Information and Knowledge Sharing in Industrial Clusters

Theoretical Background and a Case Study

Karolína Kolerová, Tereza Otčenášková and Vladimír Bureš

Faculty of Informatics and Management, University of Hradec Králové, Rokitanského 62,

500 03 Hradec Králové, Czech Republic

Keywords: Case Study, Cluster, Efficiency, Information Sharing, Knowledge Sharing.

Abstract: Information and knowledge sharing represents currently usually not sufficiently utilised source of the

competitive advantage. If appropriately managed, this should lead to better performance, higher efficiency

and improved cooperation and communication within as well as among organisations. The advantages and

disadvantages of information and knowledge sharing are discussed. Based on the semi-structured interviews

and subsequent statistical analysis, the researched industrial cluster reveals the real practices and enables the

comparison with the theoretical prerequisites. The findings prove the ineffectiveness of the sharing

processes. Therefore, particular recommendations and suggestions for the improvements are provided and

emphasised.

1 INTRODUCTION

During the past decades knowledge has emerged as

the key to economic success and as a focus of

thinking about organizational effectiveness,

innovation and growth. Nevertheless, the research

question how organizations should encourage and

facilitate knowledge sharing to improve

organizational performance is still very important.

Therefore, the extent and potential of information

and knowledge sharing (IKS) associated with

organisational performance and activities is

examined. Firstly, the general background is

provided focused on the importance of knowledge,

IKS and clusters. The following section describes

the research methodology. Afterwards, the results

and findings are discussed. The last part concludes

the main implications and recommendations as well

as summarises the limitations and areas for further

research.

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

Bartol and Srivastava (2002) define knowledge

sharing as the action in which employees diffuse

relevant information to others across the

organisation. Knowledge sharing is the voluntary

dissemination of acquired skills and experience to

the rest of the organization (Davenport, 1997);

(Käser and Miles, 2002) and is the most important

part of knowledge management (Bock and Kim,

2002). On the contrary, Lee and Al-Hawamdeh

(2002) and Appleyard (1996) emphasise the

necessary compensation being expected by the

participants for their efforts. Information and

knowledge have been recently considered as a

critical organizational resource that might provide a

sustainable competitive advantage (Foss and

Pedersen, 2002). The real transformation to a

competitive advantage has to be based on selecting

employees who have specific skills, abilities, or

competencies with respect to IKS (Jackson et al.,

2006). Taking into consideration records in the well-

established scientific databases, the information

sharing in economic or industrial clusters has not

attracted researchers’ attention yet. On the other

hand, few studies on knowledge sharing in clusters

have already been published (Connell and Thorpe,

2012); (Li and Feng, 2011); (Wang and Zhou, 2007).

These basic processes themselves represent a topic

currently studied from multiple perspectives. The

variety of approaches and views is associated with

many aspects.

2.1 Perspectives on IKS

Firstly, technological changes in the area of

457

Kolerová K., Ot

cenášková T. and Bureš V..

Information and Knowledge Sharing in Industrial Clusters - Theoretical Background and a Case Study.

DOI: 10.5220/0004624104570463

In Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Information Retrieval and the International Conference on Knowledge

Management and Information Sharing (KMIS-2013), pages 457-463

ISBN: 978-989-8565-75-4

 2013 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)

information and communication technologies IKS

and knowledge sharing significantly support the

research endeavours. Even from the technological

point of view, the research results are quite

extensive. These can be further classified according

to diverse criteria such as general technology type

(information and communication versus knowledge

technology), type of supported sharing process

(formal versus informal), or particular type of

technology applied (e-commerce system, web-based

systems, grid systems etc.). For instance, Li et al.

(2012) investigate how the effective strategy of

Internet of Things (IoT) can help organisations to

make use of an opportunity from the IoT and then

improve their competitive advantage. The Internet of

Things (IoT) is a technological phenomenon

originating from innovative developments and

concepts in information and communication

technology associated with Ubiquitous

Communication/Connectivity, and the Ambient

Intelligence concept (Mikulecký, 2010). Authors

provide a theoretical framework which classifies IoT

strategies into four archetypes from two dimensions

of managers' strategic intent and industrial driving

force. They conclude that external industry

information sharing more efficiently contributes to

the enhancement of both market-based and

technology-based exploratory capabilities. On the

contrary, internal industry information sharing more

efficiently contributes to the enhancement of both

market-based and technology-based exploitative

capabilities. Davison et al., (2013) explore the use of

interactive information technology applications for

informal knowledge sharing and develop theoretical

propositions to highlight the key facets of informal

knowledge sharing processes. Li et al., (2010)

analyse the sharing pattern results of supply chain

information under the atmosphere of E-commerce.

Secondly, the application domain influences the

principal research questions and used methods in

IKS research. Variety of areas can be identified

ranging from medicine, or pharmacy to industrial

applications, education (Fullwood et al., 2013); (Eid

and Nuhu, 2011) or agriculture (Li et al., 2010).

Moreover, classification based on supported activity

such as leadership, creativity (Carmeli et al., 2013),

or relationship development (Biggemann, 2012)

might also be distinguished. Kane and Luz (2011)

present results of a study of multidisciplinary

medical team meetings (MDTMs), with focus on

information presentation, collaboration, sharing and

decision-making issues. Their study reveals the

multi-faceted nature of the event and the fact that

new knowledge is generated during the meetings.

They analyse the findings in terms of their

implications for the information sharing needs of

participants according to their roles and discuss

requirements for technology support at individual,

group and organisational levels. Ali et al., (2012)

used a self-administered questionnaire to survey

Chief Information Officers at all 21 of New

Zealand's District Health Boards regarding the

extent to which their organisations use knowledge

sharing activities involving ITs. They conclude that

knowledge sharing activities emphasising the

sharing of explicit knowledge (via exchanging

documents in electronic form) are significantly more

common than knowledge sharing activities

emphasising the sharing of tacit knowledge (via

technology-mediated discussions and via using

technology to connect employees to experts).

Therefore, they suggest that in order to facilitate the

wider adoption of technologies, early adopters of

both relatively established technologies and of the

emerging technologies such as social media should

be encouraged to publish accounts of their

experiences of success and lessons learned from any

failures so that the knowledge gained is

disseminated to the wider medical informatics

community. Yan and Pei (2012) investigated

information sharing of traditional and online

retailers. Results show that information sharing is

not always beneficial for each retailer all the time;

both the online and the traditional retailer can be

better off under certain conditions; and the value of

information sharing for each retailer increases as

products are more compatible with online marketing.

Moreover, they analyse the incentives for

information distortion in information sharing and

find that both the online and the traditional retailer

have an incentive to overstate their forecasts while

sharing information.

Thirdly, particular market arrangements

influence forms and patterns of IKS. Differences can

be identified in particular developing or developed

economies (Toh and Srinivas, 2012), diverse

cultures (Brunet-Thornton and Bureš, 2012), or

market settings such monopolistic competition (Cho

and Jun, 2013). From this paper perspective, the

supply chains play an important role since they are

structurally similar to economic cluster which

represent the subject of this study. For instance,

Schloetzer (2012) examines whether the potential

for hold-up in supply chains influences the extent of

process integration and information sharing between

partners. Eventually, he comes with the conclusion

that the potential for hold-up can restrict the

performance benefits available to partners from

KMIS2013-InternationalConferenceonKnowledgeManagementandInformationSharing

458

developing more extensive supply chain integration

practices. Prajogo and Olhager (2012) investigate

the integrations of both information and material

flows between supply chain partners and their effect

on operational performance. They conclude that

information technology capabilities and information

sharing both have significant effects on logistics

integration. Furthermore, long-term supplier

relationships have both direct and indirect

significant effects on performance; the indirect

effect via the effect on information integration and

logistics integration.

The ultimate goal of sharing employees’

knowledge is its transfer to organisational assets and

resources (Dawson, 2001). Employees may fear a

loss of superiority and knowledge ownership after

sharing their own personal knowledge (Szulanski,

1996).

Moreover, the implementation of knowledge

management principles and rules might support the

knowledge sharing processes (Bureš and Brunet-

Thornton, 2009). Many authors have pointed out that

sharing knowledge among employees would lead to

faster responses to customer requirements at a lower

cost in operations (Sher and Lee, 2004). Obviously,

there are a lot of areas of knowledge and experience

sharing from which the companies can gain and

retain the competitive advantage, as well as the

continuous development and improvement.

2.2 Introduction to Clusters

Clusters usually comprise “firms and other actors

co-locating within a concentrated geographical area,

cooperating around a certain functional niche, and

establishing close linkages and working alliances to

improve their collective competitiveness” (Anderson

et al., 2004). Clusters depend primarily on the

communication and collaboration among their

member companies and also with external subjects.

The members exploit the same resources to gain and

develop knowledge (Işik, 2012) and share best

practices and procedures. Other advantages include

the cooperation and communication improvements

leading to better flow of information and knowledge

(Kolerová and Otčenášková, 2012).

Companies within cluster mostly operate close to

each other which assures the immediate access to

knowledge sharing through formal business

networks together with spillover opportunities

(Connel, 2009). The problem with the determination

of partners for, extent of and conditions for

knowledge sharing remains.

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The discussed research is focused on the initial case

study and provides the basic introduction to the

whole project intention. Therefore, the results and

recommendations should be revised and verified by

the experts of particular organisations. The project

team aim to explore different companies and unions

to broaden the perspectives of the discussed topics.

3.1 Methods

Various methods were utilised to ensure relevant

results as well as practical implications of the

research task. The appropriate amendments based on

the research methodology development were

continuously done during the research to ensure the

complexity as well as accuracy.

Firstly, brainstorming of the project team was

employed to generate basic concepts and areas

potentially shared within organisation. These were

also confronted with the primary as well as

secondary resources which were also analysed.

Furthermore, to exclude irrelevant, unnecessary and

worthless indicators, the selection and visualisation

tools were employed (Bureš, 2012); (Kolerová,

2012); (Otčenášková, 2013). On the basis of the

final selection of research areas, the questionnaire

was prepared and afterwards reduced after the semi-

structured interviews which were conducted with

representatives of cluster in pursuit to get the

feedback and avoid useless indicators and get. The

whole questionnaire encompasses firstly the

identification of respondent, secondly the

examination of individual companies and their

performance and thirdly the functioning of the

cluster as a whole. The questionnaire was sent via

email to managing directors and chief executives of

all eighteen examined companies within the cluster.

Considering the extent and the purpose of this study,

only the related questions are discussed and

investigated. To reveal as many connections and

findings, these include both the closed and open

questions. The relevant data are also analysed using

the statistical analysis encompassing the correlation

analyses and the frequency rate determination.

3.2 Research Sample

The initial research was focused on the examination

of a cluster called Hradecký IT KLASTR, Joint

Association of Corporate Bodies (HIT Klastr). This

cluster associating companies focused on

information technologies belongs to one of the most

InformationandKnowledgeSharinginIndustrialClusters-TheoreticalBackgroundandaCaseStudy

459

successful clusters in the Czech Republic. Sixteen

private organisations and two educational

institutions representing the public sector are

involved. 39% of organizations have 1-10

employees, 17% have 11-15 employees and 44%

have 51-250 employees.

Activities of the cluster are supported by the

European Regional Development Fund within

programme Investment in Your Future. The

involved organisations work generally with

information technologies. The cluster aims to benefit

from the cooperation of members and to provide the

services for them. The main objectives include the

improvement of quality management, increase of

innovation potential, costs savings and development

of business opportunities. Especially the following

areas are emphasised in pursuit to promote sharing:

development of human resources; marketing;

sharing of capacities; and development and

innovations (HIT Klastr, 2013). This proves the

presence of the idea of sharing and organising some

activities together, even though the member

companies are usually competitors to a certain

extent. On the contrary, just the declaration of

shared plan of activities and areas of cooperation is

not enough if these are not realised either at all or

not effectively.

4 FINDINGS AND RESULTS

The survey focused on one specific cluster and

distributed to all members had 100% response rate

which means that representatives of all eighteen

member organisations provided the answers. This

rate is so high because of the personal contact with

the representatives of cluster member organisations.

This section comprises the close question analysis of

the acquired results. Questions related to the sharing

issues are described in more details.

Firstly, the rate of sharing of various items is

briefly described. Secondly, the analysis is focused

on IKS, specifically on its significance, and on the

efficiency of various activities for the sharing of

knowledge and information in the cluster. Moreover,

the correlation analysis is performed underlining the

most interesting results.

4.1 Rate of Sharing of Various Items

Beside other things, respondents were asked about

the rate of sharing of various items from many areas

of business, particularly from the finance (financial

sources and credit liability), logistics, export,

marketing (promotion, contacts and electronic

marketplace), human resources (experiences, best

practices, know-how and employees) and production

(technology). The seven-point scale was used with

categories classified from “not realized” to “very

often”. This question was formulated because of the

identification of the main aspects and possibilities of

sharing in organizations.

Experiences, best practices, know-how and

contacts were the four most crucial items being

shared. The rate of sharing of these items is “often”

or “very often” as mentioned by most respondents.

On the contrary, credit liability and export were

labelled as “not realized” or “not shared”. Some

respondents stated that technology, promotion,

employees, export, credit liability and financial

sources are shared “rarely”.

4.2 The Significance of IKS for the

Cluster Performance

Respondents were also asked about the significance

of IKS. Mentioned items were chosen on the basis of

the brainstorming of the research team and the

literature review. The five-point scale was used with

categories classified from “not shared” to “shared

frequently” (see Table 1).

Table 1: The significance of information and knowledge

sharing about the mentioned items for the cluster

performance.

Frequency (n) 0 1 2 3 4 Mean

Customers, Public 6 4 3 2 2 1,41

Market 6 2 2 4 3 1,76

Products, Services 2 3 7 4 2 2,06

Procedures,

Processes

2 4 6 3 2 1,94

Competition 8 3 1 3 1 1,13

Suppliers 4 6 4 2 0 1,25

Employees 3 5 9 0 0 1,35

Intellectual Assets 5 3 5 3 0 1,38

Cluster 5 1 3 5 0 1,57

Purchases 10 3 2 2 1 0,94

Institutions,

Collaboration

5 2 7 2 0 1,38

Other Clusters 8 4 2 1 0 0,73

Moral Values,

Principles

5 5 3 4 0 1,35

Information and knowledge about other clusters,

joint purchases and their competition are shared at

least (their mean is 0,73, 0,94 and 1,13). The most

shared information and knowledge within the cluster

are about products and services, procedures and

processes, all aspects of the related market and about

KMIS2013-InternationalConferenceonKnowledgeManagementandInformationSharing

460

the cluster itself. Companies share also some

significant information and knowledge about

customers and public, employees, suppliers,

intellectual assets, government institutions and

moral values (as precisely described in Table 1).

4.3 The Efficiency of Various Activities

for the IKS in the Cluster

In addition to the significance, the efficiency of

various activities for IKS was investigated as well.

Period for the determination of this efficiency were

the last twelve months to ensure the up-to-datedness

and avoid irrelevant former practices of the

organisations. The six-point scale was used with the

range from “no efficiency” to “high efficiency”.

Impersonal forms of contact, namely internal

magazines and newspapers, and the own cluster

information centre are the least efficient for the IKS

(the arithmetic mean is 0,28 and 0,39). Personal

contact of members of cluster seems to be the most

efficient way for the information and knowledge

sharing. Personal meetings, workshops, informal

meetings were stated as the most efficient. Modern

communication technologies such as e-mail, mobile

phones, cluster web pages and intranet are stated as

very effective and worthy to be used (see Table 2).

Table 2: The efficiency of various activities for the

information and knowledge sharing in the cluster.

Frequency (n) 0 1 2 3 4 5 Mean

Personal

Meetings

1 1 1 5 1 9 3,72

Phone Calls 1 2 5 4 4 2 2,78

E-mail 1 2 5 3 4 3 2,89

Workshops 1 1 1 6 7 2 3,28

Conferences 4 4 4 4 2 0 1,78

Intranet 2 4 9 3 0 0 1,72

Cluster Web

Pages

1 5 7 3 2 0 2,00

Internal

Magazines,

Newspapers

14 3 1 0 0 0 0,28

Information

Centre

13 3 2 0 0 0 0,39

Shareholders'

Meetings

2 2 6 5 1 2 2,39

Informal

Meetings

2 1 2 3 7 3 3,17

4.4 Correlation Analysis

Three correlation analyses were performed on the

base of the research data. Firstly the area of the

frequency of sharing various items is examined in

pursuit to reveal potential relations and

dependencies. The significant positive correlation

occurred among almost all of the examined areas -

technology, promotion, experiences, best practices,

employees, know-how and contacts (indexes vary

from 0,83 to 0,99). Only the correlation among

financial sources and other items is a little bit lower

(indexes vary from 0,71 to 0,95). No or weak

correlation is not revealed at all.

Secondly, the correlation in the area of

significance of various items sharing in

organizations was researched. The significant

positive correlation occured among a lot of

examined areas - a market, products and services,

procedures and processes, competition, employees,

intellectual assets, purchasers, moral values and

principles (indexes mostly vary from 0,69 to 0,99).

Only the correlation among suppliers and cluster and

other items is a little significantly lower (indexes

vary from 0,00 to 0,50). In addition, the negative

correlation arose among cluster and products and

services (the rate of -0,19 and -0,28).

Moreover, the correlation in the area of

efficiency of various items sharing in organizations

was examined. The significant positive correlation

arose among many examined areas - informal

meetings, workshops, e-mail communication, phone

calls and personal meetings (indexes vary from 0,65

to 0,99). This shows the interconnectedness of the

mentioned items which signifies the necessity to pay

attention to these simultaneously and to support the

efficient utilisation. Only the correlation among

conferences, shareholders’ meetings and other items

is lower (indexes vary from 0,00 to 0,76). The

negative correlation is not observed at all.

5 DISCUSSION, LIMITATIONS

AND FURTHER RESEARCH

The significance of IKS is obviously crucial for all

organisations regardless their size, type, cultural

background or any other characteristics. Several

recommendations linked directly with sharing or

indirectly with influential factors on these processes

based on case study and literature review are

discussed below.

Doubtlessly, the research revealed specific areas

requiring attention leading in better performance.

The use of best practices more effectively, the

support of learning and the knowledge creation are

strongly sustained through IKS. Nevertheless, also

the sharing does have particular limitations. Issues

linked with security, data protection, copyright,

intellectual property and legal issues relating to the

privacy should be considered and treated more

InformationandKnowledgeSharinginIndustrialClusters-TheoreticalBackgroundandaCaseStudy

461

properly. From the practical perspective, the danger

of know-how loss or the insufficient motivational

schemes belong to factors negatively influencing

sharing within clusters as well as among individuals.

These issues should be addressed more precisely to

avoid undesirable effects. Except from the

technological and other support also the appropriate

conditions should be given. The cooperative instead

of competitive culture should be established as well

as promoted. The motivational and reward schemes

within the organisation and among them if in cluster

or any other union should be developed to enhance

the notion of sharing culture. The competitive

culture usually leads to the information and

knowledge retention. Moreover, the utilisation of

these does not occur at all or is very limited due to

the employees’ attitude. If appropriately changed to

cooperative and communicative approach, the

pursuit to reach the common goal and to fulfil the

shared vision would be emphasised naturally. As

proved by the results, these issues should be

addressed more strictly, because such approach

would ensure more efficiency and higher

significance of the sharing processes.

Nevertheless, there are particular limitations of

the mentioned outcomes which might have impact

on the results to a certain extent. The fact that only

one cluster was analysed should be considered. In

further research, the research sample should be

extended. More organisations from various sectors,

areas of business and cultural background should be

incorporated. This should increase the relevancy and

applicability of the recommendations, because the

current results cannot be generalised to the

appropriate extent.

Notwithstanding, the discussed issues provide

utilisable ideas for both theorists and responsible

people from organisations or unions of

organisations. Especially knowledge management

specialists or employees dealing with information

and knowledge are addressed and motivated to

consider the findings in pursuit to improve the

efficiency of the organisational processes and the

competitive advantage.

6 CONCLUSIONS

Information and knowledge sharing represents an

important source of the competitive advantage.

Nevertheless, the utilisation of its potential is not

sufficient and efficient even within member

organisations of one particular cluster. Therefore,

these issues require attention and should be

supported especially on the individual and

organisational level. For these purposes, particular

recommendations as well as concepts are introduced

to be employed within companies and among

themselves.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This paper was supported by the specific research

project “Analysis of Influential Factors on

Information and Knowledge Sharing within

Organisations and the Measurement of its

Efficiency” granted by the University of Hradec

Králové, Czech Republic and by the project No.

CZ.1.07/2.2.00/28.0327 “Innovation and support of

doctoral study program” financed from the European

Union and the Czech Republic funds. Additionally,

the authors would like to acknowledge the HIT

cluster who provided data and information for the

purposes of the case study.

REFERENCES

Ali, N. et al., 2012. The use of information technologies

for knowledge sharing by secondary healthcare

organisations in New Zealand. International Journal

of Medical Informatics, 81(7), pp. 500-506.

Anderson, T et al. (2004). The Cluster Policy Whitebook.

Sweden: International Organisation for Knowledge

Economy and Enterprise Development. Retrieved

March 02, 2013 from

http://www.clusterplattform.at/fileadmin/user_upload/

clusterbibliothek/916_TheClusterPoliciesWhitebook.p

df.

Appleyard, M., 1996. How does knowledge flow?

Interfirm patterns in the semiconductor industry,

Strategic Management Journal, 17(Special Issue), pp.

137-154.

Bartol, K.M., & Srivastava, A., 2002. Encouraging

knowledge sharing: The role of organisational reward

systems. Journal of Leadership & Organisational

Studies, 9(1), pp. 64-76.

Biggemann, S., 2012. The essential role of information

sharing in relationship development. Journal of

Business & Industrial Marketing, 27(7), pp. 521-526.

Bock, G.W., & Kim, Y.G., 2002. Breaking the myths of

rewards. Information Resources Management Journal,

15(2), pp. 14-21.

Brunet-Thornton, R. & Bureš, V., 2012. Cross-Cultural

Management: Establishing a Czech Benchmark. E+M

Ekonomie a Management, 15(3), pp. 46-62.

Bureš, V. & Brunet-Thornton, R., 2009. Knowledge

Management: the Czech Situation, Possible Solutions

and the Necessity for Further Research. In: Dalkir K.

(ed.). Proceedings of 6

International Conference On

KMIS2013-InternationalConferenceonKnowledgeManagementandInformationSharing

462

Intellectual Capital, Knowledge Management &

Organisational Learning, Canada, pp. 95-102.

Bureš, V. et al., 2012. A Comprehensive View on

Evaluation of Cluster Initiatives. In Proceedings of 8

European Conference on Management, Leadership

and Governance, Cyprus, 8-9 Nov. 2012, pp. 74-79.

Carmeli, A., Gelbard, R. & Reiter-Palmon, R., 2013.

Leadership, Creative Problem-Solving Capacity, and

Creative Performance: The Importance of Knowledge

Sharing. Human Resource Management, 52(1), pp. 95-

121.

Cho, M. & Jun, B.H., 2013. Information sharing with

competition. Economics Letters, 119(1), pp. 81-84.

Connel, J., 2009. How do Economic Clusters Work?

Innovation, Clusters and Knowledge Sharing: A Brief

Look at Dubai. [Online] Available at:

http://www.business21c.com.au/2009/09/innovation-

clusters-and-knowledge-sharing-a-brief-look-at-dubai

[Accessed: 14/06/2012].

Connell, J. & Thorpe, M., 2012. Industry Clusters: an

Antidote for Knowledge Sharing and Collaborative

Innovation? 6

Knowledge Management International

Conference 2012, Johor Bahru, Malaysia, pp. 1-13 .

Davenport, T.H., 1997. Information ecology. Oxford, UK:

Oxford University Press.

Dawson, R., 2001. Knowledge capabilities as the focus of

organisational development and strategy. Journal of

Knowledge Management, 4(4), pp. 320-327.

Eid, M. & Nuhu, N.A., 2011. Impact of learning culture

and information technology use on knowledge sharing

of Saudi students. Knowledge Management Research

& Practice, 9(1), pp. 48-57.

Foss, N.J. & Pedersen, T., 2002. Transferring knowledge

in MNCs: The role of sources of subsidiary knowledge

and organizational context. Journal of International

Management, 8(1), pp. 49–67.

Fullwood, R., Rowley, J. & Delbridge, R., 2013.

Knowledge sharing amongst academics in UK

universities. Journal of Knowledge Management,

17(1).

HIT Klastr. 2013. HIT Klastr - Working Groups. [Online]

Available at: http://www.hitklastr.cz/en/working-

groups.shtml [Accessed: 04/02/2013].

Işık, M. (2012). Locations in a Cluster and Innovation: An

Economic Approach. In 18

International Business

Information Management Association Conference,

Istanbul, Turkey, 9-10 May 2012 (pp. 774-782).

Jackson, S.E. et al., 2006. Toward developing human

resource management systems for knowledge-

intensive teamwork. In Joseph, J.M. (Ed.), Research in

Personnel and Human Resources Management, 25JAI,

Amsterdam, pp. 27–70.

Kane, B. & Luz, S. 2011. Information Sharing at

Multidisciplinary Medical Team Meetings. Group

Decision and Negotiation, 20(4), pp. 437-464.

Käser, P.A.W. & Miles, R.E., 2002. Understanding

knowledge activists’ successes and failures. Long

Range Planning, 35(1), pp. 9-28.

Kolerová, K. & Otčenášková, T., 2012. The Purpose and

Potential of Clusters: Theoretical Background and a

Case Study. In 3

World Conference on Information

Technology, Barcelona, Spain, 14-16 Nov. 2012.

Procedia Computer Science, Elsevier Ltd. (to be

published).

Lee, L. & Al-Hawamdeh, S., 2002. Factors impacting

knowledge sharing, Journal of Information &

Knowledge Management, 1(1), pp. 49-56.

Li, D.L., Liu, Y. & Chen, Y.Y., 2010. Research on

Information Sharing Pattern of Agricultural Products

Supply Chain Based on E-Commerce Technology. In

IFIP TC 12 Conference on Computer and

Computing Technologies in Agriculture, 346, pp. 539-

548.

Li, G. & Feng, Y., 2011. Study on Knowledge Sharing

Pattern in Industry Clusters Based on SECI Expand

Model. In 8

International Conference on Innovation

and Management, Yamaguchi University, Kitakyushu,

Japan, pp. 911-915.

Li, Y. et al., 2012. Towards a theoretical framework of

strategic decision, supporting capability and

information sharing under the context of Internet of

Things. Information Technology & Management,

13(4), pp. 205-216.

Mikulecký, P. 2010. Large-Scale Ambient Intelligence.

Proceedings of the 9

WSEAS International

Conference on Data Networks, Communications,

Computer, University of Algarve, Faro, pp. 12-12.

Otčenášková, T., Kolerová, K. & Bureš, V., 2013. Sharing

of Resources: Theoretical Background and a Cse

Study. 2013. In 2

World Conference on business,

Economics and Management. Belek, Antalya, Turkey.

25-28 Apr. 2013. Procedia Social and Behavioral

Journal (to be published).

Schloetzer, J.D., 2012. Process Integration and

Information Sharing in Supply Chains. Accounting

Review, 87(3), pp. 1005-1032.

Sher, P.J., & Lee, V.C., 2004. Information technology as a

facilitator for enhancing dynamic capabilities through

knowledge management. Information & Management,

41, pp. 933-945.

Szulanski, G., 1996. Exploring internal stickiness:

Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the

firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17 (Winter

special issue), pp. 27-43.

Toh, S.M. & Srinivas, E.S., 2012. Perceptions of task

cohesiveness and organizational support increase trust

and information sharing between host country

nationals and expatriate coworkers in Oman. Journal

of World Business, 47(4), pp. 696-705.

Wang, L. & Zhou, Z., 2007. Knowledge sharing and

innovative performance improvement among firms in

the industrial cluster from the perspective of social

capital. 5

International Symposium on Management

of Technology, Hangzhou, Peoples Republic of China,

pp. 1389-1392.

Yan, R.L. & Pei, Z., 2012. Incentive-Compatible

Information Sharing by Dual-Channel Retailers,

International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 17(2),

pp. 127-157.

InformationandKnowledgeSharinginIndustrialClusters-TheoreticalBackgroundandaCaseStudy

463