Ambidextrous Organisations from the Perspective of Employed Knowledge Management Strategies: Evidence from Turkey

Management literature proposes several broad categories of business motives behind Knowledge Management (KM) initiatives: minimising risk, improving efficiency and effectiveness and enabling innovation. While risk minimisation and efficiency and effectiveness improvement are fundamental for organisational survival, innovation is the key for organisational advancement and long-term economic success. Choosing the right KM strategy is of utmost importance for organisational performance. On the one hand, two popular Knowledge Management strategies termed codification and personalisation differ in their reliance on technology or people. On the other hand, two strategies referred to as exploitation and exploration differ in their focus on transferring existing or developing new knowledge. This study aims to examine the main business forces in KM adoption and to identify preferred KM strategies responsively. More specifically, it aims to provide a metric in determining (1) applied and realised KM strategies, (2) business focus, (3) knowledge processes and (4) knowledge focus. Data, collected from 372 surveyed employees of Turkish organisations across different industries, were analysed in terms of the two key classes of KM drivers and strategies. The findings reveal a widespread tendency for simultaneous pursuance of dual survival and advancement business goals and widespread integration of codification and personalisation as well as exploitation and exploration strategies. The findings validate the ability of Turkish firms in the organisation of KM activities through the combination of somewhat contradictory drivers and strategies implying their ambidexterity regarding considered KM strategies.