Proactive HRM for Reducing Knowledge Risks — Evaluating Commitment and Trustworthiness

Abstract

Although the first look might suggest otherwise, knowledge protection is a complex phenomenon that does not lend itself to easy classification. Discussion easily turns to intellectual property rights (IPRs) such as patents or secrecy, while other aspects such as human resource management (HRM) for knowledge protection is neglected. Yet, innovative firms depend on their knowledgeable employees to generate new innovation, to assist in profiting from them, and maintain the capabilities for later innovative activities. Therefore both reactive and proactive action is needed to mitigate problems with knowledge leaving and leaking. This study addresses the ways in which companies can prepare for knowledge-related risks as early as during employee recruitment. The findings from our case study suggest that somewhat different issues are considered in relation to different types of risks (leaving and leaking), and that while intuition plays a notable role in proactive assessment, a more analytical approach can also be taken.

A taxonomy of knowledge risks for healthcare organizations

“…2. Literature background 2.1 Knowledge risks Together with being regarded an asset by scholars that can positively affect performance (Salojärvi et al, 2005), knowledge is also considered a source of several hazards (Bratianu, 2018;Durst et al, 2018;Olander and Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, 2015) which can disrupt a company's operations and performance (Martins and Meyer, 2012;Perrott, 2007). While recent technological advances were beneficial to knowledge workers and industries, they also amplified associated risks.…”

Hr Practices, Knowledge Sharing and Protection Activities, and Performance — A Moderation Model

“…Managers can address these issues through continuous monitoring, and by evaluating, for example, the trustworthiness of employees already during the recruitment interviews (Olander and Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, 2015). In general, the HR practices that are targeted towards limiting unwanted knowledge flows, i.e., knowledge securing practices, can cover means such as non-disclosure agreements, confidentiality clauses, enforcing non-competition agreements (applicable only with certain employees), educating employees on confidentiality issues, motivational aspects for following information security rules, sanctions for breaking the rules, and controlling and restricting access, (Baughn et al, 1997;Bulgurcu et al, 2010;Hannah, 2005;Hannah and Robertson, 2016;Olander et al, 2015;O'Neill and Adya, 2007;Porter Liebeskind, 1996;.…”

Hr Practices, Knowledge Sharing and Protection Activities, and Performance — A Moderation Model

“…Most often mishaps in knowledge protection activity are about the inability to understand the damage that breaking knowledge protection rules causes (Husted and Michailova, 2010;Ritala et al, 2015). Managers can address these issues through continuous monitoring, and by evaluating, for example, the trustworthiness of employees already during the recruitment interviews (Olander and Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, 2015). In general, the HR practices that are targeted towards limiting unwanted knowledge flows, i.e., knowledge securing practices, can cover means such as non-disclosure agreements, confidentiality clauses, enforcing non-competition agreements (applicable only with certain employees), educating employees on confidentiality issues, motivational aspects for following information security rules, sanctions for breaking the rules, and controlling and restricting access, (Baughn et al, 1997;Bulgurcu et al, 2010;Hannah, 2005;Hannah and Robertson, 2016;Olander et al, 2015;O'Neill and Adya, 2007;Porter Liebeskind, 1996;.…”