ADILSON AUGUSTO MALDONADO COSTILHAS Melhoria do compartilhamento do conhecimento operário e a influência cultural: estudo comparativo Brasil e China em indústria de bens de capital Guaratinguetá - SP 2020 Adilson Augusto Maldonado Costilhas Workers knowledge sharing improvments and the cultural influence: comparative study Brazil and China in a capital good industry Dissertation presented to the School of Engineering of Guaratinguetá, São Paulo State University, as part of the requirements for achievement of the title: Master in Production Engineering Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Jorge Muniz Junior Co-Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Jacky Fok Loi Hong Guaratinguetá - SP 2020 Novembro 2020 CURRICULUM DATA ADILSON AUGUSTO MALDONADO COSTILHAS BORN 28.05.1965 – Capão Bonito/ SP- Brazil FILIATION Adilson Maldonado Costilhas Carmen Bernardes Ribeiro Costilhas 1984/1988 Mechanical Engineer Graduation School of Engineering, Guaratinguetá Universidade Estadual Paulista “Júlio de Mesquita Filho” (Unesp) 1995/1996 Production Management Master Latus Sensus Universidade de Sorocaba- UNISO dedico esse trabalho a Deus, meus pais Adilson e Carmen pela educação que proporcionaram, minha esposa Celeste e meus filhos Guilherme e Tiago que sempre me incentivaram. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The company where I work that served as a basis for the development of this research and all employees who collaborated and took part in this research. To my leaders who believed, trusted my work and allowed it to be done. To professors and students of the master program, in particular to Prof. Dr. Cleginaldo Pereira de Carvalho, Prof. Dr. Valério P. Salomon, Prof. Dr. Fernando Marins, Prof. Dr. Claudemir Tramarico, Prof. Dr. Elias M. K. Jabbour and students Fábio Nishiwaki, Mariana Baldo and in particular to Vagner Batista Ribeiro who supported in several phases of this research. Special thank Prof. Dr. Jorge Muniz Junior and Prof. Dr. Jacky Fok Loi Hong, for his guidance, encouragement and always dedicated attention. I also thank all the employees of the School of Engineering of Guaratinguetá for the support offered during the course period. And, finally, to the other colleagues of the Master's course in Production Engineering, who collaborated with the studies necessary for the development of this research. "It does not matter how slowly you go as long as you do not stop." Confúcio ABSTRACT This research analyses the factors capable of supporting knowledge sharing of workers in the capital goods industry. The research is based on a case study of an American Multinational Company that produces the same type of made-to-order product in two subsidiaries, one in Brazil and another in China, as well as interviews with industrial leaders who had the opportunity to work in Brazil and China in other business segments. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used to collect data. Regarding the quantitative method, a structured questionnaire was used to collect the opinion of workers, leaders and managers in both units. As far as the factors that influence the sharing of knowledge, these data were treated using the Saaty’s Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method (1977). And lastly, for the qualitative method, interviews were conducted on the results found by the AHP with the manufacturing managers units and a global leader who had the opportunity to work in both units. Additionally, another questionnaire was prepared and applied to leaders who had the opportunity to deal with workers in Brazil and China and were able to assess the cultural influence on knowledge sharing in both countries. The results found in the quantitative method show that Socialization and Internalization are seen by Brazilian and Chinese workers respectively as the main knowledge conversion factors facilitating knowledge sharing among workers. Some factors, such as Incentive, was highlighted as a positive influence on knowledge sharing in both countries. Cultural aspects were assessed using interviews results complementing the understanding of the quantitative data. This research contributes with evidence in order for a favourable context to be promoted, one that fosters knowledge sharing, evaluates cultural aspects, and understands and classifies existing factors, capable of interacting in such creation process. The results are aligned with research opportunities (gaps) identified in the literature, such as cultural influence in industrial environments, search for competitiveness and knowledge transfer, collaborating and complementing similar researches. KEYWORDS: Knowledge management. Knowledge sharing. Knowledge creation. Worker knowledge. Culture. Capital goods industry. Human resources. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). RESUMO Esta pesquisa analisa fatores capazes de apoiar o compartilhamento de conhecimento entre trabalhadores do setor industrial de bens de capital. A pesquisa é baseada no estudo de caso de uma empresa multinacional americana que produz o mesmo tipo de produto sob encomenda em duas subsidiarias sendo uma no Brasil e outra na China, bem como, entrevistas com líderes industriais que tiveram a oportunidade de trabalhar no Brasil e na China em outros segmentos de negócio. Foi utilizado método quantitativo e qualitativo para coleta de informações. Para o método quantitativo foi utilizado um questionário estruturado para coleta do julgamento de operários, líderes e gerentes de ambas as unidades, sobre os fatores que influenciam o compartilhamento do conhecimento, esses dados foram tratados utilizando-se do método Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) de Saaty (1977), para o método qualitativo foram realizadas entrevistas sobre os resultados encontrados pelo AHP com os gerentes das unidades de fabricação e um líder global que teve a oportunidade de trabalhar em ambas unidades. Adicionalmente, foi preparado um outro questionário e aplicado em líderes que tiveram a oportunidade de liderar trabalhadores tanto no Brasil como na China e puderam avaliar a influência cultural no compartilhamento do conhecimento em ambos os países. Os resultados encontrados no método quantitativo evidenciam que a Socialização e a Internalização são vistas pelos trabalhadores brasileiros e chineses respectivamente como os principais fatores de conversão de conhecimento facilitando no compartilhamento do conhecimento entre os trabalhadores. Fator como o incentivo foi destacado como influenciador positivo no compartilhamento do conhecimento em ambos os países estudados. Aspectos culturais foram avaliados utilizando os dados coletados nas entrevistas complementando o entendimento dos dados quantitativos. Esta pesquisa contribui com evidências para a criação de um contexto favorável na promoção do compartilhamento do conhecimento, avaliando aspectos culturais, compreendendo e classificando fatores existentes capazes de interagir no processo de criação. Os resultados estão alinhados com oportunidades de pesquisa (gaps) identificados na literatura, tais como, influência cultural em ambientes industriais, busca por competitividade e transferência de conhecimento, colaborando e complementando estudos similares. PALAVRAS CHAVES: Gestão do conhecimento. Compartilhamento do conhecimento. Criação do conhecimento. Conhecimento operário. Cultura. Industria de bens de capital. Recursos humanos. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1– 3D Still Image | Computer-generated image of a Kaplan turbine generator unit. Generator example..................................................................................................................19 Figure 2– Dimensions for promoting the Ba.......................................................................... 27 Figure 3– Knowledge Based Production Management Model (K-PMM) with Dimensions and Factors............................................................................................................................ 28 Figure 4– Method Used to Assess Knowledge Sharing Factors.............................................31 Figure 5– AHP Structure Support...........................................................................................33 Figure 6– Question Example for the Respondent Compare two Different Factors................33 Frame 1– Questionnaire- Leaders worked in Brazil and China............................................. 34 Frame 2– Example for Interview with Leaders that worked in Brazil and China in different industrial environment............................................................................................. 35 Frame 3- Questionnaire- Plant Managers in Brazil and China...............................................37 Frame 4- Example for Interview with Manager that Work in the Electrical Factories Subsidiaries.............................................................................................................38 Frame 5– Worker Culture Codes and Factor Definitions .....................................................39 LIST OF TABLES Table 1– Profile– Managers that Worked in Brazil and China in Industrial Environment.............................................................................................................35 Table 2– Respondents– Brazil and China -Electrical Production Lines...................................36 Table 3– Profile– Managers that Work in the Electrical Factories Subsidiaries.......................38 Table 4– Key Factor Comparisons– Brazil and China Electrical Factories..............................45 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AHP Analytic Hierarchy Process A-MNC American Multinational Company BRICS Acronym coined for an association of five major emerging national economies: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa CCKM Cross-cultural knowledge management KC Knowledge Creation KM Knowledge Management KS Knowledge Sharing MNC Multinational Company MCDM Multiple-Criteria Decision Making SECI Socialization, Externalization, Combination and Internalization VSM Value Stream Map CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................... 13 1.1 CONTEXT............................................................................................................. 13 1.2 JUSTIFICATION AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS............................................ 14 1.3 OBJECTIVE AND RESEARCH DELIMITATION............................................. 14 1.4 RESEARCH METHOD AND CLASSIFICATION.............................................. 15 1.5 COMPANY SELECTION..................................................................................... 17 1.6 WORK STRUCTURE .......................................................................................... 20 2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND..................................................................... 21 2.1 CULTURE INFLUENCE IN AN INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENT .................... 21 2.2 BRAZILIAN CULTURE OVERVIEW ................................................................. 22 2.3 CHINESE CULTURE OVERVIEW ...................................................................... 23 2.4 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN INDUSTRIAL SYSTEMS........................ 26 2.5 THE AHP METHOD.............................................................................................. 28 3 METHOD............................................................................................................... 30 4 FINDINGS ............................................................................................................. 39 4.1 BRAZIL-CHINA WORKER CULTURE ANALYSIS........................................... 39 4.2 WORKER KNOWLWDGE SHARING ENABLERS ASSESSMENT ................. 43 4.3 KEY FACTORS AHP ANALYSIS – BRAZIL BY FUNCTION ........................... 45 4.4 KEY FACTORS AHP ANALYSIS – CHINA BY FUNCTION.............................. 46 4.5 KEY FACTORS AHP ANALYSIS – CHINA BRAZIL COMPARISON............... 47 5 CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................... 50 REFERENCES..................................................................................................... 53 ANNEX A- Research Instrument in Portuguese................................................. 60 ANNEX B- Research Instrument in Mandarin................................................... 63 APPENDIX A- AHP Complete Results Brazil and China.................................. 68 APPENDIX B- Interview with Managers that worked in the Electrical Factories Subsidiaries............................................................................................ 69 APPENDIX C- Interview with Managers that Worked with……...….….…… 80 13 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 CONTEXT This research presents the results found about which factors are capable to support workers’ knowledge sharing (KS) and how the local culture influences workers in two subsidiaries of an American multinational company (A-MNC), based in Brazil and China. The research based on a case study carried out with workers in industrial production environments (shop floor) in the capital goods sector that supply made-to-order electrical generator. Brazil and China are emerging countries representatives by the acronym BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), with a high population, cheap labour and based on industrial economy consumption. The multinationals decided to install subsidiaries in the BRICS, seeking greater competitiveness and profit based on the economy of labour and the need to increase domestic consumption in these countries as well. On the other hand, as more and more subsidiaries were transferred to these countries, implementing their forms of management, standards, norms and procedures, brought along cultural differences compared to the local ones, which interfere in the performance of these companies. Due to the increase of demand for human resources by multinationals, studies have revealed the need to assess how these new workers would be aligned with corporate and personal values, what behaviours are desired to increase productivity, especially considering the financial impact associated with hiring, training and firing workers. (ARDICHVILI et al., 2012). Studies on organizational culture and knowledge not only consider the processes of generating and exchanging data or information, but also how the process relates to cultural environment. This cultural influence has a direct impact on the development communication system, on behaviour and on individual learning intention to share and acquire knowledge (CLEVELAND; ELLIS, 2015; INGVALDESEN, 2015; REED et al., 2011). KS is relevant for retaining valuable assets and strengthening the organizations ability to compete in an increasingly complex, dynamic and knowledge dependent global business environment (SAINI; ARIF; KULONDA, 2017). Developing an effective relationship between managers and workers is difficult, especially when they belong to different cultures. 14 Managers can appear biased, illogical and unfair when viewed from the perspective of a worker from another culture (ADLER, 2002). 1.2 JUSTIFICATION AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS Research gaps are identified in published papers, which have mostly studied KS based on different types of industries: hospital electronics (DEVINATZ, 2007); automotive (MUNIZ JUNIOR et al., 2010a; VALIO; GONZALEZ, 2014; MUNIZ JUNIOR et al., 2019); petrochemical (FILHO; ANDRADE; MARINHO, 2010), electronics (MUNIZ JUNIOR et al., 2019), glass (MUNIZ JUNIOR et al., 2019) and no papers were found on KS in capital goods industries. Knowledge Management (KM) studies consider impacts at different levels of an organization, which can be assessed by the aspect of technologies for knowledge creation (KC), KS, organizational culture, leadership and organizational learning (MAZDEH; HESAMAMIRI, 2014). Specifically, however, two critical questions remain unanswered in the existing literature: • How does culture influence KS? (MUNIZ JUNIOR et al., 2019) • What are the critical factors that influence the willingness to share knowledge? (MANUS et al., 2016) 1.3 OBJECTIVE AND RESEARCH DELIMITATION This research aims to discuss the cultural influence in the capital goods industry and its impact on KS. Researchers have defended the need to develop cross-cultural structures that can help different people achieve results and work together effectively (FISHER; SMITH, 2003), develop skills in multicultural communities (SHENKAR; ZEIRA, 1987), highlighting the existing need for studies that address KS factors (WANG et al., 2016) and management methods that consider the perception of workers in the shop floor (HOLM, 2018). A robust KM system requires the identification and evaluation of factors that influence KS, showing its effects and enabling the necessary corrections, which are of great importance for the KM strategy in organizations (LAK; REZAEENOUR, 2018; SHIROUYEHZAD; RAFIEE; BERJIS, 2017; ARMAGHAN; RENAUD, 2017; KAN; GUO; LI, 2016). 15 This research was delimited for this case study during the years of 2018 until 2020, considering, two subsidiaries from A-MNC installed in Brazil and China that produced the same products in which lines this research was applied, the synchronous electrical generator production based on demand. It considered the shop floor environment, where workers, supervisors and leaders work in the production lines of components to manufacture the synchronous electrical generators. These production lines are semi-automatic and have different production systems that depend of tacit knowledge of the workers. This research contributes to KS studies applied in the capital goods industry, using a qualitative and quantitative approach using AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) method, interviews with managers from respective plants to discuss the results found and additionally interviews with managers that worked in Brazil and in China and experienced contact with workers from both countries. (MUNIZ JUNIOR et al., 2019; MARTINSONSA et al., 2017; HONG; SNELL; ROWLEY, 2017; MANUS et al., 2016; ARDICHVILI et al., 2011). The KM introduction in different organizational and social contexts, increased the need to develop cross-cultural structures that can help different people achieve results and work together effectively (HONG; STANLEY; EASTERBY-SMITH, 2006), KS factors (WANG et al., 2016) and management methods that consider the perception of employees on the shop floor. (HOLM, 2018). Developing an effective relationship between managers and employees is difficult, especially when they belong to different cultures. Managers can appear biased, illogical and unfair when viewed from the perspective of an employee from another culture (SAINI; SINGHANIA, 2018). 1.4 RESEARCH METHOD AND CLASSIFICATION The method applied in this research consists of five main steps. First, a comprehensive worker KS literature review, based on studies published in ISI Web of Science and Scopus, which updated the literature review made by Muniz Junior et al. (2019 and 2010a). The method for critical review of papers follows Nakano and Muniz Junior (2018). Second, it was applied a questionnaire in both subsidiaries. Third, it was analysed the data using the AHP method. Fourth, it was conducted interviews with managers of both subsidiaries to collect their perceptions on the results found in the AHP. Fifth, it was conducted interviews with 16 leaders that worked in Brazil and China in different businesses to complement the assessment of cultural impact on KS. A detailed flowchart will be presented in the chapter 3. This research contributes to KS studies applied in the capital goods industry, using a qualitative and quantitative approach using AHP method, interviews with managers from the respective plants to discuss the results found and additionally interviews with managers that worked in Brazil and in China and experienced contact with workers from both countries. (MUNIZ JUNIOR et al., 2019; MARTINSONSA et al., 2017; HONG; SNELL; ROWLEY, 2017; MANUS et al., 2016; ARDICHVILI et al., 2011). The research consisted of the following process: ▪ A questionnaire applied (ANNEX A and B) to workers, leaders and managers (2018) in the production areas in two capital goods subsidiaries, China and Brazil, with the same A- MNC and that produce components for made-to-order synchronous electric generators. The interviews were conducted using the SECI (Socialization, Externalization, Combination and Internalization) questionnaire, translated into local languages, Mandarin and Portuguese, respectively, and applied using the same method. ▪ Interviews with managers (2020) who are responsible for the two electrical plants in Brazil and China and a global manufacturing specialist from the company itself who had the opportunity to work in Brazil and China, where the SECI questionnaires above were applied. For these interviews, a specific questionnaire (Frame 2) was used with questions regarding the results found after the multicriteria analysis provided by the AHP method. ▪ Additionally, leaders (2019/2020) who worked in Brazil and China in other industrial environments were interviewed using a specific questionnaire (Frame 1) with questions involving industrial work and culture, comparing the differences and similarities between Brazilian and Chinese workers from the perspective of the interviewees and their experiences in industrial environments (Energy, Automotive and Infrastructure). This research carried out comparative studies between Brazilian and Chinese workers in the industrial context and how culture influences KS. (MUNIZ JUNIOR et al., 2019; KLAFKE et al., 2016; ARDICHVILI et al., 2012). Researchers have recently defended the need to develop structures that can help different people overcome obstacles and work together effectively in countries with different cultures (FISCHER; SMITH, 2003). This research contributes to complement other researches (CHEN; TJOSVOLD, 2005) that studied 17 the relationship of foreign managers who worked in other countries and needed to understand the influence of culture in the industrial environment to improve results. 1.5 COMPANY SELECTION This research was based on two subsidiaries installed in Brazil and China for the same A-MNC that produce capital goods. This specific study considers the synchronous electrical generator production that are produced using similar process and product lines in both countries. The production is made-to-order projects of hydroelectrical power plants. The Brazilian subsidiary attend America and Western Europe customers and the Chinese attend basically Asia and Eastern Europe and Africa customers. Hydro generators are customized for each project to ensure enhanced performance for site conditions and customer needs. Each large hydro generator is engineered to run smoothly under any operating condition, while reducing structural stress and improving reliability for the lifetime of the turbine. In both subsidiaries, there were specific lines for different kind of components and assembly areas in the mechanical and electrical shop. At the time this research was being carried out, there were 800 employees in the Brazilian factory and 1,200 in Chinese one, and this specific research was concentrated in the three different and independent lines of the electrical shop and counted on the participation of the workers, leaders and managers in these specific lines, as defined in the Table 1. In a general view, the generator workshop where the active parts of the machine are produced, is separated in three different and independent production lines. The different lines work as a serial production, where the parts are manufactured in sequence and usually in big volumes for different kind of orders. All processes were designed in both subsidiaries using VSM (value stream map), lean concept and continuous improvement, despite well-designed process and many tools and machines, the knowledge workers have is the main drive and tacit knowledge is embedded throughout the process. The generator components produced in each line are: Stator Bar, Rotor Poles and Stator Lamination. The detail description and the overview of the process is given below for each different line: 18  Stator winding bars/coils consists of assembling copper strands and insulation materials onto pieces that will conduct the magnetic flow coming from the rotor and transform it into power output. The production line starts with copper elementary strand, and it follows with the insulation material, mainly Mica paper and Epoxy resin, to form the insulation system. The finished stator bar should be electrically tested and dimensionally guaranteed to comply with the Stator requirements. After that it can be delivered piece by piece. Industrial Resources in the production line: hydraulic press, taping machines, impregnation chambers and several hand tools.  Rotor poles: pieces attached to the rotor structure that hold the copper windings where the excitation current will flow and then produce the magnetic field that will feed the stator core and windings. The production line starts with copper straight bar, and carbon steel lamination. Some insulation material, such as Nomex paper and Epoxy Resin, are also used to electrically insulate the components. After the rotor pole is assembled, it goes through a dimensional and electrical check. Single finished poles must be packed and delivered piece by piece. Industrial resources in the production line: laser cutting machines, press and brazing machines and other hand tools.  Stator core laminations: pieces that fill and form the stator circumference when stacked and are intended to absorb the magnetic field produced by the rotor poles and direct them to the stator winding, where the power output will be generated. The definition for the Stator core lamination production is simply an automated line considering a big press, which punches the lamination mostly made of silicon steel, then it goes to a conveyor automatically and suffer deburring and insulation varnishing applied by a rubber roll. After curing then in the end of the line, each lamination is stacked above the other, forming a single package of stator core lamination, then it will be delivered piece by piece. Industrial resources in the production line: punching machine, varnishing machine, spot welding machines, stacking robots. 19 Finally, in the assembly shop the active parts produced inside the production line are assembled with mechanical components that are produced outside the electrical factory and enter in the end of line where the complete generator is assembled and tested. When the generator size is so large that transporting it completely assembled is impracticable, only the rotor is pre-assembled and disassembled, all components are packed and delivered at site were the generator is completed assembled and connected with the hydraulic turbine and the grid. The Figure 1 shows the 3D Image for a hydraulic Vertical Kaplan Turbine including the synchronous electrical generator. Figure 1 - 3D Still Image | Computer-generated image of a Vertical Kaplan turbine and synchronous electrical generator unit. Source: GE Renewable Energy (2020). 20 1.6 WORK STRUCTURE This research presents in the second chapter the theoretical background, addressing the main concepts related to cultural influence in the industrial environment in Brazil and China followed by the study related to KS in industrial systems. The third chapter describes the research method, detailing the sequence adopted. Subsequently, the fourth chapter develops the record of the observed results and discussions, thus supporting the purpose of this research and its conclusions presented in the fifth chapter. Finally, the References that were used, Annexes and Appendices that detail and complement this research. 21 2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 2.1 CULTURE INFLUENCE IN AN ORGANIZATIONAL INDUSTRY ENVIROWMENT Researchers have studied the culture impact in organizational environments, but the theme is very abroad and difficult to synthesize. Understand and investigate the relationship between national culture and KS process is key to understand KM process. No sufficient research (theoretical and practical) has been conducted to establish relationship between national culture and knowledge sharing. National culture affects KM process significantly, and it has been validated by various empirical studies conducted in various countries. (GOSWAMI et al, 2020) SMIRCICH, 1983, traced the ways culture has been developed in organization studies: as a critical variable and as a root metaphor, demonstrated that not only have organizational analysts held varying conceptions of culture, but that these different conceptions give rise to different research questions and interests. The differences in approach to the organization- culture relationship are derived from differences in the basic assumptions that researchers make about both "organization" and "culture." She studied some researchers that classify culture anthropologically: In cognitive anthropology, culture consists of shared knowledge (GOODENOUGH, 1971; AGAR, 1982); In symbolic anthropology, culture is a system of shared meaning (HALLOWELL, 1955; GEERTZ, 1973); Structural anthropology and psychodynamics, culture is a manifestation and expression of the mind's unconscious operation (ROSSI; O'HIGGINS, 1980); Anthropologists such as HALLOWELL, 1955 and GEERTZ, 1973 treat societies, or cultures, as systems of shared symbols and meanings. They see the anthropologist's task as interpreting the "themes" of culture those postulates or understandings, declared or implicit, tacitly approved or openly prompted, that orient and stimulate social activity (OPLER, 1945). Values and business ethics practices change as the result of social transformations because people try to acclimate to the social, political, and economical circumstances of the country (HITLIN; PILIAVIN, 2004). Knowledge, a complex amalgam of know-how, values and experience, is dispersed throughout organisations’ global networks. A rarely noted aspect of these processes is that the 22 way in which knowledge is transferred can transform organisations in unhelpful ways, culture is a set of largely tacit or implicit rules for the social game. (PAULEEN; ROONEY; HOLDEN, 2010) 2.2 BRAZILIAN CULTURE OVERVIEW Ardichvili et al. (2012), studied the culture influence in large business organization into the BRICS countries. The author described that Brazilian managerial culture is characterized by paternalism (defined as a dyadic relationship between superiors and their subordinates in which superiors provide protection and guidance in exchange for loyalty and deference on the part of subordinated, power concentration, personal relationships, strong loyalty to one’s in- group and leader, and flexibility). According to Holanda (1995), the colonial legacy also includes the origins of the traditional Latin American personalism, the lack of social cohesion and the looseness of the institutions. Brazilians inherited their characteristics from the Iberians: Hispanic arrogance and Portuguese laxness and plasticity as well as an adventurous spirit and appreciation of loyalty in both. The mixture of all those ingredients probably resulted a certain slackness and anarchy, lack of cohesion, disorder and indiscipline. Baer (2008), defined “Brazil has surmounted formidable challenges; it is a large country with a diverse population, tackling numerous socioeconomic and political challenges throughout history and experiencing growth and development while facing economic and fiscal pressures in a context of regional inequalities.” Amado and Brazil (2016) studied, even in multinational companies operating in Third World countries, and concluded that research on the influence of Brazilian culture over the management of national and international companies is both relevant and important as a principle of regulation, every action in a social system (in this case, the company) is always influenced by the wider cultural system. According to Hess (1995), Brazil, in spite of its western-like institutions, is a country where western culture has mixed and mingled with non-western cultures for centuries. He describes Brazil as the product of a particular colonial legacy that includes a class of wealthy landowners who supported a highly centralized Portuguese state. In turn the state imposed a latifundia, or plantation agricultural system in Brazil, where the plantations were controlled by patriarchs who exercised nearly absolute authority over their dominions. 23 For these authors, Hofstede’s (1981) most important finding refers to the importance of national culture in order to explain the differences in work-related attitudes and values. Brazilians, no matter how differentiated they may be in their racial and cultural matrices and in their ecological regional functions, or in respect of being old settlers or recent immigrants, have come to know themselves, to feel themselves, and to act as a single people, belonging to the one same and only culture. They are a national entity distinct from all others, speaking the same language, differing only in regional accents. Hofstede (1981), as mentioned before, was able to come to a kind of worldwide typology by exploiting international data reflecting differences among national cultures, defined within four reference parameters. But this mapping neglects the typical characteristics of each country, and is, thus, of little help to clear up those issues concerning the influence of a specific country's culture in the organization. Hofstede's contribution, however, reinforces our belief that cultural aspects cannot be neglected in transfers of technology, in the context of organizations. 2.3 CHINESE CULTURE OVERVIEW China is the largest of the four BRICS in terms of population and size of economy, and the second largest in territory (after Russia). Compared with all countries of the world, China has the largest population, second largest economy, and third largest territory. During the last half of the twentieth century and the first decade of the twenty-first century, mainland China has experienced several major social transformations: The transition to socialism after the Communist party took power in 1949, the Cultural Revolution in the 60s, the economic reform in 1978, and the subsequent 30 years of continuous economic development and exposure to western business practices. The literature suggests a strong Confucian influence on Chinese business ethics practices. (ARDICHVILI et al., 2012). Culture is a cultural movement and cultural phenomenon in the historical development process of human society. So far as modernization of Chinese culture itself is concerned, it is a cultural phenomenon that is generated in a particular Chinese social and historical background and is a cultural pattern that is formed by Chinese people in specific and particular practical cultural activities. Therefore, our understanding in modernization of Chinese culture should neither be only based on culture itself nor merely based on the so- called general development process of modernization of culture. Instead, we have to take into 24 consideration of the particular Chinese social and historical background and historical conditions. That is, we should put the scientific explanation of the issue of modernization of Chinese culture into particular Chinese social and historical practical activities with certain principles and height and regard all stages in development particular Chinese society and history as the “source of birth” and “stage” to see through the issue of modernization of Chinese culture. To put it bluntly, a theoretical explanation of the issue of modernization of Chinese culture has to resort to the “historical materialism” built by Marx so as to analyse the internal mechanism and development rule of modernization of culture in a scientific way and also decode scientifically the gene and code of modernization of Chinese culture. Before the Opium War broke out, the mainstream Chinese ideology was the traditional Chinese ideological culture, namely, such feudal ideological culture as “the doctrine of Confucius and Mencius” and “Cheng and Zhu's Neo-Confucianism”. Chinese traditional culture grew out of the foundation of Chinese natural agricultural economy and presented a kind of “unrestrained” development process. In the meantime, as a sort of Chinese national cultural ideology, the traditional Chinese ideological culture has solidly safeguarded the feudal property in China for thousands of years with its powerful ideological function. After the Opium War broke out, the Qing Government began a top-down “Survival and Downfall Movement”, which was mainly initiated by the upper-class intellectuals in Qing Government, including enlightened literati and officialdom, landed aristocracy and landlord class. They learnt from the modern culture, ideological culture, political culture, military culture and scientific culture in developed western capitalist countries and intensively launched the national salvation movement in China. To put it bluntly, ever since the Opium War began, modernization of Chinese culture opened a transfer from “unrestrain” to “act-by-oneself” and a development process of transition from “traditional” culture to “modern” culture. As the particular Chinese practical cultural activities were continuously launched, it gradually came into the mind of Chinese people that neither developed western capitalist culture nor the traditional Chinese national culture could fundamentally resolve the issue of overall emancipation of Chinese people. Instead, both of them had, on a large scale, aggravated formation of Chinese semi-colonial and semi-feudal society. Thus, Chinese people came to be aware that they had to make a premised criticism on western capitalist culture and the traditional Chinese culture and make revolutionary innovations and development instead of either blindly and mechanically copying the cultural road of developed western capitalist countries or following the traditional Chinese cultural road. When Marxism philosophy was brought to China in succession, Chinese people began to employ advanced Marxism 25 ideological culture to resolve the issue of modernization of Chinese culture. From then on, the three cultures of traditional Chinese culture, western ideological culture and Marxism culture converged, which marked the historical formation of modernization of Chinese culture and a kind of life stream with cultural innovation was formed and fed into the long historical river of modernization of Chinese culture. Chinese culture was established on the basis of feudal land natural economy and western capitalist ideological culture emphasized “individual”, whereas the traditional Chinese culture emphasized “collectivity”. It is obvious that quite large discrepancy exists between these two kinds of culture. Thus, the development path of modernization of Chinese culture should neither simulate the western culture that pursues individualism nor follow the collective Chinese traditional culture, which is exactly the core issue of modernization of Chinese culture. To put it bluntly, the issue of modernization of Chinese culture is an issue of comprehensive development of human freedom. Chinese national culture, combine quintessence of the national culture of other developed countries in the world and make great efforts to create Chinese culture with Chinese national flavour. In the meantime, we have to follow the historical tide of cultural globalization and take a positive initiative in pushing the Chinese national culture to the whole world and having communication and dialogue with other nations in the world. This also lays a certain cultural communication platform for Chinese culture to go towards the historical culture of the world. (KANG; FENG, 2013) Given that in a Chinese context trust is based on human relationship considerations more than on rational considerations, adhering to the Confucian principles of “wulun” (the five rules of social interactions in interpersonal relationships), guanxi (the bonds of close social relationships), and guanxi (seeking informal relationships and bonds between families to exchange goods) is highly influential. Building trust through family connections is often a means of survival in troubled times, and once trust is established, the parties must maintain it if they are to continue exchanging explicit or implicit benefits. Furthermore, in a Chinese context, “guanxi” and “mianzi” are fundamental to the transfer of knowledge in social interactions and can be interlinked (KING; WEI, 2018). 26 2.4 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN INDUSTRIAL SYSTEMS KC can be understood as a continuous process through which one overcomes the individual boundaries and constraints imposed by information and past learning by acquiring a new context, a new view of the world and new knowledge (NONAKA; KROGH, 2009). One dimension of KC process can be drawn from a distinction between two types of knowledge- "tacit knowledge" and “explicit knowledge". "Explicit" or codified knowledge refers to knowledge that is transmittable in formal, systematic language. On the other hand, "tacit" knowledge has a personal quality, which makes it hard to formalize and communicate. Tacit knowledge is deeply rooted in action, commitment, and involvement in a specific context (NONAKA, 1994). Pauleen, Rooney and Holden, (2010) believe it is reasonable to view culture as a knowledge resource. Mismanaging culture, as with other resources, can undermine corporate endeavour in ways that catch managers – often at senior levels – off guard and in some cases throw corporate strategies off course for years. He defined CCKM (Cross-cultural knowledge management) as the systematic and purposeful management of culture as an organisational knowledge asset. In an organisation with a multicultural workforce, a diverse or international customer base, international suppliers and global competitors, the potential for culture to become a significant organisational knowledge asset is great indeed, one that needs conscientious management and wise leadership. Only tacit and explicit knowledge is not enough and presented the ‘‘dynamic fractal organization’’ as a new organizational model. This model departs from the conventional information processing paradigm. A new frontier in organizational theory: the ‘‘dynamic fractal organization based on dynamic “Ba”. Dynamic fractal organizations build and utilize a triad relationship of knowledge that integrates and synthesizes tacit and explicit knowledge and creates a third type of knowledge, phronesis. The triad relationship is an upward spiralling process of converting tacit and explicit knowledge and propels sustainable knowledge transformation across the diverse boundaries within and between organizations. The “Ba” presents an evolution where the process is dynamic, interdependent where many layers need to be studied (HONG; STANLEY; EASTERBY-SMITH, 2006). Ba, which is conceptualized as a shared context in motion, can transcend time, space, and organization boundaries to create knowledge, has been studied improving KC theory through the SECI process and Ba, and try to advance them further by incorporating the dialectic thinking. KC is conceptualized as a dialectical process, in which various 27 contradictions are synthesized through dynamic interactions among individuals, the organization, and the environment. With the view of a firm as a dialectic being, and strategy and organization should be re-examined as the synthesizing and self-transcending process instead of a logical analysis of structure or action. An organization is not an information- processing machine that is composed of small tasks to carry out a given task, but an organic configuration of Ba (NONAKA; TOYAMA, 2003). Figure 2– Dimensions for promoting the Ba Source: Muniz Junior et al. (2010). Knowledge conversion explains, the interaction between tacit and explicit knowledge and can be understood as a continuous process through which one overcomes the individual boundaries and constraints imposed by information and past learning by acquiring a new context, a new view of the world and new knowledge. (NONAKA, KROGH; VOELPEL, 2006). Thematically on firms’ attempts to globalize the SECI model in terms of imperatives, such as new product development, process innovation, safety enhancement, cost savings and environmental protection. China and Brazil score high on Hofstede’s dimension of collectivism, and it would therefore be expected that workers in both countries are likely to be reluctant to share knowledge with members of the organisation with which weak or no social ties exist. Moreover, as “high context” communication cultures, workers in Brazil and China are likely to look for contextual cues in information and tend to disregard information in writing (WILCZEWSKI; GUT; GORBANIUK, 2017, MUNIZ JUNIOR et al., 2019). 28 Figure 3– Knowledge based production management model (K-PMM) with dimensions and factors Source: Muniz Junior et al. (2010) 2.5 THE AHP METHOD The purpose to use MCDM (Multiple-Criteria Decision Making tool is support the analysis of decision-making, identifying actors, alternative solutions, consequences, stakeholders, assisting in the organization of the decision-making process in order to achieve consistency between objective decision and the final decision reached, cooperation and consensus between decision-making actors and legitimization of the final decision. Among the various methods of MCDM, the AHP was chosen for this research because it is the most used method so far, despite some criticisms from researchers as to its effectiveness and that must be evaluated by the users of this method in face of their respective surveys. (MARINS; SOUZA; BARROS, 2009) According Muniz Junior, 2014, AHP is a systematic method of synthesizing priorities, structurally represented by its hierarchy. The mathematical modelling of MCDM involves three steps: a) identification of decision, criteria, and alternatives. b) assignment of weights to the criteria and priorities for alternatives. c) synthesis of the results. In the same way that this tool can bring us quantitative data about multicriteria and provide a basis for the interviewees' choices, it can bring another series of data that together with managers who are in the daily work can use this data to obtain scenarios discussions that allow assistance in decision making. (MUNIZ JUNIOR et al., 2019) The AHP is a hierarchy of top down linear structure, with no feedback from the lower levels to the upper levels. At its top, it presents the global objective that influences the Criteria. 29 Alternatives are influenced by the next higher level and each Alternative depends only on itself. (PETRINI, 2015) All the elements that make up each hierarchical level are considered independent from each other (SAATY, 1988). Here we will emphasize the main criticisms presented to the AHP method and that must be considered from the point of view of each research, Goodwin and Wright (2003) presented the following criticisms: - Difficulty in converting linguistic to numerical comparisons. - Inconsistencies imposed by the linear scale from 1 to 9. - Understanding of the questions by those who answer the comparisons. - Priority order inversion comparing with existing alternatives, with the exclusion or inclusion of alternatives or criteria. - The necessary number of comparisons can be high. - The axioms into the methods. Evaluating the criticisms raised above, we took care in applying the questionnaire used in this research, a questionnaire that has been applied in a significant number of surveys to KS assess in different industrial environments in recent years, as it will be mention later. Care was taken to explain the survey method and the objective for all interviewees, the pertinent doubts were removed before start to filling out, after collecting all the questionnaires and before using them, some questionnaires that were not clearly filled out were discarded. The AHP method does not seek to find the optimal solution to the decision problem, but rather seeks quantitative and comparative data that can generate knowledge for decision makers. (MUNIZ JUNIOR, 2014) The approach of this research is based on a case study using the AHP and also interviews with managers, seeks to evidence the results with a qualitative and quantitative approach, with the application of surveys. Although the AHP has a strong mathematical basis in view of the possible inconsistencies results in an analytical way, we seek to use the data generated in the AHP to guide and give a perception for managers to reflect on the results found in order to generate discussions and analyses how KS and what is culture influence in the industrial environment. (ISHIZAKA; NEMERI, 2013) According MARINS, SOUZA and BARROS, 2009, if in a research there is a combination of case study with mathematical modelling, with an emphasis on the application of AHP (for example, describing in detail the attribution of importance to the criteria) it can be said that it followed a quali-quantitative approach. 30 3 METHOD Factors related worker KS and culture analysis involves qualitative and quantitative judgment. Express factors in measurable units and structure evaluation criteria into a framework to facilitate understanding can be supported by expert judgement and multi criteria method. The research method applied 3 steps according to Figure 2: A) Theoretical Background was conducted using a literature review about Brazil and China industrial worker culture, KS factor analysis in the industry shop floor environment and the culture influence in KS. The fieldwork outline B.) The method characterization consists of presenting the SECI research instrument to the interviewees in the two subsidiaries, explaining the reason for the research and clarifying doubts about filling it out, applying the research, performing the data processing based on the AHP method, evaluating the results, presenting them to the managers and collecting their perceptions through semi-structured interviews and process the interview data. In addition, semi-structured interviews will be conducted with leaders who had the opportunity to work in Brazil and China with workers in the industrial area and apply these results together with the results found in the AHP method, verifying the cultural influence on the factors that contribute to knowledge sharing. The step C) Fieldwork consist in two steps: C1) Fieldwork 1, KS assessment applying AHP Saaty´s scale to assess knowledge human and process factors and the interviews with China and Brazil managers that work in the subsidiaries. C2) Fieldwork 2, was applied another questionnaire considering leaders that worked in Brazil and China in different industrial environment leading workers in both countries to understand the culture influence in the shop floor. 31 Figure 4 - Method used to Assess KS Factors Source: Adapted from Muniz Junior et al. (2014) The Step A.1., was reviewed from Web Science and Scopus platforms (2000-2020), considering the follow topics KS / KM/ KC/ Industrial workers/ Cross-culture/ Confucian values/ Guanxi/ Face/ Industrial manufacturing/ Capital goods/ Culture diversity/ Human resource/ Management/ Cultural values/ Chinese culture/ Brazilian culture/ Blue-collars/ Workers. The Step A.2, the literature review was concentrated in the Brazilian and Chinese culture in industrial environment and how the culture can influence KS, regarding the differences and similarities between the two cultures. The literature review permitted to understand the co-relation between cultural aspects and KS in the shop floor comparing researches made in other industrial sectors. KS studies based on different business were performed, as example: Medical electronics (DEVINATZ, 2007), the author asserts that the organization of US industrial manufacturing is irrational as well as appearing chaotic from the workers’ viewpoint because of management’s refusal to integrate the workers’ knowledge into the production process. Automotive (MUNIZ JUNIOR et al., 2010), proposed a model of production management that integrates KM, as a third dimension. Automotive (VALIO; GONZALES, 2014) proposed with their research that it is both social and of coordination, aiming to identify contextual factors, internally developed in the organizations, which support the KM process in the Brazilian companies in the automotive sector. A. Theoretical Background A.1. Literature Review B. Fieldwork outline C. Fieldwork B.1. Method Characterization C.2. Assessment about KS Factors A.2. Culture influence in KS C.1. Interviews about culture factors 32 Automotive (MUNIZ JUNIOR et al., 2019), proposed to evaluate factors that influence KS in automotive production context in Brazil and China. Glasses (MUNIZ JUNIOR et al., 2019), the authors based their assumptions on previous work in automotive industry (MUNIZ JUNIOR et al., 2010a), which is now applied to a moulded and pressed glass factory. Moulded Glass production is more dependent on blue collar tacit knowledge than automotive production, which makes it a perfect setting for this study. They saw a research gap when they didn’t find any papers on KS in capital goods industries. Considering these studies, it was possible to find a research gap in KS applied in capital goods industry and develop this research based on this bibliography references and adding culture influence in the shop floor workers. Step B.) Fieldwork outline, the use of AHP developed by Saaty (1980) is a MCDM, decomposes complex decision-making problems (i.e., with multiple judgments at different levels) into sub-problems within hierarchical level. Each hierarchical level represents a set of attributes or alternatives related to each sub-problem (Figure 5). The top level of the entire hierarchy represents the goal of the problem, which in the presented study, has better KS among blue collar workers. An important step for the AHP method is the structuring of the decision problem into hierarchical levels and the construction of a model that relates the factors in terms of their priorities. In this step the overall objective, the criteria and the alternatives are identified. Next, the perceptions of people involved with the decision in question are collected. Following the identification of the objective (better sharing of worker knowledge), at the next level, we discerned three major sub-categories, namely Socialization (communication) Externalization (written down codes of practice and rules) as well as Internalization (the studying and/or reading of such codes of practices and rules). Finally, we considered different alternative tools to reach the means of better KS, some of which included alternatives including formal communication channels, the forging of informal personal relationships etc. The factors applied were selected based on their relevance to promote the use of worker knowledge and engagement (MUNIZ JUNIOR et al., 2010b). It then uses pairwise comparisons to model mutual interaction between the different elements and then measures and ranks their impact on the entire system. The relative order of importance between the elements, which is the objective KS factors evaluation, is obtained. 33 Figure 5- AHP Structure Support Source: Adapted from Muniz Junior et al. (2014) The AHP guided the questionnaire design (Appendix A), which allowed the respondents to assess multiple key factors in hierarchical decision-making process by using Saaty’s scale (SAATY, 1980). The questionnaire was developed, translated into Brazilian Portuguese and Chinese (Mandarin) languages. In the Figure 6 is showed an example for the comparison criteria. Figure 6: Question example for the respondent comparing two different factors Source: Muniz Junior et al. (2019) The research instrument in based on the same questionnaire already applied in other researches considering SECI method (Appendix C) and adapted from Petrini's application (2015), carried out in the automotive sector, also exploring previous works, such as, Muniz 34 Junior et al., (2014), which evaluates a smaller number of factors and Muniz Junior et al. (2019), in automotive companies in Brazil and China. The instrument includes KS factors mapped, and related production organization. The Step C.) was divided in two interviews: C.1.) Interviews about culture factors It was prepared a semi-structured questionnaire (Frame 1) based on advisor experience in culture influence in Brazil and China. This questionnaire has the objective to compare how culture influence the KS in both Countries and the differences between each one. Frame 1– Questionnaire- Leaders worked in Brazil and China 1- What are the characteristics of Brazilian and Chinese workers? 2- What is the difference between Brazilian and Chinese workers? 3- How does the Brazilian manager deal with Brazilian workers? 4-How does the Chinese manager deal with Chinese workers? 5- What´s the incentive approach to Brazilian workers? 6- What´s the incentive approach to Chinese workers? 7- What´s the punishing approach to Brazilian workers? 8- What´s the punishing approach to Chinese workers? 9- How is the Union influence over the Brazilian worker? 10- How is the Union influence over the Chinese worker? 11- What are the personal values of the Brazilian workers? 12- What are the personal values of the Chinese workers? 13- What are the personal characteristics of Brazilian workers and Chinese workers? 14- What are the organization systems in Chinese companies? 15- What are the organization systems in Brazilian companies? 16- How does the Chinese worker work/deal with other workers? 17- How does the Brazilian worker work/deal with other workers? 18- What were the difficulties encountered when you were working with the Chinese/Brazilian? 19- How did you overcome them? Any examples? 20- What are the similarities between Brazilian and Chinese workers? 21- Why do you think such problems/difficulties occur? 22- What are the similarities between Brazilian and Chinese workers? 23- How do the Brazilian workers share knowledge and experience in the industrial environment? 24- How do the Chinese workers share knowledge and experience in the industrial environment? 25- What´s the concern about sharing knowledge in the Brazilian companies? 26- What´s the concern about sharing knowledge in the Chinese companies? Source: Author´s own production. 35 The interviews were conducted through open individual interviews with leaders considering their work experience in industrial environment in both countries, leading workers and comparing the culture aspects. (Table 1). Table 1- Profile - Managers that Worked in Brazil and China in Industrial Environment Job Function (CODE) Business Professional Experience (YEARS) China Experience (YEARS) Brazil Experience (YEARS) Nationality Advanced Manufacture Engineering Manager (MG1) Energy 20 6 14 Brazilian Operation Director (DIR1) Automotive 30 5 25 Brazilian Process Developing Supervisor (ENG 1) Automotive 20 1 19 Brazilian Acquisition Director (DIR2) Automotive 22 3 19 Brazilian Commercial Manager (COM 1) Infrastructure 8 4 4 Chinese Commercial Manager (COM 2) Infrastructure 7 2 5 Chinese Source: Author´s own production. The survey was individually applied in a virtual meeting with each manager per around one hour. The questionnaire presented in Frame 1 was used and all meetings were recorded and transcribed - around 6 hours of interviews were recorded to allow comparison between Brazilian and Chinese workers based on factors that influence KS on the shop floor context. It was used content analysis techniques (STEMLER, 2000) to identify conceptual categories and worker culture aspects related to industrial context in both countries. Frame 3, illustrated content analysis based on meaning units from interviews, through condensed meaning units, translated into codes, and then it was ranked. In the Frame 2 it is showed an example of the complete interviews with the opinions of the leaders about Brazilian and Chinese workers, which were totally transcribed in the Appendix C, and it was performed an analysis based on Nakano and Muniz Junior, 2014. Frame 2- An example of the interviews with leaders that worked in Brazil and China in different industrial environments Meaning unit Condensed meaning unit Codes Interviewed Manager 1(MG 1) The Brazilian worker is afraid of losing his/her job, while the Chinese comes from a communist policy, where companies are more preventive, the chance of him/her losing his/her job would be smaller, but today there are many companies that do not belong to the government. Afraid of losing his job Economic Job Security High Context 36 Meaning unit Condensed meaning unit Codes What happens is that China has been experiencing economic growth for a long time, so China is in a position to full employment chances, which makes the company be the showcase of the employee, who can change it at any time. Brazilians are more afraid of losing their job and because of this they strive a little more, focus on showing results, growing. They have the ambition to become a boss. The Brazilian employee studies more, is always looking for opportunities, even if it is outside the company. In Brazil, employees seek more knowledge. Brazilians even pursue specializations and master's degrees, while in China you won’t see many employees with master’s degrees, because once the Chinese are employed, he ends up accommodating himself. growth Afraid of losing his job Job Security C.2.) Assessment about KS Factors The SECI questionnaire were applied in Brazil and China plants in Aug.19 and Dec.10 respectively considering the workers, leaders and managers that work in the production lines for synchronous electrical generators. These business units from an American Multinational Company, produce these generators for hydroelectric power plants using similar production lines and assembly system in Brazil and China. It was carried out meetings with the teams and explained the method for all, and after some doubts were clarified, a trial was made and finally the questionnaire was applied. The SECI questionnaire respondents (Table 2), included managers with electrical engineer’s background, production leaders with technical experienced and blue collars workers, this census considering all people that worked in this production lines and were responsible for synchronous electrical generator production. Table 2– Respondents– Brazil and China -Electrical Production Lines Plant-Electrical Production Lines Number of respondents Manager Production Leader Workers Brazil 20 1 1 18 China 48 1 9 38 Source: Author´s own production. 37 All participants responded a paper copy of the questionnaire in a 1-hour section in each plant, before the application the method was discussed and the questions were read and some examples were given, in order to make the instrument more familiar for the respondents. It was presented the answers based on the questionnaire (Frame 3) in 3 distinct interviews with managers responsible respectively for China and Brazil plant, and a global manufacture expert manager that worked in Brazil and in China also answered it to consolidate the results. (Appendix C). A new questionnaire with AHP data was prepared and it was used to make a separated interview with the managers. (Frame 3) Frame 3- Questionnaire- Plant Managers in Brazil and China 1. Why socialization is more important among managers and workers in Brazil? Why Brazil leaders think it is more important than internalization (study)? 2. Why in China does everyone think that internalization (study) is more important? Why does the Chinese manager give the same weight to internalization (study) and socialization (speak)? 3. How do new employees learn (internalize) new activities or practices? 4. What is the process currently used for knowledge transfer between workers? 5. Is the result presented above in line with what is currently practiced? 6. Related to people, why was there a strong emphasis on incentives? 7. How are these incentives in the company? 8. Managers also emphasized training. Why do you think it happened in both plants? 9. Regarding the processes, all of them are practically key at the same level of importance in the Chinese plant. Howev- er, in Brazil, there was a concentration in the processes of zero defect and quick change. Why do you think this hap- pened? 10. Regarding zero defect and quick-change processes in Brazil, it pointed to a great weight for quick changes for the manager and zero defect for the leader, why do you think this happened? Brazilian workers also emphasize these two processes, why? Source: Author´s own production. The AHP results and the questions above were presented for the three managers and their perceptions were collected. Below, in Table 3 it was collected the manager profiles that were interviewed in June 20. 38 Table 3- Profile- Managers that Work in the Electrical Factories Subsidiaries Job Function (CODE) Business Professional Expe- rience (YEARS) China Expe- rience (YEARS) Brazil Experi- ence (YEARS) Global Advanced Manufacture Engineering Manager (MG D) Energy 20 6 14 Electrical Factory Manager China (MG S) Energy 11 11 0 Global Advanced Manufacture Manager located in Brazil Electrical Factory (MG M) Energy 11 0 11 Source: Author´s own production. In Frame 4 an example is showed, and the complete interviews with the critical analysis from AHP data and the respective perceptions for the managers were totally transcribed in Appendix B. After that, an analysis based on Nakano and Muniz Junior, 2014 was prepared. Frame 4- Example of Interview with a Manager that Works in the Electrical Factories Subsidiaries Meaning unit Condensed meaning unit Codes Interviewed Manager M (MG M) So, for me it is a bit of a surprise to have appeared such divergent result in the leader position. I understand that the leader here is the direct leader of the workers. I think it depends exactly on the moment you are saying that. This research was carried out in 2018. Perhaps, the leader perception comes directly from the workers, he thinks many people need to read process sheets, instructions, drawings, quality instructions, everything, and the way they are doing it is what really brings knowledge. Studying, right, what really, let's say, is exactly where knowledge spreads, right, knowledge is established. I even found it a bit interesting because we as Brazilians, we like it a lot. I see the guy coming over on the other side a lot more and saying “how do you do that?” and the other one says, "Oh, this does this, like this, like this, that's how they said to do it". Much more than that, you can see that they signalled it themselves, Brazilian workers signalled this part of socialization more than internalization and it is the vision that I understand most happens. I will not say that it is the most important, but I will say that it is what I see as a result in our electrical factory in Brazil. It is true in Brazil. Brazilian leader desire that workers study the documents. Brazilian workers learn speaking and passing knowledge on to each other. Internalization Socialization A critical analysis was ranked and the consolidation results were presented in Appendix D, being prepared based on Nakano and Muniz Junior (2014). 39 4 FINDINGS This section explores Brazil’s and China’s managers’ perceptions on worker culture, and blue-collar and white-collar workers’ KS in the shop floor. 4.1 BRAZIL-CHINA WORKER CULTURE ANALYSIS The Contents Analysis technique allows one to raise cultural factors of Brazilian and Chinese blue-collar workers (Frame 4). Some codes came from Chinese culture literatures (Face, Guanxi). Frame 5- Worker Culture Codes and Factor Definitions Codes Number of Citations Factor Definitions Authority 13 Respect for hierarchy conditions, decision-taking, respect in the work environment. Respect for authority, filial piety, ancestor worship, male dominance, fatalism, conservatism, and endur- ance (LI; NGO, 2018) Guanxi 9 The way that workers learns, interact day by day, culture The bonds of close social relationships (KING; WEI,2018) Job Security 10 Work conditions and perception of stability in the job. When managers know how job security could affect trust in organization and how subordinate–supervisor guanxi could affect trust in supervisor, they can take appropriate actions to improve human relations at work. (WONG, 2017) Face 3 Relationship in work environment, culture, behaviour Face as a factor to consider in trust and trust building. (KING; WEI, 2018) Trans- parency 4 The way Companies manage, organize the process, lead in open discussions A clear and open understanding of the objectives and aims of an organisation. Open and honest communi- cation between individuals. (MANUS et al., 2016) Low Context 9 Social conditions in the work environment, aspects, example traditionalism, collectivism, etc. Chinese traditionality is a culture-based construct developed by Yang et al. (1989) several decades ago, which tries to capture the influence of Chinese culture on individual attitudes and behaviours. The con- struct is rooted in Confucianism, an ethical and philosophical system in China that affirms norms of behav- iours in social institutions and interpersonal relationships (LI; NGO 2018) Collectivist cultures is strongly linked to a specific understanding of the self-defined in relation to others. The interdependent self induces a tendency to focus one’s attention on others’ actions, wishes, knowledge and needs. Because collectivism and interdependent self-construal have been recognized as dominant among Eastern cultures as opposed to Western cultures characterized by strong individualism. (MICHAL; GORBANIUK ,2017) High Context 8 General overview about economic aspects and influence work environment, example employees’ conflicts, union involvement, etc. Extant KM literature provides a host of extrinsic motivators, such as status change, promotions, and raises, positively affect knowledge contributing behaviour. Work-related characteristics, such as in-role behav- iour, work and task conflict, decentralization, and work engagement also drive knowledge contributing behaviours (ELLIS, 2015) Total 56 Source: Author´s own production. 40 The data evidence cultural differences between Brazilian and Chinese workers. Some cultural characteristics impact the way of work and KS practices, and the interviewers are observed in Brazilian and Chinese workers this similarities and differences. We organized some part of the interviews that indicate the most important factors mentioned above. The answers evidences Authority and Guanxi relevance. The Chinese workers strongly respect hierarchy conditions, take decision, respect in the work environment. Inside these work context, high-traditionality employees are likely to perceive congruence between the norms and values of the organization and their own (LI; NGO, 2018). Traditionality the Chinese culture emphasize Authority, which means respect for hierarchy conditions to take decision in the work environment. The Brazilian worker is more flexible about it. (TONG; MITRA, 2009) “… In China, hierarchy is strong, and the workers are very disciplined, they don’t make a lot of questions, they simply follow the instruction. In Brazil the workers question more, until they understand why the instruction is important.” (ENG 1) “… The Brazilian manager has less strength of authority and more commitment than the Chinese, in other words, in China the hierarchy is very strong and important, sometimes the boss is a military man. The hierarchy of the Chinese company is like an army, the Chinese bosses don’t even talk to the factory floor workers, however he treats all employees equally, without personal colleagues and always respecting the hierarchy. The Brazilian boss usually has a commitment and a strong relationship with everyone around him.” (DIR 2) “Regarding the Chinese characteristics, I think that the Chinese works harder, they do not respect working hours, they always work overtime, and they have a characteristic that they always find it easy to obey boss orders and they are also conservative …” (COM 1) “… a culture of Asian or Chinese companies, the level of positions is very clear and you can only report your work to your direct boss…” (COM 2) Guanxi in human relations refers either to the state of two or more parties being connected or the connected parties themselves. As a state of being connected, it is either in existence or not (e.g., two people either have or do not have guanxi), good or bad, close or distant, deep or shallow, in tension or in harmony (REN; CHEN, 2018). Guanxi factor in the 41 Chinese work environment contributing to the enforceability of reciprocity, which is important for the development of a subordinate’s trust in his or her supervisor (WONG, 2017). “… When the company had a production record, it was common for the supervisors and managers to celebrate drinking and eating, it is traditional for them. The Chinese have some cultural traditions like “Losing Face” and “Guanxi”. The managers tried to focus not only on the financial point but on the personal too, appreciating all employee´s efforts. The “Lauban” (boss) was always encouraging and recognizing. But the strongest point of the Chinese is the financial one.” (DIR 2) Job security is considered as an antecedent of affective commitment, and subordinate– supervisor guanxi is viewed as an antecedent of loyalty to supervisor (WONG, 2017). In the interviews, some managers indicated that the KS doesn´t affect job security, but someone indicated that due to the China economic growth, it is not a sensitive matter, meanwhile in Brazil, due to the unstable economic situation, Brazilians fear losing their jobs. Brazilian people are obsessed with relationships and personal bonds, so as to be able to find the key to their own lives. Their history and sociocultural roots are the basis for these intermediations, of which the Brazilian ''jeitinho" - a special way of managing obstacles to find a way out of bureaucracy - makes a paradigmatic synthesis. (AMADO; BRAZIL, 2016) “… The Chinese comes from a communist policy, where companies are more preventive, the chance of him/her losing his/her job would be smaller, but today there are many companies that do not belong to the government.” (MG1) “… In Brazil the relationship between workers was very friendly. Their knowledge was limited, but they used to share information, they were not afraid of losing their jobs.” (MG 1) “… What happens is that China has been experiencing economic growth for a long time, so China is in a position to full employment chances, which makes the company be the showcase of the employee, who can change it at any time.” (DIR 1) “… Brazilians are more afraid of losing their job and because of this they strive a little more, focus on showing results, growing. They have the ambition to become a boss. The Brazilian employee studies more, is always looking for opportunities, even if it is outside the 42 company. In Brazil, employees seek more knowledge. Brazilians even pursue specializations and master's degrees, while in China won’t see many employees with master’s degrees, because once the Chinese are employed, he ends up accommodating himself.” (MG 1) “Guanxi in China is stronger than in Brazil, if you want a career promotion you need to maintain a good “Guanxi” relationship with superior people, with important people, because it creates strong dependence on the relationship. Asian countries are more dependent on this kind of relationship than other countries in the world, this indicates that bosses can determine more things… (COM 1) Face is related to trust building, in the social interactions between persons, at least one of whom is Chinese (KING; WEI, 2018). Face is relevant in Chinese business practice and can be traded, or at least considered, in exchange negotiations. In Brazilian business merit recognition is the most important value. “… Brazilians like recognition. They don’t need a promotion, but a recognition from the boss, while the Chinese wants a financial pleasure and recognition in public, he wants people around to see the boss happy with his work…Guanchi …do not lose the Face… lost Face.” (DIR 1) Transparency is related flows of honest communication among individuals (MANUS et al., 2016). The Brazilian worker appreciates transparent behaviours. “… In Brazil there is a greater freedom and questioning, “have you thought about it?” “Couldn’t this cause a problem?” so, the Brazilian worker is a little more conscious and there is a more open dialog, which differs from China.” (MG 1) Low context is related to social conditions in work context, economic aspects, example traditionalism, collectivism. It is relevant in both countries. “… In China there is a better camaraderie/companionship than here because people are more committed to each other (complementing each other). Here in Brazil, it is easier to find one employee ratting the other who is doing something wrong and in China no, they are more compliant and help each other more.” (DIR 1) 43 “… When there is a foreign that respects their culture and try to understand them, they make everything easier. It's important to respect their culture and show the necessary results, so that you can have success together.” (ENG 1) High context is related to social and economic aspects between Brazil and China, and Union influence. Some conflicts are generated in both countries when we look for these aspects. “… The Chinese union is strong, with its well-structured office being the government. The guy in the union checks out every week.” (ENG 1) “… The Government controls everything in China. There was in every company a Chinese Union. In our factory we had one in the Planning area. They work very well, but they took all the information to the Chinese Union. The Government is the Union. In China they have a ´lending regime´, the factory was not ´ours´. In every time the government could take it. It was a 60-70 years contract.” (DIR 2) Snell et al. (2017) analysed knowledge and the organizational learning in various regional contexts, giving the assumption that organizational learning processes are socially constructed and are embedded in specific social contexts. The basic research question for this contextualist perspective is: how do differences in cultural and institutional conditions between countries, such as home and host, shape the learning processes of organizations? Early research studies identified learning-related barriers faced by developed multinational corporations (MNCs). More recent studies indicated how the diverse and idiosyncratic economic, social and institutional factors in Asia can induce an organization to blend global perspectives with local insights. Our study indicated these characteristics comparing regional contexts in China and Brazil classifying these perspectives in High and Low Context. (Frame 1) 4.2 WORKER KNOWLEDGE SHARING ENABLERS ASSESSMENT The perception among blue and white collars indicates importance of Socialization (dialogue) in Brazil (Table 4), and Internalization (study) in China. Brazilians like to share 44 their knowledge through Socialization, group work, conversations between the workers and pass of tacit knowledge between colleagues. Chinese are more introspective, disciplined and seek understanding through written instructions to find the knowledge necessary for their duties. "... the Chinese worker is proactive, likes to learn, has no day and time limitation, considers his entity as his own business. The problem is that the Chinese do not like to pass knowledge to each other for fear of losing their job, so it is difficult to work as a team with them.” (Dir 2) Other executive interviewed reported that: "... The Brazilian worker is very unproductive and undisciplined, but has an easy relationship, if an employee is motivated, he can pass it on to others.” (Dir 1) Regarding the specific criteria, the highest score for both Brazilian and Chinese respondents was the incentive, which shows that the American culture promoting financial incentive to workers has been absorbed in both units and is a unanimous point regarding the way to reach competitiveness and meritocracy. The most internalized indications of KS are highlighted by Chinese respondents, such as problem-solving method and work instruction, otherwise the actions with quick changeover and zero defect that take more working in group and with higher degree of socialization, presented higher percentage among the Brazilian respondents. 45 Table 4– Key Factor Comparisons- Brazil and China Electrical Factories Criteria and Alternatives Electrical Factory Overall Results [%] Brazil China Brazil China Overall Manager Leader Workers Manager Leader Workers Socialization 85.6 1.1 56.5 42.9 13.1 23.9 56.3 21.9 39.1 Externalization 12.3 9.9 33.2 14.3 26.1 34.0 31.8 31.4 31.6 Internalization 1.8 89.0 10.3 42.9 60.8 42.1 11.9 46.6 29.3 People Objective 0.4 0.3 0.2 8.5 7.1 7.2 0.3 7.6 3.9 Structure 3.7 2.3 0.2 1.5 1.9 2.1 2.4 1.9 1.9 Communication 1.3 0.5 0.4 8.5 3.6 6.5 0.7 6.2 3.5 Training 9.5 3.5 1.3 11.6 6.7 5.8 4.8 8.1 6.4 Incentive 9.9 32.2 51.8 14.9 12.4 19.2 31.3 15.5 23.4 Personal Char- acteristic 5.4 1.3 2.5 5.1 4.8 4.3 0.9 4.1 2.5 Personal Rela- tionship 1.1 0.6 1.2 3.2 5.9 3.2 3.1 4.7 3.9 Process Problem Solv- ing Method 1.1 0.2 4.4 25.4 13.5 10.7 1.9 16.5 9.2 Work Instruc- tion 7.5 0.9 7.6 14.9 18.3 9.4 5.4 14.2 9.8 5S 1.1 6.4 4.5 3.0 8.1 9.0 4.0 6.7 5.3 Mistake Proof- ing 9.1 45.2 15.1 0.6 7.6 11.7 23.1 6.6 14.9 Quick Change 50.0 6.5 10.8 3.0 10.1 10.9 22.4 8.0 15.2 Resp# 1 1 18 1 9 38 20 48 68 Source: Author´s own production. 4.3 KEY FACTORS AHP ANALYSIS – BRAZIL BY FUNCTION Socialization (85,6) is considered the most important factor following externalization and far Internalization by the Brazilian managers interviewed. In the managers’ evaluation, 46 workers could improve Socialization to learn faster and share information each other. Quick changeover could bring more productivity, and structure follows it. From leading perspective in Brazil, Internalization (89) is the most important factor, following it comes externalization and Socialization. In the leader’s evaluation, workers could improve Internalization to learn faster reading and understanding the instruction. Mistake proofing could bring more productivity, after it comes structure and training. From workers’ perspective in Brazil, Socialization (56,5) is the most important factor, coming after it externalization and Socialization. In the worker’s evaluation, workers could improve Socialization to learn faster and share information each other. Incentive is the most important factor and could bring more productivity. “… I see the guy coming over on the other side a lot more and saying “how do you do that?” and the other one says, "Oh, this does this, like this, like this, that's how they said to do it". Much more than, you can see that they signalled it themselves, Brazilian workers signalled this part of socialization… (MG M) “…The Brazilian worker is also giving more value to speaking, I mean, you see that the worker is aligned with the manager… I think the leader is looking to become a little more professional, to leave informality, to be a little more formal, that is why the leader in both situations, as he is that guy, he is not the worker, but he is also not the manager there, he is a guy who is becoming professional, he is going from worker to employee manager.” (MG D) 4.4 KEY FACTORS AHP ANALYSIS – CHINA BY FUNCTION From managers’ perspective in China, Socialization and Internalization (42,9) have the same weight and are important for productivity. In the managers’ evaluation, workers could improve Socialization and Internalization, learn the instruction and share the information to each other. Training, incentive, and work instruction have the same weight and could bring more productivity for the team. From leaders’ perspective in China, Internalization (60,8) is the most important factor, and then comes externalization and socialization. In the leaders’ evaluation, workers could improve Internalization to learn faster, by reading and understanding the work instruction. Work instruction could bring more productivity, and then comes incentive. 47 From workers’ perspective in China, Internalization (42,1) is the most important factor, and after that there is externalization and socialization. In the workers’ evaluation, they could improve Internalization, respecting work instruction. Incentive is the most important factor and could bring more productivity. “…Chinese leaders, I think it is more related to the cultural aspect, because the leader and the workers, they will hardly, at the same hierarchical level, talk about what they have to do. Usually, Chinese understands that they will assimilate the information better and know what s/he must do by looking at the document, following what the document is saying, so, Chinese has a lot more of this cultural aspect of "I follow what is written, what is written I follow".” (MG M) “… I think it´s kind of a cultural thing… like we say new things. Sometimes we don´t feel ashamed to ask somebody’s opinion or how to do it. So, we like to learn by ourselves because we want to demonstrate I have this ability, to do it by myself. I think that is kind of a cultural thing… I see that the Chinese people want to do it first by themselves and then ask help to others. So, for me, my personal point of view is that this is cultural. (MG S)” 4.5 KEY FACTORS AHP ANALYSIS – CHINA BRAZIL COMPARISON The comparison between respondents of the questionnaires applied in the two Factories, in Brazil and China, evaluated that the main differences in data are in Socialization (56,3) on Brazil’s side and Internalization (46,6) on China’s side; the externalization data in both units have roughly the same percentage. We will concentrate, in the first step, on Socialization and Internalization, making a comparison to understand the differences in the way workers share knowledge. The data can demonstrate the cultural differences between Brazilian and Chinese workers, corroborating with what we heard in the interviews with executives who worked in both countries and that were shared with us. Brazilians like to share their knowledge through socialization, working in group, conversations between the workers and passing on tacit knowledge between colleagues. Chinese are more introspective, disciplined and seek through written instructions to find the knowledge necessary for their activities. 48 “…The Chinese, s/he valued more studying too, but you see that s/he was not so far from the others. For the minor score of writing, it was close to reading, it was a little more distant from speaking, but the dissipation of the values of the Chinese worker was less than that of the Brazilian worker, there was more dispersion…anyway, the Chinese worker, maybe he is, maybe the Chinese leader is managing to align himself more with his worker, passing his concern of having a document. I think the Chinese leader manages to have more ancestry, to have more influence on the behaviour of the worker.” (MG D) Regarding the specific criteria, the highest score for both Brazilian and Chinese respondents was the incentive, which shows that the American culture promoting financial incentive to workers has been absorbed in both units and is a unanimous point regarding the way to reach competitiveness and meritocracy. “…We have a skill matrix within the organization, in the factory, that you have from level 1 to level 4. According to knowledge and behaviour you say “this guy has skill level 1, this one has level 2, 3 and 4 ” and the more you become a senior, becoming a multiplier of knowledge, more you go up in this scales matrix and consequently, more you will increase your salary, increasing your positioning, your level within the organization.” (MG M) “… I think they recognize that this is important, that this human contact between the leader and the led helps, is the main lever to be able to make the motivation and incentive for people. And this can be in the form of a compliment, an orientation, having a cup of coffee together, feeling close to the person. But the training that appeared there, which we had already mentioned before, in China has a lot of training, more than here. In China it is very common to have training outside, or inside our factory.” (MG D) “For us, in the manufacturing side training is always an important thing. Because we need to have the worker to know all the requirements, all the procedures, right? So, training would be the first step to bring them into his stage.” (MG S) The most KS internalized indications are highlighted by Chinese respondents, such as problem-solving method and work instruction, otherwise the actions with quick changeover 49 and zero defect that have more group work and with higher degree of socialization presented higher percentage among the Brazilian respondents. “… I think that the perception of being “quick change” among managers and workers is because, one is thinking about financial result and other is thinking about agility of their work, and more or less there is a priority. The issue of error proofing is due to the scenario that, really, if I have a system that doesn’t allow me to cause a defect, it has to be a priority.” (MG M) “…, the right work instruction will be the most important think for the workers. Because all of them will follow the work instruction, right? If the work instruction is good, delivered with good quality, it means that the worker has less opportunities to make a mistake. And we can have a result in terms of EHS, quality and operation, right? So, I think that´s why, especially for the manager and the leaders, I think these two levers are most important.” (MG S) 50 5 CONCLUSIONS This paper contributes to other researches and studies related to work organization, KM in emerging countries with different cultures and demonstrates the impact of culture on KM. Developing and understanding how culture influences KS is not an easy task and the results are directions that aim to bring the theme to managers in order to show one more aspect to be considered as KM studies in different groups and different countries. The objective of this research was not to deepen the study of culture, even because it would require another type of approach that was not the main objective of this case study. This research, we were able to find data in the interviews carried out that demonstrate the influence of culture in KS. Other aspects not addressed in this case study and which can be studied in future re- search are the social, economic and political aspects of each country and their development strategies and their influence and impacts on KM in the industrial environment. How workers and the value chain are encouraged to increase the impact of their work with a more long-term thinking and with national development thinking as part of a great social, economic and political gear. Certainly, although we have not directly addressed these aspects in the culture influence in the KS in this case study, future studies may seek new connections between the countries' long-term development plans and the influence in the industrial environment. Another aspect to be highlighted in this case study was the AHP method application in capital goods industry and can show managers how important it is to study ways of sharing knowledge while respecting workers' culture. Analysing cultural aspects in the workplace can provide managers with better tools for sharing knowledge tailored to each country's style and culture. It was possible to evaluate significant differences between Chinese and Brazilian workers. While the Chinese prefer to share knowledge through written procedures, respecting the hierarchy in a disciplined manner, the Brazilian prefer to share knowledge through socialization, teamwork, conversations between peers and pass on tacit knowledge between colleagues. These findings can´t be generalized, these specific case study can bring perceptions on the workers that were analysed in this opportunity. We can also state that Brazilian employees are the most enthusiastic about sharing information with others in their organization. 51 Deference to hierarchy creates another culturally specific KS barrier. No less so in China, where respect for the leaders together with top-down decision making processes appear to undermine KS effectiveness, in a Confucian society where hierarchical systems of domination exist in the authority chains. It is disrespectful and defiant if subordinates dare to openly express opinions that are divergent from those of the superiors. This may limit opportunities for constructive debates and reflexive thinking that are crucial for KS. The SECI data analysis and the interviews with managers show that “Socialization” and “Internalization” are viewed by Brazilian and Chinese workers respectively as the main KC process facilitating KS among employees. Factors such as Incentive are also highlighted by interviewees as positively influencing in both subsidiaries and demonstrate that the A-MNC introduce the incentives procedures in a good way in both subsidiaries and the incentive system is recognized by workers. Further researches about how culture influences KS is a promisor track to follow, and research questions appears as: What is culture-specific characteristics to influence KS? What are the workers perceptions about the factors studied? What are the main difficulties to introduce these methods in others countries? The authors advocate further intensive research in different industries along with more extensive data collection. Second, institutional theory appears to provide a good theoretical foundation for organizational research in China and other economies in transition, but further theorizing should accompany the design of additional studies. Other research suggestion, while a punctuated equilibrium perspective on organizational change brings the potential for clean-cut change, jolting an organization out of its safe but ineffective torpor, the rejection of a more normative approach may be anthemic to organizational leader’s keen to preserve an organizational culture that is noted for its lack of surprises