show changes in the relative importance of these different roles in coordinating distributed expertise over time. Second, we reconceptualize the commonly accepted view of codification as focusing on the replication and diffusion of knowledge by developing the notion of the codification of the knower as complementary to the codification of knowledge. Unlike previous studies of expertise directories, codification of the knower does not involve representing expertise in terms of occupational skills or competences but enables the reciprocal interrelating of expertise required by more unstructured tasks.