Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The impact of knowledge management and strategy configuration coherence on SME performance

  • Published:
Journal of Management & Governance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

According to recent literature, effective knowledge management should be coherent and based on the firm’s strategy. Prior empirical research, in contrast, tries to evaluate the impact of knowledge management initiatives directly on performance but finds inconsistent results and not allows the understanding of knowledge management contribution to competitive advantage generation. In this study we aim to investigate the impact of knowledge management and strategy configuration coherence on SMEs innovation and organizational performance through a quantitative analysis carried out on a sample of 60 manufacturing SMEs in northeast Italy. Our findings reveal that a significant coherence exists between knowledge management and strategy configurations. Most of the SMEs with a prospector and defender strategy adopt, in turn, an aggressive and conservative knowledge management. Moreover, we find that such coherence has a significant impact on the overall performance. This is particularly interesting since it suggests that the inconsistency in the results of prior studies on the impact of knowledge management on performance (Kalling in J Knowl Manag 7(3):67–81; 2003) may be due to the lack of consideration of knowledge management and strategy configuration coherence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Analyzers combine the characteristics of defenders and prospectors.

  2. The use of perceived measures also for financial performance is due to the limited reliability of the financial reports of SMEs.

  3. Tabachnick and Fidell (2001) cite .32 as a good rule of thumb for the minimum loading of an item.

References

  • Aragón-Sánchez, A., & Sánchez-Marín, G. (2005). Strategic orientation, management characteristics, and performance: A study of Spanish SMEs. Journal of Small Business Management, 43(3), 287–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bierly, P. E., & Chakrabarti, A. (1996). Generic knowledge strategies in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 123–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bierly, P. E., & Daly, P. S. (2007). Alternative knowledge strategies, competitive environment, and organizational performance in small manufacturing firms. Entrepreneurships Theory & Practice, 31(4), 493–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohn, R. (1994). Measuring and managing technological knowledge. Sloan Management Review, 36(3), 61–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, D. J. (1985). The evolution of marketing in small firms. European Journal of Marketing, 19(5), 7–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, B., & Lee, H. (2003). An empirical investigation of KM and their effect on corporate performance. Information & Management, 40(5), 403–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chuang, S. (2004). A resource-based perspective on knowledge management capability and competitive advantage: An empirical investigation. Expert Systems with Applications, 27(3), 459–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coda, V. (1988). L’orientamento strategico dell’impresa. Torino: Utet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darroch, J. (2005). Knowledge management, innovation and firm performance. Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(3), 101–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Long, D. (1997). Building the knowledge-based organization: how culture drives knowledge behaviors. Working paper, Ernst and Young’s Center for business innovation, Boston.

  • De Pablos, P. O. (2002). Knowledge management and organizational learning: Typologies of knowledge strategies in the Spanish manufacturing industry from 1995 to 1999. Journal of Knowledge Management, 6(1), 52–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dess, G. G., Newport, S., & Rasheed, A. (1993). Configuration research in strategic management: Key issues and suggestions. Journal of Management, 19(4), 775–795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drazin, R., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1985). Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30(4), 514–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dvir, D., Segev, E., & Shenhar, A. (1993). Technology’s varying impact on the success of strategic business units within the miles and snow typology. Strategic Management Journal, 14(2), 155–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feltham, T. S., Feltham, G., & Barnett, J. J. (2005). The dependence of family businesses on a single decision-maker. Journal of Small Business Management, 43, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freel, M. S. (2000). Strategy and structure in innovative manufacturing SMEs: The case of an English region. Small Business Economics, 15(1), 27–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freel, M. S. (2003). Sectoral patterns of small firm innovation, networking and proximity. Research Policy, 32(5), 751–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gloet, M., & Terziovski, M. (2004). Exploring the relationship between management practices and innovation performance. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 15(5), 402–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A., & Edgars, A. H. (2001). Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 185–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. B. (2005). Contemporary strategy analysis. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halawi, L. A., McCarthy, R. V., & Aronson, J. E. (2006). Knowledge management and the competitive strategy of the firm. The Learning Organization, 13(4), 384–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C. (1983). Some tests of the effectiveness and functional attributes of miles and snow’s strategic types. Academy of Management Journal, 26(1), 5–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C. (2003). On the staying power of defenders, analyzers, and prospectors. Academy of Management Executive, 17(4), 115–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, M. T., Nohria, N., & Tierney, T. (1999). What’s your strategy for managing knowledge? Harvard Business Review, 77(2), 106–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holsapple, C. W., & Jones, K. (2004). Exploring primary activities of the knowledge chain. Knowledge and Process Management, 11(3), 155–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holsapple, C., & Jones, K. (2005). Exploring secondary activities of the knowledge chain. Knowledge and Process Management, 12(1), 3–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalling, T. (2003). Knowledge management and the occasional links with performance. Journal of Knowledge Management, 7(3), 67–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ketchen, D. J., & Shook, C. L. (1996). The application of cluster analysis in strategic management research: an analysis and critique. Strategic Management Journal, 17(6), 441–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langfield-Smith, K. (1997). Management control systems and strategy: A critical review. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 22(2), 207–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H., & Choi, B. (2003). Knowledge management enablers, processes, and organizational performance: An integrative view and empirical examination. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(1), 179–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, K. S., Lim, G. H., & Tan, S. J. (1999). Dealing with resource disadvantage: Generic strategies for SMEs. Small Business Economics, 12(4), 299–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993). The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 95–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, P. L., Chen, W. C., & Tsai, C. H. (2004). An empirical study on the correlation between knowledge management capability and competitiveness in Taiwan’s industries. Technovation, 24(12), 971–977.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyon, D. W., Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (2000). Enhancing entrepreneurial orientation research: Operationalizing and measuring a key strategic decision process. Journal of Management, 26(5), 1055–1085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maclaran, P., & McGowan, P. (1999). Managing service quality for competitive advantage in small engineering firms. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 5(2), 35–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, S. W., & Kolari, J. W. (1987). Marketing strategy implications of the miles and snow strategic typology. The Journal of Marketing, 51(4), 19–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKeen, J. D., Zack, M. H., \& Singh, S. (2006). Knowledge management and organizational performance: An exploratory survey. In Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii international conference on system sciences (pp. 1–9), Kauai, HI, USA.

  • Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure and process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (1984). Designing strategic human resource systems. Organizational Dynamics, 13(1), 36–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D., & Coleman, H. J. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. Academy of Management Review, 3(3), 546–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. (1981). Toward a new contingency approach: The search for organizational gestalts. Journal of Management Studies, 18(1), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1982). Innovation in conservative and entrepreneurial firms: Two models of strategic momentum. Strategic Management Journal, 3(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1984). A longitudinal study of the corporate life cycle. Management Science, 30(10), 1161–1184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organization. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nath, D., & Sudharshan, D. (1994). Measuring strategy coherence through patterns of strategic choices. Strategic Management Journal, 15(1), 43–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, A., Gilmore, A., Carson, D., & Cummins, D. (2002). Competitive advantage in small to medium-sized enterprises. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 10(3), 205–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Dell, C., & Grayson, C. J. (1998). If only we knew what we know: Identification and transfer of internal best practices. California Management Review, 40(3), 154–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage. New York, London: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russ, M., Jones, J. K., & Fineman, R. (2006). Toward a taxonomy of knowledge-based strategies: early findings. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning, 2(1/2), 1–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. (1993). Product-market strategy and performance: An analysis of the Miles and Snow strategy types. European Journal of Marketing, 27(10), 33–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. D. (2004). Knowledge management strategies: A multi-case study. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(3), 6–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, H., \& McKeen, J. (2003). Knowledge management in organizations: The state of current practice. In C. W. Holsapple (Ed.), Handbook on knowledge management. New York: Springer.

  • Smith, K. G., Guthrie, J. P., & Chen, M.-J. (1989). Strategy, size and performance. Organization studies, 10(1), 63–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, T. A. (1997). Intellectual capital: The new wealth of organizations. London: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sveiby, K. E. (1997). The new organizational wealth: Managing and measuring knowledge-based assets. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swan, J., Newell, S., & Robertson, M. (2000). Limits of IT-driven knowledge management for interactive innovation processes: Towards a community-based approach. In Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii international conference on system sciences (pp. 1013–1024). IEEE Computer Society, Washington DC, USA.

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

  • Tapscott, D., & Ticoll, D. (2003). The naked corporation: How the age of transparency will revolutionize business. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treacy, M., & Wiersema, F. (1993). Customer intimacy and other value disciplines. Harvard Business Review, 71(1), 84–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Krogh, G., Nonaka, I., & Aben, M. (2001). Making the most of your company’s knowledge: A strategic framework. Long Range Planning, 34, 421–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. (2003). Knowledge-based resources, entrepreneurial orientation, and the performance of small and medium-sized businesses. Strategic Management Journal, 24(13), 1307–1314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zack, M. H. (1999). Developing a knowledge strategy. California Management Review, 41(3), 125–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zack, M. H. (2002). Developing a knowledge strategy: Epilogue. In C. W. Choo & N. Bontis (Eds.), The strategic management of intellectual capital and organizational knowledge: A collection of readings (pp. 277–295). UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zack, M. H. (2005). The strategic advantage of knowledge and learning. International Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital, 2(1), 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, Y., Wang, Y.-F., & Lan, H.-l. (2006). Empirical study on interaction among knowledge management strategy, core competence and organizational performance. In International conference on management science and engineering, 2006 (pp. 1269–1273). Lille: ICMSE.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University Ca’ Foscari Venice, Venice, Italy

    Carlo Bagnoli & Marco Vedovato

Authors
  1. Carlo Bagnoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marco Vedovato
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlo Bagnoli.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15.

Table 6 Questions used to analyse firm’s strategy configuration
Full size table
Table 7 Questions used to analyze firm’s knowledge management configuration
Full size table
Table 8 Questions used to analyze firm performance
Full size table
Table 9 Descriptive statistic of firm’s strategy configuration variables
Full size table
Table 10 Descriptive statistic of firm’s knowledge management configuration variables
Full size table
Table 11 Descriptive statistic of firm’s organizational and innovation performance variables
Full size table
Table 12 The agglomeration schedule and the dendrogram for strategy
Full size table
Table 13 MANOVA strategy
Full size table
Table 14 The agglomeration schedule and the dendrogram for knowledge management
Full size table
Table 15 MANOVA knowledge management
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bagnoli, C., Vedovato, M. The impact of knowledge management and strategy configuration coherence on SME performance. J Manag Gov 18, 615–647 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-012-9211-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-012-9211-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation