Similarity in knowledge transfer barriers

During the analysis there was an interesting finding detected. All the participants in headquarter (n=6) stated that there are certain knowledge transfer barriers which are specific for all subsidiaries. It was also found that there are some knowledge impediments which were specific for particular company’s units.

Firstly, all the respondents (n=12) both in headquarter and subsidiaries mentioned that significant knowledge transfer barrier which was applicable to all subsidiaries was difference in language between the parties. All interviewees believe that language difference also consumes great amount of time and efforts for translation. Hence, language is a significant barrier in knowledge transfer.

“The most important barrier is probably the language. The most information here is giving out in German. So, most of the people who are unfamiliar with the language have problems. So we have to work on translating that.” (Opinion of headquarter)

“When we get the emails in German language, it is a problem, because no one here speaks German. It is also a problem to translate it to our language. It would be better if we could receive the mails in English.” (Opinion of subsidiary A)

Moreover, language difference has much more complicated nature, because variety of cultures, and native languages results in diversity of cognitive schemata’s which employees in headquarter and subsidiaries have; then a meaning of the knowledge can be lost or misinterpreted.

“Language is very important barrier, because our foreign subsidiary directors and us speak different languages, that is why they can just show that they understood what we said, but actually they did not.” (Opinion of headquarter)

“All the knowledge which is sent to us is in German. Someone who translates that is not a professional translator; he might translate only text, not the email’s content. Thus, a lot of things can be lost in translation.” (Opinion of subsidiary A)

Furthermore, second mentioned impediment was market difference between Germany and all subsidiaries. There was an interesting finding that market difference does not impede a transfer of knowledge. However, it impedes knowledge implementation locally in subsidiaries’ markets.

“Law difference was never a barrier for us to send an email or to transfer knowledge personally. It has never been a problem in my work practice. (Opinion of headquarter)

“Yeah, we can receive the knowledge despite of regulations’ differences, but implementation of some ideas is impossible.” (Opinion of subsidiary)

All interviewees in subsidiaries (n=6) stated that market difference is a significant barrier for knowledge transfer, because it impedes knowledge implementation.

“Sometimes, it is difficult to implement the knowledge which a headquarter transfers.

The main reason is market difference, habits’ difference, price difference.” (Opinion of subsidiary A)

“A market is very different here. For example in Germany customers look for quality; in our country customers look for a price. Then, it is quite difficult to implement the knowledge a headquarter transfers to us.”(Opinion of subsidiary B)

“In our country, there are a lot of small customers. In Germany, they usually work with large chains. That is why not all the knowledge from headquarter is suitable for us.”

(Opinion of subsidiary C)

Furthermore, a third knowledge transfer barrier named by interviewees was difference in national cultures (n=12). However, there was also an interesting finding that headquarters managers believed that cultural difference does not represent a significant impediment for efficient knowledge transfer between headquarter and subsidiary managers. However, cultural difference can be barrier when knowledge is delivered to subsidiaries’ employees.

“Culture is not a barrier for knowledge transfer for subsidiaries’ management. They know how Germans think and we know how Spanish, Czech and Belgium people think.

It is more challenging to deliver the knowledge to sales reps, because they are not in very often contact with us. Thus, it is very difficult for them to understand what we want and for us to realize what they think.” (Opinion of headquarter)

Furthermore, interviewees in headquarter and subsidiaries believe (n=8) that cultural difference does not affect a transfer of explicit knowledge.

“Culture does not affect ta knowledge which we transfer in emails, because everyone understands the terms margins, turnover, payment days and invoices.” (Opinion of headquarter)

“I don’t have any difficulties in my daily work in using the knowledge which headquarter transfers me on daily basis. It is all very understandable. My national

culture does not have any influence on it or represents any obstacle.” (Opinion of subsidiary)

On the other hand, all subsidiaries’ interviewees (n=6) believe that cultural difference affects knowledge implementation and speed of applying it in their local markets.

“Every culture has its own heritage and habits which sometimes are impossible to understand, such as why in Germany things work in one way and cannot work in our country in same way when they transfer knowledge.” (Opinion of subsidiary A)

“Our and German mentalities are different. Therefore, sometimes it is slightly difficult to implement the transferred knowledge, because it is not always possible.” (Opinion of subsidiary B)

“Culture determines the priorities which a person puts for himself. I am from X country, and I like to do things quickly. Spain is more relaxed and its takes a bit longer time for them to implement the knowledge, comparing to Czech Republic. Belgium is quite fast in implementation. ” (Opinion of headquarter)

Furthermore, it was mentioned that transmission channels can also impede transfer of knowledge. All subsidiary interviewees (n=6) stated that existing knowledge transfer mechanisms are inefficient. They sometimes prevent knowledge delivery to subsidiaries or increase time to perform some tasks.

“It would be great to receive the offers immediately from headquarter in editable version that we can work with it. Unfortunately, we don’t have any intranet for a quick and direct connection.” (Opinion of subsidiary A)

“We have the system, but it is very inflexible and difficult, with limited amount of possibilities. If we have any changes with the products, I have to adjust it manually. It takes a lot of time.” (Opinion of subsidiary B)

“There is a difficulty with software. If I am staying connected to German server, I can’t use Skype or open my email, because it closes all other connections to internet. Thus, I can’t receive any knowledge during this time.” (Opinion of subsidiary C)

However, there was an unexpected finding. During the research the interviewees (n=12) told that many knowledge transfer barriers a headquarters creates itself. All the

interviewees stated that parent company and its employees are too concentrated on German market; consequently they are not willing to create a right knowledge which would be applicable and useful for the subsidiaries. Interviewees stated that headquarters’ employees are not motivated enough to meet subsidiaries needs which prevents a knowledge transfer to subsidiaries.

“It might be that some employees in the headquarter are lacking motivation. It might be that they are more interested to work for a local market; and they don’t see the benefits of working with foreign countries and foreign subsidiaries.” (Opinion of headquarter)

“Not all the knowledge is falling to us. I have discovered that there are some items which can be sold great here, but no one had told us about them; and they have been in the assortment for already half of year. Headquarter is not very motivated to work with us. ” (Opinion of subsidiary B)

“We don’t have very good contacts with other departments and do not receive much knowledge from them.” (Opinion of subsidiary A)

Interviewees in headquarter (n=6) stated that concentration on German market and low level of motivation prevents headquarter employees to transfer a knowledge in English language too. It creates a significant impediment for successful knowledge transfer and prevents them from using it actively.

“Here, a lot of colleagues are able to speak English, but they are not willing to try. Our colleagues in foreign markets are not native speakers, and it is easier to understand their language, because we can use easier words. But a lot of guys in Company X Germany are not so open-minded; they are not trying to write emails in English or to call to subsidiaries.” (Opinion of headquarter)

“It is boring to ask many times and still do not get the answer.” (Opinion of subsidiary)