Ursula Gomes Rosa
Maruyama
Centro Federal de
Educação Tecnológica Celso Suckow da Fonseca (CEFET-RJ/PPCTE), Brazil
E-mail: maruyama.academic@hotmail.com
Marco Antonio
Barbosa Braga
Centro Federal de
Educação Tecnológica Celso Suckow da Fonseca (CEFET-RJ/PPCTE), Brazil
E-mail: braga@tekne.pro.br
Submission:
23/01/2014
Accept:
05/02/2014
ABSTRACT
Technology and innovation
development presented new challenges for the twenty-first century manager.
Besides, aspects of organizational culture and knowledge management are equally
important for corporate success. All the above areas have a growing number of
studies that seek to deepen reflections providing a greater understanding of
their environmental relationship. Brazilian human resource management has shown
years of late progress, especially due to the prevailing macroeconomic
conditions, with no transformation evidences This current study with a
theoretical-descriptive qualitative approach through literature analysis, study
the integration model proposed by Chen and Huang (2009). The mediating role of
knowledge management to strategic human resource practices and innovation
performance presented by these authors are compared with national and
international literature. The integration conceptual model proposed to apply in
the Brazilian context, consider three pillars presented by the Eastern authors,
enhanced by cross-checks prospects with intellectual capital approaches,
representing the Western authors’ contributions. Henceforth, we aim to provide
a suitable proposal for this model in the Brazilian organizational context.
Keywords: Strategic Human Resources Management; Innovation
Management; Knowledge Management
1.
INTRODUCTION
There
is a growing trend and rapid incorporation of new forms of industrial
organization to the corporate culture, in response to new market challenges
(TALAMO; CARVALHO, 2004). To answer these transformations is necessary for
organizations to constantly innovate while maintaining an efficient management
of knowledge associated with strategic people management.
The
importance of strategic people management, innovation management and knowledge
management as themes associated with the lack of their interdependently
literature shows the relevance of this study. Results of previous research (LIN;
LIU CHENG 2011; ANDRADE; GALINA, 2013) showed that the higher the degree of
internationalization, the lower tends to be the commitment performance of
multinational firms. In this sense, how should companies keep their focus in
the national context in order to achieve their goals?
Chen
and Huang (2009) developed a survey of approximately 146 companies in Taiwan,
presenting statistical evidence that corroborate the association of these
relations, considering the ability of knowledge management as a mediator
between strategic human resource practices and innovation performance. Thus,
our research question arises: How Chen and Huang theory can be applied to the
Brazilian context?
Thus,
this research aims to identify elements of Chen and Huang theory that can be
used in the Brazilian scenario. To achieve this result, appear as specific
objectives:
·
Search in the literature evidence to support or oppose
the assumptions of Chen and Huang;
·
Identify the main points of this theory;
·
Analyze theory elements that can be applied in Brazil;
·
Develop conceptual model proposed for use in the
Brazilian context.
Furthermore,
the research developed by Chen and Huang in 2009 is presented, integrating
strategic areas of human resources (HR), knowledge management (KM) and
innovation. Finally, a conceptual proposal will be presented using these
elements to facilitate the variables understanding and their subsequent
implementation in the Brazilian organizational context.
2. STRATEGIC HUMAN RESOURCES PRACTICES
Brazilian human resource management has faced years of late progress,
especially due to the prevailing macroeconomic conditions, with no
transformation evidences (LACOMBE; TONELLI, 2001). The aforementioned authors
conducted research with 100 companies, verifying models of human resource
management companies, divided in two groups:
HR strategic model (53 % of the sample) and a HR competitive model (19
%). Although these companies can be configured within the same pattern, those
practices have presented wide heterogeneity (LACOMBE; TONELLI, 2001, p. 172).
According to Schuler
(1992), strategic human resource management (SHRM) focuses on the relationship
between individual motivations and performance and business development
strategy. While Silva et al (2008) advocate an approach where human resource
management (HRM) should not stick to organizational practices objective
dimension, or either reject it. It is necessary to deal with the subjective
dimension, as two different poles, complementary and inseparable. This is a
challenge for HRM scientific knowledge (SILVA et al., 2008, p. 16).
Analyzing strategic approach in the broad sense, only a small number of companies
use actual strategic planning (ANSOFF, 1990). Strategic planning, rather than a
static process, should be seen as a dynamic management tool, containing
emerging events and anticipating decisions on the line of action to be followed
by the organization in fulfilling its mission (ALDAY, 2000). Thus, it is
noticed that dynamism and flexibility become a recurring challenge to
organizations.
HRM is not free of these obstacles, which require much effort by their
managers in order to maintain your competitive edge. Once "people do not
work in isolation" (ROCK; BARONE, 2011), the manager must be aware of
expectations each professional brings to the workplace.
In literature, possessing competitive advantage means having the ability
to provide the best products, services or financial return than its
competitors. Therefore, HR should help companies to create value. Thus, some
categories of HR practices can create greater competitive advantage than
others. Brockbank (1999) presents his theory, proposing that:
[...] strategic dimension versus operational
dimension suggests that HR builds competitive advantage when it creates greater
long-term value than competitors HR activities and focuses on issues which are
critical to success. Proactive versus reactive dimension suggests that in order
to create value, HR activities must be made before their competitors. Thus, an
HR department increases its potential to create a competitive advantage, since
it moves from being operationally reactive to be strategically proactive
(BROCKBANK, 1999 p.340).
Theoretical studies in business strategy have driven the Human
Resources area as a competitive advantage generator (BECKER; GERHARD, 1996).
However, imitate human resource strategies that are deeply embedded in
organizations is no easy task, especially due to the existence of process
causal ambiguity and dependency (BARNEY, 1991; COLLIS; MONTGOMERY, 1995).
HR planning should be developed as part of companies strategies. Setting
needs to be periodically revised adapting to new environmental conditions
(LACOMBE, 2005). In this study, SHRM use human capital approach, as well as
organizational behavior and culture with strategic alignment.
2.1.
Behavior, organizational climate and culture
Organizational behavior is
seen as human behavior study in corporate environments (GRIFFIN; MOORHEAD,
2006), whether is in the relationship amongst professionals, whether is in the
organization itself. For Davis and Newstrom (2002), the organizational behavior
key elements are people, structure, technology and environment in which the
organization operates.
Rock and Barone (2011)
present three categories involving organizational behavior fundamental
concepts:
The behavior emerges from one’s commitment or apathy within organization
which can be jointly translated by organizational climate. Accordingly,
"an organizational commitment is usually conceived as a psychological
connection with the organization, including an involvement sense, loyalty and
belief in the organization value" (O'REILLY, 1995). On the other hand,
organizational culture can be interpreted as a mediator between Human Resource
Management (HRM) and organizational performance, once HRM practices lay the
groundwork for culture, which in turn facilitates contributors participation to
organization overall goals, increasing its performance (RIBEIRO, 2009).
But what is organizational culture? How is it interpreted and perceived
by its main authors and organizations? Schein (2009, p. 8) makes a good
analogy: "culture is to a group like character or personality is to an
individual." Although the concept of culture has a certain degree of
'abstraction', meanwhile represents real and profound behavioral and
attitudinal consequences within the organization.
Rock and Barone (2011, p.99) states that culture "is the underlying
set of value, beliefs, knowledge and essential norms shared by employees."
On the other hand, O'Reilly (1995) warns that failing on a clearer
specification of what is culture can result in confusion, disagreement and
conflict over its basic function and importance.
When a group forms its culture, assumes that the components of this
culture will be expressed, processed and transmitted to new generations of
group members (LOUIS, 1980). Certo et al. (2010, p.117) presents organizational
culture as "a set of shared value and beliefs that influence
effectiveness of strategy formulation and implementation."
By analyzing organizational culture, it can be said that every culture
has at least three levels in its composition: artifacts, shared value and
basic assumptions. These components are the key elements to understand the
culture of organization (CHIAVENATO, 2009):
Lacombe (2005) defines that company culture is a precious resource
management and can be used to achieve strategic objectives by aligning
technology, production inputs, equipment, financial and human resources through
its symbols, codes and value. However, the biggest challenge for any
organization is changing its culture. Whereas culture "is the stabilizing
force, conservative, a way to make things significant and predictable" (SCHEIN,
2009, p. 367), an organization that has a 'strong culture', by definition, to
be stable, would be difficult to modify itself, once distinguishes itself from
the market dynamics, requiring flexibility and continuous learning.
Organizational culture is the organization foundation: it is the summary
of common beliefs reflecting traditions and habits, as well as more tangible
manifestations - stories, symbols, or even buildings and products (MINTZBERG,
et al., 2000).
A concept which links organizational culture, SHRM and knowledge
management was presented by Peter Senge as ‘learning organizations’. The
'learning organizations' are those in which people continually enhance their
skills in order to create the future they really want to see in organization
and might be known by its characteristics: personal mastery, mental models,
shared vision, team learning and systems thinking.
However, Senge (2000) shows no models or learning organizations models
because, according to the author, "is not the way that innovation happens:
it cannot be copied". Once learning and change cannot be imposed on
people, it is necessary to reflect the extent to which perceptions, thoughts
and feelings are culturally determined to modify amidst these organizational
transformations. In this sense, human capital becomes a catalyst for boosting
these changes.
The human capital
term was first coined in 1954 by the economist and Nobel laureate Arthur Lewis
along with Theodore Shultz in Economic
Development with Unlimited Supplies of Labour, considered an influential
paper developed in its age. However, the most widespread concept in the
economic field of 'human capital' was developed by Mincer and Becker, members
of the Chicago School. The book human (1964) has become a reference standard,
where human capital is presented as ‘production means’.
Thus, it could be inferred
that human capital investment through education, training, medical treatment
would depend partially on ROI (return over investment). Therefore, human
capital was considered as an input, a means of production in a given additional
investment that would in turn produce additional outputs. Following this logic,
human capital would be replaceable, easily attainable, but could not be
transferred as land, labor or capital assets.
Similarly, another meaning of the term human capital is attributed to
skills used to finish some work adding economic value. Economic theories refer
to it as simply workforce, considering a fungible resource - homogeneous and
easily interchangeable.
However, the contemporary view used in management presents different
approaches: people generate capital for companies through their skills, their
attitudes and their capacity to innovate. Skills include ability and education,
and attitude refers to behavior and assertiveness. As a matter of the fact, it
is ultimately the ability to innovate, which can generate more value to
organizations: this is the human capital framework (SANTOS, 2009).
Considering as an intangible asset, human capital assigns a value to
each individual, and this value is used for the company's growth within
pragmatic policies and measures for each business management guidelines.
According to Oliveira & Oliveira (2011) in their 194 records meta-analysis
and original studies in the period between years 1985-2007, there is a positive
relationship between HRM and organizational performance. In order to seal this
relationship a key element is required: people.
3. INNOVATION
PERFORMANCE
Products offered by
companies need to be rethought, because organizations expend too much effort,
time and resources to attend costumers needs. Similarly, business
administration theory has been adapting itself to such organizational reality
(JUSSANI, et al., 2011). Not all types of innovation are equally important in
all environments (DAMANPOUR; GOPALAKRISHNAN, 1998). Understanding how the
company operates in this context creates opportunities and competitive
advantage.
Kim and Mauborgne (2005)
present an approach called 'Blue Ocean Strategy' which emerges from the
analysis of the red ocean, for instance, the chaotic and aggressive
organization routine. Henceforth, instead of a bloody battle to compete, the
differential blue ocean strategy search unexplored market spaces, where
competition has not arrived yet and the company can expand its market share.
This strategic move is directed to a value innovation, which results in a
strong asset to the organization and to products and services clients (JUSSANI,
et al., 2011).
Schumpeter emphasizes that innovation is not invention synonymous, once
an invention does not necessarily induce innovation. The invention itself
produces no significant economic effect (TIGRE, 2006). "Owning creative minds is not enough to
innovate in companies"(SERAFIM, 2011, p.25). How about the creativity and
the creative process? What is its relationship with technological innovation?
Creative ideas can only be considered an innovation, if the next moment
that they have been deployed, they are able to obtain some return or added
value. Accordingly, one of the accepted definitions assigned to the innovation is
to be an invention that has reached the market introduction phase in the case
of a new product or the first use of a production process, in the case of an
innovation process (UTTERBACK, 1971).
In order to achieve
organizational goals, managers must evaluate "options and information
available and choose the most attractive choices. Thus, the strategies
formulation should be based on aggregated, incomplete and uncertain information
over alternative levels"(HITT, et al., 2003).
Russell (1990) raises the
question: what do we know about innovation? Innovation is influenced by
individual, organizational and environmental variables. In this sense, one can
find several not related to Research and Development (R & D) activities but
considered them prior to conducting innovative activities of higher levels
conditions.
In developing countries, technology transfer began with technology
acquisition and application to accelerate economic development (DAYS; MARINA,
2013). This process is known by starting with simple activities application
(e.g. copying and imitation), encouraging continuous improvement and
experimentation, as activities become more complex up to reaching a degree
where there is investment in research infrastructure and development with
constant feedback.
Structural capital is known
for a set of elements that compounds administrative systems, concepts, models,
patterns, brands, patents and computer systems providing effectiveness to
organization. Its composition is attributed to organization elements
represented by its explicit intangible assets. Therefore, when an employee
tacit knowledge (human capital) is captured and stored it becomes part of the
structural capital.
Thus, this capital is formed
by technology, inventions, data, files, knowledge repositories, publications,
processes and programs that record the knowledge of the organization. It also
can be considered that systems enterprise value ensure consistency and enable
human capital enhancement (as explained before). The focus on each of these
‘capitals’ must be suited to its peculiarities and temporal needs.
Presenting the accumulation
of technological capacity issues is perceived the intra-organizational factors and
learning mechanisms which are influenced by leadership, as well as
macro-environment influences:
[...] Far from being a linear and continuous,
the trajectories of technological capabilities accumulation - particularly in
the context of emerging companies - are characterized by high variability,
among companies of the same and different industrial segment - both in terms of
the way (direction) and speed they accumulate their technological capabilities
(FIGUEIREDO, 2011, p 5).
The technological accumulation
process also suffers influences from the nature of industrialization models
adopted in each country. Even though this technology accumulation process
occurs within companies, there is a significant role in government policies on
their development, especially if developed countries and developing countries
are compared one to another.
Even during crisis, opportunities may arise in unexplored areas from
creative and innovative capacities encouragement. Considered from Brazilian
organizations viewpoint, the current scenario is quite challenging, intricate
and full of transformations. Roberts (1988) argued that there are four guiding
dimensions for organizational success: people, structure, strategy and support
systems. Such dimensions are central to innovation success. They ensure
companies have the right people to effectively manage critical organizational
development issues.
Analyzing under this point of view, observing the "people dimension”,
multidisciplinary teams are able to work efficiently and effectively in solving
these complex situations. Increasingly, more professionals with generalist
background presence are required: they can engage with other specialties
professionals, contributing effectively in those teams works (LACOMBE, 2005).
When dealing with such issues, the organization technological capabilities
system interacts amongst intellectual capital elements (structural capital,
human capital and social capital) as well as with organizational culture, in
continuous feedback (e.g. there is a continuous updating and interaction with
the system).
The capacity for innovation accumulation can represent not only
performance and competitive advantage, but also national and international
leadership, economic superiority and influence on political alliances among
companies, countries and geographical regions. In this sense, "the more
complex and profound is technological capacity, the harder is to be imitated
and copied by other competitors" (FIGUEIREDO, 2011). Innovative activities
are based on a process of innovation and this in turn presents some typical
characteristics (DOSI, 1988), such as:
On the other hand, to FGV
professor Paulo Figueiredo (2011) other characteristics should be observed in
the assessment of technological capabilities:
Whereas the accumulation of
technological capabilities has its effects on organizations performance,
technological learning indirectly influences the enterprises competitiveness.
In this sense, another challenge for companies is how to manage knowledge and
foster organizational learning.
4.
KNOWLEDGE
MANAGEMENT CAPACITY
In this new economy age,
the so-called Age of Knowledge, Knowledge Management (KM) is suggested to be
the core strategy for competitiveness in organizations (BEM, et al., 2013).
This is due to the subject being in several areas of knowledge borderline.
Recognized as being multidisciplinary par
excellence, the degree of knowledge considers a skill set from many areas
it originates (FRANCINI, 2002).
Knowledge management can be
applied in whole or part of the company, in order to improve its internal
processes and become more efficient (CANDIDO; ARAÚJO, 2003). According to
Scholl, et al. (2004), KM is a "relatively diffuse and characterized by
different concepts, perspectives and approaches”, while Spender (2001) claims
to be "difficult to conceptualize knowledge because it is a fluid term and
difficult to define it". Nonaka and Takeuchi, the renowned Japanese
authors (2008) consider knowledge an internal process within the individual
person and then, externalized. Inasmuch, through this socialization, knowledge
is shared and enhanced. Considering this premise:
When organizations innovate, they do not just
process information from outside to inside aiming to solve existing problems
and adapting to the changing environment. They actually create new knowledge
and information, from the inside out, aiming to redefine both problems and
solutions in the process, recreating its environment. [ ... ] Information is a
flow of messages, while knowledge is created by the same flow of information,
anchored by the beliefs and commitment of its bearer. This understanding
emphasizes that knowledge is essentially related to human action (NONAKA;
TAKEUCHI, 2008, p. 55- 56).
Emotions regulate learning
and memory formation. In this way, learning can be considered as a process of
change, triggered by various stimuli, mediated by emotions, which may or may
not come to manifest themselves in the person change of behavior. Thus,
organizational knowledge creation is a continuous and dynamic interaction
between tacit and explicit knowledge. The interaction process is composed
between different models of knowledge conversion which are induced by various
triggers.
Davenport and Vopel (2001) assert organizations must learn to employ
knowledge workers from their attitudes and motivation in relation to knowledge.
Thus, developing activities in accordance with those rules create a culture in
which staff internalizes knowledge management as part of their own work.
However, the institutionalization of KM suggests a favorable cultural
environment, and if the organization has not acquired this environment, it will
have to build or reform it. Knowledge Management policies are useless if they
do not leave the paper (BEM, et al., 2013).
Corporate
university is considered the concept inspired in universities and sheltered by
corporate environment in order to develop people in organizations as well as
their stakeholders (ARAÚJO; GARCIA, 2009). Eboli (2006) presents the rationale
for integration and implementation of Corporate Education:
In
full corporate education, for example, education promoted by
university-business partnership, the central issue is not to let people in the
organization deviate from the independent educational processes. The corporate
university cannot be compared to the training and development (T&D) area
because it is directed to specific programs to meet the organization's
strategy, while the T&D is directed to develop skills, abilities and
attitudes related issues presented in the organization.
As
stated by Vergara and Davel (2001), corporate universities have doctrinal
character. Despite the speech, which is developed the ability to think
differently, to innovate, break paradigms, like the core competence required
nowadays and therefore privileged in education and business training.
McClelland after publishing
his article Testing for Competence rather
than Intelligence in 1973, initiated the debate on competence among
psychologists and administrators in the United States (FLEURY; FLEURY, 2001).
The competence concept is currently thought of as:
[...] set of knowledge, skills and attitudes (i.e.,
set of human capabilities) that justify a high performance, believing that the
best performances are grounded in the intelligence and personality of the
people (FLEURY; FLEURY, 2001, p.185).
Competence is seen by Le Boterf (1995) as the integration of three axes
formed by the individual (his biography, socialization), by their educational
background and their professional experience. Competence thus becomes a set of
social and communicative learning nourished by the upstream and downstream
learning by the ratings system. Prahalad (2001, p. 45) reviewing the core
competencies portfolio, where management becomes complex, identified at least
five distinct tasks:
Competencies development
focuses on learning at three levels: individual, group and organizational. The
learning focus should include, in addition to analytical skills, learning
processes, behaviors and value. Thus, a new competence is developed,
individual role is examined, teams across organization pursuit excellence,
scientific knowledge, creativity transforming into expertise and innovation
capacity.
The main advantages from framework and processes consolidation in the
organizational competencies development are (BITTENCOURT, et al., 2013):
Thus, according to the
authors, the dynamic capabilities refer to organizational ability to develop
new skills, integrating and regenerating old and new features rapidly through
their processes in a constant process of change. However, it should be noted
that the organization dynamic capabilities depend on its specific allocation of
resources, whether they are physical, material, financial, human or
organizational.
5. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This study is classified as
qualitative, considering the need to understand in depth the researched
phenomenon (RICHARDSON, 1999). While as and approach, it was classified as
descriptive, aiming to explicit the issue, allowing ideas enhancement and the
characteristics description of a particular phenomenon (GIL, 2002). The
bibliographical research was used to support deepening national and
international literature comprehension (GRAY, 2009; SILVERMAN, 2009).
6.
Chen & Huang Model and proposition to Brazilian
context
Chen and Huang work aimed
to examine the strategic impact of HR practices on the performance of
innovation through its mediating effect on the ability to manage knowledge. The
strategic HR practices (SHRP) arise as pillars to support the path
organizations will model their skills, attitudes and employees behavior in
order reaching their goals in innovatively.
Figure 1: Chen and Huang
Model (2009)
Source: Authors
How do companies as Intel, Hewlett-Packard, Cray Research, 3M and
Johnson & Johnson develop successful products and create new ways of doing
things? How can culture help or hinder these processes? The answer lies in the
rules if widely shared and accepted by organizations members could actively
promote new ideas generation and implement different approaches (O'REILLY,
1995, p. 319). Notwithstanding, innovation arise in the corporate environment,
as human capital are leveled in organizational expertise creating new products
and services.
In addition to accessing employees’ knowledge, skills and expertise, it
is necessary to have good ability to manage knowledge management tools ensuring
human capital effective use in organization expertise development towards
innovation. Knowledge management is an approach that will add value by
balancing know -how (practical or tacit knowledge) and expertise (know-why)
facilitated by explicit knowledge in the organization.
By using these four management practices dimensions: selection,
training, recognition and reward proposed by Youndt, et al. (1996) associated
with participation dimension, complete the construct used by Cheng and Huang
(2009) to analyze organizations. The Taiwanese research conducted selected the
5000 companies in the China Credit Information Service Incorporation, divided
this sample into five levels of 1,000 companies. Out of this classification,
150 questionnaires were sent to each level totaling 750 questionnaires, which
finally 146 were considered valid forms.
The quantitative research results indicated that HR practices relate
positively with knowledge management capacity, which in turn is positively
related to innovation performance. Thus, a better level of knowledge management
capacity can stimulate creativity and innovative thoughts leading to better
innovation performance. Therefore, to counterbalance the link between people management
practices and promote innovation performance, managers need to first recognize
the importance of knowledge management.
The current technological
revolution is not characterized by knowledge and information, but by a
cumulative feedback loop between innovation and its use (CASTELLS, 1999). To
complement the work of Chen and Huang (2009) as proposed in this study,
national and international literature were analyzed, whereas similar studies
merged to corroborate within the theoretical framework.
Considering Chen and Huang proposed model (2009) and evaluating how it
could be applied to Brazilian context, we elaborated a new structure where
three pillars - Strategic Human Resources Practices, Knowledge Management and Innovation
Performance - were organized in three intellectual capital directories
(thematic axis or approaches):
Figure 2: Proposed
model for integration in the Brazilian context
Source: Authors
In consonance with Bem, et al. (2013), with regard to knowledge
management success is necessary to have a steadfast cultural environment. Raw
intellectual capital would be found in the three organization secondary axis as
Training & Development (T&D) in Strategic Human Resources Practices
pillar, as well as Corporate University (CU) in Knowledge Management pillar and
Research & Development (R&D) axis to Innovation Performance pillar.
Yet, the second axis or focus approach, represented by this intellectual
capital management would be recognized in the form of raising human capital in
Strategic HR Practices pillar, whereas the manager is able to attract new
talent to organization. On the other hand, organizational capital alignment
would be allocated on Knowledge Management pillar, which means management tools
and systems are able to organize knowledge. The last represented factor by
social capital (stakeholders) development would be assigned to Innovation
Performance pillar, due to the positive influences in diversity to foster
creativity and innovation.
Finally, the focus of intellectual capital strategic management finds
Strategic Human Resources Practices pillar by Organizational Culture axis,
mainly by recognizing organizations value and basic assumptions influencing
their choices and strategic decisions. In Knowledge Management pillar is
presented Competencies Management concerning its improvement on essential
skills as a result its competitiveness.
Figure 3:
Organizational management process focusing on intellectual capital for R&D
Source: Authors
Last, but not least, Innovation Performance pillar, embedded the dynamic
and technological capabilities concept, so that the organization has the
necessary elements for innovative sustainability. An integration scheme in a
logical sequence of events is shown on figure 3.
By using this conceptual model, companies maintain its structure linked
to human resources and innovation management. When there is integration, rework
is eliminated; both human and temporal, as well as financial resources and
efforts are saved. It is recommended that this structure is viewed from the
project management perspective in order to continually provide feedback.
Knowledge management, as presented by Chen and Huang (2009) in the East,
can become an ally integrating internal organizational resources (human and
organizational capital), as well as better allocation of external resources
(stakeholders and their capital) in the Western organizational context and more
specifically in Brazil. Therefore, it is necessary a multidirectional
communication where culture is open to change and innovation.
7. FINAL CONSIDERATIONS
Knowledge management
ability emerges as mediator between strategic human resource practices and
innovation performance. The performances of these three pillars are important
foundations for the creation of competitive advantage in organizations. Whereas
Chen and Huang (2009) demonstrate through its quantitative research the
relationships amongst these variables, this theoretical-descriptive essay
presented concepts in the literature corroborating to adapt the proposed model
nationally.
Throughout this study, behavior and culture organization research
concepts and theories were introduced along with human capital development to
assemble Strategic Human Resources Practices. Without these elements,
organization does not maintain its sustainability, losing its identity
responsible for generating value and competitive advantage.
Before it reached the R&D stage, companies initiate a process from
reverse engineering, copying or imitation. These processes evolve as structural
capital develops together with organizational learning, forming a mature
foundation for technological capacity. Thus, Innovation Performance originates
from complementary levels, enhancing a continuous feedback loop focused on
innovation.
Corporate university goes beyond training because it shows a broader
systemic and strategic approach. Moreover competencies management helps in
identifying and retaining more appropriate talents to organization needs. Using
these supportive tools, intellectual capital arises: structural capital, social
capital and human capital are integrated, so the knowledge management ability.
Presenting its components, Chen and Huang (2009) work was introduced to
contextualize the purpose of this study. The integration conceptual model
proposed to apply in the Brazilian context, consider the three pillars
presented by the Eastern authors, enhanced by cross-checks prospects with axes,
approaches or intellectual capital directories, representing the Western authors
contributions.
In summary, all three
pillars: strategic human resource practices, knowledge management and
innovation performance are combined with three axis (approaches): intellectual
capital, intellectual capital management and intellectual capital strategic
management. The presented structure facilitates the configuration of all organizational levels
strategies and simplifies knowledge management optimizing the available
resources.
There are some limitations in the presented study: its methodology did
not empirically apply the aforementioned issues. Nonetheless, organizational
practices compliance can provide opportunities to develop further projects
concerning this subject matter. Another limiting aspect lies on the lack of
longitudinal and cross-sectional analysis so that comparative studies may
corroborate with the developed topic as well.
In conclusion, this research corroborated to draw structural aspects of
this theme which did not have many written studies integrating them.
Interdisciplinary approaches and its relationship with organizational strategy
are recommended. It is desired this study contributes bringing about
alternatives to expand these isolated subjects into new perspectives on
innovation and knowledge management in Brazil.
8. REFERENCES
ALDAY, H. (2000). O
planejamento estratégico dentro do conceito de administração estratégica. Revista FAE, Curitiba, v. 3, n. 2, p. 9-16.
ANDRADE, A. de; GALINA, S.
(2013). Efeitos da internacionalização sobre o desempenho de multinacionais de
economias em desenvolvimento. RAC,
Rio de Janeiro, v. 17, n. 2, art. 6, p. 239-262.
ANSOFF, H. I. (1990). Do planejamento estratégico à administração
estratégica. São Paulo: Atlas.
ARAÚJO, L. C.; GARCIA, A.
(2009). Gestão de Pessoas: estratégias e
integração organizacional. 2 ed. São Paulo: Atlas.
BARNEY, J. (1991). Firm
resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, v. 17, p. 99-120.
BECKER, B.; GERHART, B.
(1996). The impact of human resource management on organizational performance:
progress and prospects. The Academy of Management
Journal. v. 39, n. 4, p. 779-801.
BEM, R.; PRADO, M.;
DELFINO, N. (2013). Desafios à implantação da gestão do conhecimento: a questão
cultural nas organizações públicas federais brasileiras. Revista Digital Biblioteconomia Ciência da Informação Campinas, SP,
v. 11, n. 2, p. 123-135.
BROCKBANK, W. (1999). If HR
were really strategically proactive: present and future directions in HR’s
contribution to competitive advantage. Human Resource
Management, v. 38, n. 4, p.
337-352.
CASTELLS, M. (1999). A sociedade em rede. v. 1. São Paulo:
Paz e Terra.
CERTO, S.; et al. (2010). Administração estratégica: planejamento e
implantação de estratégias. 3 ed. São Paulo: Pearson.
CHEN, C.; HUANG, J. (2009).
Strategic human resource practices and innovation performance – the mediating
role of knowledge management capacity. Journal
of Business Research, v. 62, p. 104-114.
CHIAVENATO, I. (2009). Gestão de Pessoas. 3 ed. Rio de Janeiro:
Campus.
COLLIS, D. J., &
MONTGOMERY, C. A. (1995). Competing on
resources: Strategy for the 1990s. Harvard Business Review, v. 73, n. 4, p. 118-128.
CRIE. (2013). Capitais do conhecimento. Available at:
http://www.talentoseresultados.com/capitais.htm Access 21/07/2013.
DAMANPOUR, F.;
GOPALAKRISHNAN, S. (1998). Theories of organizational structure and innovation
adoption: the role of environmental change. Journal of Engineering Technology Management, n. 15, p. 1-24.
DAVENPORT, T. H. e VÖLPEL,
S. C. (2001). The rise of knowledge towards attention management. Journal of Knowledge Management. v. 5,
n. 3, p. 212-222.
DAVIS, K.; NEWSTROM, J.
(2002). Comportamento humano no trabalho. v. 1. São Paulo: Pioneira
Thomson Learning.
DIAS, A.; PORTO, G. (2013).
Gestão de transferência de tecnologia na Inova Unicamp. RAC. Rio de Janeiro, v. 17, n. 3, art. 1, p. 263-284.
DOSI, G. (1988). The Nature
of the innovative process. In. DOSI, G. et al. (1988). Technical Change and Economic Theory. London: Pinter Publishers.
EBOLI, M. (2006). Educação Corporativa
Desenvolvendo a Excelência Profissional e Organizacional. AGANP Proceedings, Goiânia. Available at:
http://www.sgc.goias.gov.br/upload/links/arq_453_palestra_marisa_eboli_semfotos.pdf
Access 21/07/2013.
FRANCINI, W. (2002). A
Gestão do conhecimento: conectando estratégia e valor para a empresa. RAE eletrônica. v. 1, n. 1, p. 1-16.
GIL, A. (2002). Como elaborar projetos de pesquisa. 4
ed. São Paulo: Atlas.
GRAY, D. (2009). Pesquisa no mundo real. 2 ed. Porto
Alegre: Penso.
GRIFFIN, R.; MOORHEAD, G.
(2006). Fundamentos do comportamento
organizacional. São Paulo: Ática.
HITT, M.; IRELAND R.;
HOSKISSON, R.(2003). Administração estratégica:
competitividade e globalização. São Paulo: Thomson Learning.
JUSSANI, A.; KRAKAUER, P.;
POLO, E. (2010). Reflexões sobre a estratégia do oceano azul: uma comparação
com as estratégias de Ansoff, Porter e Hax & Wilde. Future Studies Research Journal Trends. São Paulo, v. 2, n. 2, p.
17-37.
KIM, W.; MAUBORGNE, R.
(2005). Blue ocean strategy: how to
create uncontested market space and make the competition irrelevant. New York: HBS Press.
LACOMBE, B.; TONELLI, M.
(2001). O discurso e a prática: o que nos dizem os especialistas e o que nos
mostram as práticas das empresas sobre os modelos de gestão de recursos
humanos. RAC, v. 5, n. 2, p. 157-174.
LACOMBE, F. (2005). Recursos Humanos: princípios e tendências.
São Paulo: Saraiva.
LE BOTERF, G. (1995). De la compétence: essai sur um attracteur étrange. Les éditions d’organisations. Paris: Quatrième Tirage.
LEWIS, W. (1954). A.
Economic Development with Unlimited Supplies of Labor. Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies, v. 22, n. 1, p.
139–91.
LIN, W. T., LIU, Y.; CHENG,
K. Y. (2011). The internationalization and performance of a firm: moderating
effect of a firm’s behavior. Journal of
international Management, v. 17, n. 1, p. 83-95.
LOUIS, M. (1980). Surprise
and sense making. Administrative Science
Quaterly, v. 25, p. 226-251.
MINTZBERG, H. et al.
(2000). Safári de estratégia: um roteiro
pela selva do planejamento estratégico. Porto Alegre: Bookman.
OLIVEIRA, A. DE; OLIVEIRA,
A. de. (2011). Gestão de Recursos Humanos: uma meta-análise de seus efeitos
sobre desempenho organizacional. RAC, Curitiba, v. 15, n. 4,
art. 5, p. 650-669.
O’REILLY, C. (1995).
Corporations, culture and commitment: motivation and social control in
organizations. Chapter Organizational culture.
In: STAW, B. (1995) Psychological
dimensions of organizational behavior. 2 ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. p. 316-328.
PRAHALAD, C.K. (2001).
Reexame de competências. Inovação e mudança: autores e conceitos imprescindíveis. HSM Management. São Paulo: Publifolha, p. 41-48.
RIBEIRO, T. (2009). A gestão estratégica dos Recursos Humanos:
a relação entre a Força da Gestão dos Recursos Humanos, a Força da Situação e
uma Estratégia baseada na Improvisação.
Thesi. 182 fls. ISPA: Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada.
Psicologia e das Organizações. 2009.
RICHARDSON, R. (1999). Pesquisa social: métodos e técnicas.
3ed. São Paulo: Atlas.
ROBERTS, E. (1988).
Managing invention and innovation. Research-Technology
Management. v. 50, n. 1, p. 35–54.
ROCHA, A.; BARONE, S.
(2011). Comportamento e cultura organizacional. Módulo do curso à distância de Gestão de Recursos Humanos. Rio de Janeiro: AVM.
RUSSELL, R. (1990).
Innovation in Organizations: Toward an Integrated Model. Review of Business, v. 12, n. 2, p. 19-25.
SANTOS, A. et al. (2009). Didática da gestão
do conhecimento em cursos de graduação em administração. Revista de Ciências da Administração, v. 11, n. 25, p. 11-35.
SCHOLL, W. et al. (2004). The future of
knowledge management. Journal of
Knowledge Management, v. 8, n. 2, p. 19-35.
SCHULER, R. (1992).
Strategic human resources management: linking people with the strategic needs
of the business. Organizational Dynamics, v. 2, n. 1, p. 18-32.
SERAFIM, L. E. (2011). O Poder da Inovação: a Experiência da 3M e
de Outras Empresas Inovadoras. São Paulo: Saraiva.
SILVA, A. DA; JUNQUILLO,
G.; CARRIERI, A. (2008). Políticas de RH: instrumentos de consenso e
ambiguidade. RAC, Curitiba, v. 12,
n. 1, p. 11-34, jan/mar, 2008.
SILVERMAN, D. (2009). Interpretação
de dados qualitativos: métodos para análise de entrevistas, textos e interações.
3 ed. Porto Alegre: Bookman/Artmed.
SPENDER, J. (2001).
Gerenciando sistemas de conhecimento. In: FLEURY, M; OLIVEIRA, M. (org.)
(2001). Gestão estratégica do
conhecimento: integrando aprendizagem, conhecimento e competências. São
Paulo: Atlas, p. 27-49.
TAKEUCHI, H.; NONAKA, I.
(2008). Gestão do Conhecimento.
Porto Alegre; Bookman.
TIGRE, P. (2006). Gestão da inovação: a economia da
tecnologia do Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier.
UTTERBACK, J. (1971). The
process of technological innovation within the firm. Academy of Management Journal, v. 14, n. 1, p. 75-88.
VERGARA, S.; DAVEL,
E.(2001). Gestão com pessoas e subjetividade. São Paulo: Atlas.
YOUNDT, M. et al. (1996).
Human Resource Management, manufacturing strategy and firm performance. The Academy of Management Journal, v.
39, n. 4, p. 836-866.