Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 26 No. 2 Oktober 2023, 331 - 348

Journal homepage: www.ejournal.uksw.edu/jeb
ISSN 1979-6471 E-ISSN 2528-0147

Integration of talent management and knowledge management for
enhancing innovation performance
Tri Wikaningruma*, Lisa Kartikasarib
a
b

Faculty Economy, Universitas Islam Sultan Agung, Semarang, Indonesia; wika@unissula.ac.id*
Faculty Economy, Universitas Islam Sultan Agung, Semarang, Indonesia; lisakartika@unissula.ac.id

ARTICLE INFO

ABSTRAK

Article History:
Received 06-08-2022
Revised 09-08-2023
Accepted 10-12-2023

Sumber daya manusia menjadi sumber keunggulan kompetitif di
masa darurat seperti pandemi dimana perusahaan harus bertahan
hidup. Pengetahuan yang dimiliki para talenta tersebut menjadi
modal penting untuk menghasilkan kinerja inovasi sehingga
mendukung organisasinya merespon perubahan secara tangkas.
Oleh karena itu, pengetahuan individual tidaklah cukup, melainkan
pengetahuan yang bernilai dan bisa diakuisisi sebagai pengetahuan
organisasional. Proses menjadi pengetahuan organisasional
membutuhkan interaksi antar knowledge worker, sehingga bukan
hanya berbagi pengetahuan namun juga transfer dan penciptaan
pengetahuan baru. Kualitas pengetahuan itu sendiri bukan hanya
ditentukan oleh seberapa banyak pengetahuan yang dimiliki
individu, namun juga keunikan dan seberapa cepat mengaksesnya.
Oleh karena itu, diperlukan dukungan teknologi komunikasi dan
informasi untuk mempercepat dan mempermudah transfer
pengetahuan tacit dan eksplisit serta perpindahan level
pengetahuan. Tujuan artikel ini adalah mengkaji kaitan antara
talent management, knowledge creation, social capital, dukungan
ICT dan kinerja inovasi. Penelitian dilakukan di universitas swasta
Islam di kota Semarang. Penarikan sampel menggunakan metode
purposive sampling. Kriteria sampel seperti memiliki jabatan
fungsional minimal Lektor dan tingkat pendidikan minimal S2
dengan total sampel 107 responden. Analisis data menggunakan
SEM dengan SmartPLS. Hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa semua
hipotesis terbukti, kecuali hubungan antara dukungan ICT dengan
knowledge creation.

Kata Kunci:
Manajemen talenta, penciptaan
pengetahuan, kinerja inovasi,
modal social, dukungan ICT
Keywords:
Talent management, knowledge
creation, innovation
performance, social capital,
ICT support

ABSTRACT
Human capital becomes a source of competitive advantage in
emergency times like pandemics where firms must survive. The
knowledge possessed by these talents is an important capital to
produce innovation performance for supporting the organization
in responding to changes agilely. Therefore, individual knowledge
is not enough, but knowledge that is valuable and can be acquired

*Corresponding Author

332

Integration of talent management and knowledge (Wikaningrum, Kartikasari)

as organizational knowledge. The process of becoming
organizational knowledge requires interaction between knowledge
workers so that it is not only knowledge sharing but also the
transfer and creation of new knowledge. The quality of knowledge
itself is not only determined by how much knowledge an
individual has, but also by the uniqueness and speed of access to
it. Therefore, it is necessary to support communication and
information technology to accelerate and facilitate the transfer of
tacit and explicit knowledge as well as the transfer of knowledge
levels. The purpose of this article is to examine the relationship
between talent management, knowledge creation, social capital,
ICT support, and innovation performance. The research was
conducted at a private Islamic university in Semarang city. The
sampling method used purposive sampling. The sample criteria
include having a functional position of at least Lector and a
minimum educational level of master’s with a total sample of 107
respondents. Data analysis used SEM with SmartPLS. The results
showed that all hypotheses were proven, except the relationship
between ICT support and knowledge creation.

INTRODUCTION
In the era of knowledge economy, organizations no longer rely on tangible
assets. Intangible assets such as knowledge, especially those relevant to the demands
of the external environment of the organization, are increasingly being recognized as
a source of competitive advantage (Barney & Clark, 2007). Knowledge is the
individual’s property, acquired, created, and attached to the individual owner. The
more valuable knowledge employees possess, the greater the potential to support the
achievement of organizational goals. However, this potential tends to be an individual
who is more beneficial for self-development and supports individual performance
(Bhatt, 2000). Its significant impact on the organization depends on the extent to which
the knowledge is valuable, rare, not easily replaceable, and relevant to the
organization's strategic needs.
The variety of knowledge that human resources possess can be both beneficial
and detrimental to the firm. Collaboration through teamwork techniques will boost the
team's efficacy in tackling the problem's complexity. If there is no interaction between
employees, the knowledge only exists at the individual level. In addition to having an
impact on the scarce organizational knowledge, this also prevents organizations from
producing the knowledge they need to address difficulties in their sector (Tu, 2020).
The company needs to manage the practice of knowledge sharing, transfer, system
entry, documentation, and application in an organized and long-lasting way.
Moreover, companies that are categorized as knowledge organizations definitely rely
on knowledge workers’ ownership.
Talking about knowledgeable employees who are talents or talented
individuals is closely related to affective domains such as emotional intelligence and
ownership of tacit knowledge. Especially related to the knowledge that is owned by

Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 26 No. 2 Oktober 2023, 331 - 348

333

employees, it would be valuable for their organization if knowledge can be developed
and acquired as organizational knowledge that relevant to present and future
organizational needs. Therefore, Vaiman & Vance (2008) stated that it is important to
combine talent management and knowledge management to maintain intellectual
resources in the organization. Smart talent management is the label given to it.
However, most studies about intellectual capital discuss talent management and
knowledge management separately (Abu-Shanab & Subaih, 2019; Cabrilo & Dahms,
2018; Crane & Hartwell, 2019; Jordão & Novas, 2017; Stevens, 2010). In order to
attain the innovative performance of the knowledgeable employee, the author blends
both of them.
University is categorized as a knowledge organization and education service
provider (Dee & Leisyte, 2017). University’s challenge is very dynamic, forcing
management to agile in adapting and effectively responding. The three pillars of higher
education fulfillment are now sharpened with the achievement of key performance
indicators set by the Ministry of Education and Culture including, external
environmental challenges such as economic, social, global competition, and
technological factors (https://lldikti6.kemdikbud.go.id). Especially during this
epidemic era, it is necessary to have novel methods and non-routines. Despite being in
a difficult or uncommon position, the college must continue to function efficiently
using a new strategy. Therefore, the exploration approach becomes more strategic than
exploitation. Exploration of new knowledge supported by existing knowledge will lead
to knowledge creation needed by higher education and answer the current challenges.
Knowledge management application with an exploration approach is more
effective by using a personalization strategy. This increases the urgency of
implementing practices and policies that are directed to increasing the utilization of
the company's strategic resources. As a repository of knowledge, human resources are
the strategic assets of universities. They are a source of organizational knowledge.
Referring to the opinion of Fernhaber & Patel (2012); Müller-Seitz (2012) that the
source of individual knowledge came from internal and external organizations. The
interactions result from other organizational members internally and with external
stakeholders become an important source of new knowledge for the knowledge
creation process. This can be interpreted that the interaction between individuals is an
important capital for knowledge creation. Not only "merely" the new knowledge
creation from existing knowledge, but also new knowledge for individual recipients
from the results of their interactions with other employees who are more
knowledgeable (senders).
The originality and speed of access to knowledge are also factors that affect
knowledge quality, in addition to how much knowledge a person possesses. When
everyone has equal access to information and knowledge, the speed at which
information and knowledge are acquired and subsequently applied becomes
increasingly crucial. Information and communication technology (ICT) can help this

334

Integration of talent management and knowledge (Wikaningrum, Kartikasari)

process to run more quickly and effectively.
Based on the previous description, several conclusions can be drawn. First,
how knowledge at the individual level can be transferred to the group and
organizational levels. Second, how social capital and ICT can facilitate or accelerate
the process of creating organizational knowledge. Third, empirical testing is needed to
link Talent Management with Knowledge Management. The answers to several
research problems are expected to contribute to the development of knowledge
management best practices that are integrated between knowledge management and
management of potential employees (talents) based on social capital and technology
in a knowledge organization.

LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT
The relationship between the knowledge perspective and the focus of the
discussion of knowledge management appears in some research results. Among them
are Alavi & Leidner (2001) who stated that knowledge management includes the
process of creating, storing, transferring, and applying knowledge. Other researchers
only classify them into two processes, namely knowledge creation and knowledge
transfer (Kumar & Ganesh, 2009; Ofek & Sarvary, 2001). Moreover, Cabrera &
Cabrera (2005) classified knowledge creation and transfer as knowledge flows.
Among the knowledge management processes, knowledge creation is an essential
strategic weapon (Lee & Choi, 2003). To raise organizational performance, a company
must improve its ability to use knowledge to produce new knowledge. The main
sources for companies to generate and strengthen sustainable competitive advantages
are knowledge and the capacity to produce and apply it.
For the purpose of producing new knowledge, it is crucial that organizational
members have mutual access, combine information and knowledge to produce new
knowledge, and appreciate the process (Wikaningrum, 2021). Smith et al. (2005)
stated that there are three resources that have an impact on the knowledge creation
capability. The three resources are individual knowledge stocks, relational
relationships that facilitate the flow of knowledge among employees, and
organizational processes. Given that knowledge can come from links between pieces
of information, this argument is understandable. Therefore, social capital that supports
the exchange and sharing of information will effectively support knowledge creation.
Likewise, information and communication technology (ICT) are a supporting resource
in the knowledge transfer process.
Talent Management and Knowledge Creation
Several research results show a relation between talent management and the
knowledge creation (Chadee & Raman, 2012; Daraei et al., 2014; Gateau & Simon,
2016; Whelan & Carcary, 2011). Likewise, Sparrow & Makram (2015) stated that

Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 26 No. 2 Oktober 2023, 331 - 348

335

talent capital can achieve indirect benefits for organizations through knowledge
creation. Due to management's emphasis on hiring the best and most qualified
personnel and on their knowledge, production practices, the relationship between the
two can be advantageous to the company. For example, organizations attract top talent
to assist in meeting key challenges, including minimizing knowledge gaps among
employees from different organizational units. In addition, research results by
Scaringella & Malaeb (2014) have shown that the combination of talent attraction and
knowledge creation can help organizations face major challenges related to individual
knowledge levels. Therefore, the first hypothesis can be proposed as follows:
H1: Talent management has a positive effect on knowledge creation.

Knowledge Creation and Innovation Performance
Innovation is more than just creativity because innovation is related to the
implementation of ideas. For example, an idea about a new product or service, a new
production process, a new implementation method, a new organizational structure, or
a new program. The innovation process is also highly dependent on the knowledge
(Gloet & Terziovski, 2004). The individual's ability to implement all of them is
influenced by how much tacit and explicit knowledge has been owned and developed
by the individual concerned. Therefore, knowledge management is often identified as
an important antecedent for the innovation (Mardani et al., 2018). Likewise, Nonaka
in his study of knowledge creation considers knowledge as the main condition for
innovation and competitiveness (Nonaka, 1994). Borghini (2005); Darroch (2005) also
provide empirical evidence to support the view that companies with knowledge
creation capabilities will become more innovative. Therefore, the second hypothesis
can be proposed as follows:
H2: Knowledge creation has a positive effect on innovation performance.

Social Capital and Knowledge Creation
The main of social capital is social interaction. Social interaction is conducive
to the exchange of information and personal experiences. The research result by Bouty
(2000) shows that increasing access to intellectual capital as a result of social capital
in a group will affect the dynamics of knowledge creation. Social capital includes
structural, cognitive, and relational dimensions (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). The
relational dimension is tied to the nature of relationship, whereas the structural
dimension is related to the connections between individuals. Cognitive capital is about
capabilities and resources that facilitate communication and understanding among
group members. These three dimensions have an important role in knowledge creation
practices. Mutual trust and norms of reciprocity among interacting parties will make
them feel obligated to share, transfer, and create organizational knowledge. Therefore,

336

Integration of talent management and knowledge (Wikaningrum, Kartikasari)

the third hypothesis can be proposed as follows:
H3: Social capital has a positive effect on knowledge creation.

ICT Support and Knowledge Creation
Knowledge creation is concerned with new ideas. As defined by Mitchell &
Boyle (2010), knowledge creation is the development, implementation, and
exploitation of new ideas. This requires interaction and collaboration among parties.
Interaction both with internal and external parties of the organization (consumers,
community, competitors, partners, government) will facilitate and become a source of
organizational knowledge creation. As stated by Liu & Meyer (2020) that knowledge
creation is a social process attached to interpersonal relationships both inside and
outside the organization. In the interaction process, knowledge acquisition and
conversion occur, both tacit and explicit knowledge. The conversion of tacit-tacit,
tacit-explicit, explicit-tacit, and explicit-explicit knowledge will lead to the new
knowledge creation. Several empirical evidences show that knowledge creation can be
facilitated by ICT-based practices (Chib, 2010; Desouza & Awazu, 2006; Khan et al.,
2015; Singh et al., 2018; Tripathi et al., 2021). Similarly, study by Srivastava &
Shainesh (2015) stated that technological resources facilitate the recording and
processing of information and communication between internal and external parties.
Therefore, the fourth hypothesis can be proposed as follows:
H4: ICT support has a positive effect on knowledge creation.

Figure 1
Research Model

RESEARCH METHOD
Population and Sample
The research populations were all permanent lecturers at private Islamic
universities in Semarang city, namely Sultan Agung Islamic University, Wahid

Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 26 No. 2 Oktober 2023, 331 - 348

337

Hasyim University, and Muhammadiyah University Semarang. The determination of
the research subjects was based on data that until 2020 Islamic universities were not
included in the world class university ranking list QS WUR’s version
(https://www.timeshighereducation.com). Islamic universities with fluctuating ratings
are only included in the webometric version of the WCU rankings
(http://www.webometrics.info). The assessment parameters are Tri Dharma
performance. One of them is innovation performance in the form of intellectual
property rights. However, the three universities used in this research already have
sufficient IT infrastructure to support learning during a pandemic. The context of this
research is knowledge management during a pandemic, with ICT support as one of the
research variables. Determination of the number of samples was according to Hair et
al. (2019), using the Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) technique. According
to MLE, a good number of samples was between 100-200. The sampling method used
purposive sampling, with the minimum functional position criteria of assistant
professor and minimum education master’s degree. Based on the number of returned
questionnaires and the completeness of the contents, the number of samples in this
research was 107 respondents.
Research Stages, Data Collection, and Analysis Methods
The research stage began with compiling an empirical model, searching for
primary data, processing data, and testing the model. Primary data was collected
through a survey using a questionnaire. Data analysis used Structural Equation
Modeling (SEM) with SmartPLS software. The achievement indicator was the
empirical model that was tested with a fit, and there was a significant influence
between the variables in the empirical model tested.
Operational Variable Definition
Talent management is the practice of managing potential or talented employees
through training policies, HR planning, learning, and career development. It was
measured using 15 indicators, which were developed based on AlKerdawy (2016);
Chami-Malaeb & Garavan (2013).
Social capital is the individual capacity in building communication and
relationship with internal and external stakeholders. This variable was measured by 6
questions that were developed by Steinfield et al. (2010) for a research setting at a
university.
ICT support is company support in the form of technology to support
communication, access to information, and collaborative work, measured by six items
based on Lopez-Nicolas & Soto-Acosta (2010).
Knowledge creation is the process of encouraging employees to learn from
mistakes, find solutions, and develop new knowledge based on existing knowledge.
This variable was measured using an instrument designed based on research by Lee &

338

Integration of talent management and knowledge (Wikaningrum, Kartikasari)

Choi (2003), which consists of the dimensions of socialization, externalization,
combination, and internalization. Each of the four dimensions used four indicators.
Innovation performance is the quality, quantity, and speed of an organization
offering a product or service that has a competitive advantage in its industry. The
innovation performance was measured using 12 items from Lahiri (2010); Lee & Choi
(2003); Liao et al. (2010).

ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
Below are several tables showing the results of convergent validity,
discriminant validity, and hypothesis testing results. Based on the results of hypothesis
testing, the interpretation related to the context of this research is discussed.

Indicators
Talent Management
tm1
tm2
tm3
tm4
tm5
tm6
tm7
Social Capital
sc1
sc2
sc3
sc4
sc5
ICT Support
ict1
ict2
ict3
ict4
ict5
Knowledge Creation
kc1
kc2
kc3
kc4
kc5
Innovation Performance
ip1
ip2
ip3
ip4
ip5
ip6
ip7
Source: SmartPLS Output (2021)

Table 1
Convergent Validity
Latent Variable Scores

T Statistics

0.847
0.912
0.867
0.814
0.630
0.614
0.845

18.341
41.322
23.904
15.491
6.679
5.646
15.592

0.739
0.869
0.853
0.760
0.862

7.874
36.849
15.660
10.232
23.018

0.871
0.862
0.876
0.844
0.834

19.700
24.770
29.825
19.146
17.976

0.777
0.886
0.870
0.856
0.823

11.254
28.562
21.545
19.492
19.174

0.889
0.799
0.896
0.917
0.904
0.878
0.879

27.659
12.132
17.120
31.677
35.588
19.265
18.284

339

Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 26 No. 2 Oktober 2023, 331 - 348

The convergent validity test results show that all t statistics values are greater
than 1.96 (α=5%). This means that all indicators on each variable are valid.

TM
SC
ICTS
KC
IP
Source: SmartPLS Output (2021)

Table 2
Discriminant Validity
Composite Reliability
0.923
0.910
0.933
0.925
0.960

AVE
0.636
0.670
0.735
0.711
0.776

Table 2 shows that all composite reliability values are more than 0.70.
Similarly, the AVE value is greater than 0.50. This shows that the five constructs,
namely talent management, social capital, ICT support, knowledge creation, and
innovation performance are valid.

TM → KC
SC →KC
ICTS → KC
KC → IP
Source: SmartPLS Output (2021)

Table 3
Result for Inner Weight
Original Sample
Standard Deviation
0.365
0.122
0.431
0.180
0.071
0.143
0.586
0.094

Figure 2
Structural Model

T Statistics
2.975
2.411
0.497
6.267

340

Integration of talent management and knowledge (Wikaningrum, Kartikasari)

Hypothesis 1 stated that talent management has a positive effect on knowledge
talent management creation. Based on Table 3, the estimated value for testing the
effect of the two variables shows the original sample value of 0.365 with t statistics of
2.975 (> 1.96). Statistically, there is sufficient evidence to accept this hypothesis. This
can be interpreted that talent management is proven to have a significant positive effect
on knowledge creation.
The knowledge literature showed at least three categories of organizational
resources that have an impact on knowledge creation capabilities. One of them is the
supply of employee knowledge. This is where management plays an important role in
identifying talented individuals with both tacit and explicit knowledge ownership that
is unique, specific, and valuable to the organization. For individuals who are classified
as high potential, management implements management programs to optimize the
potential of existing knowledge and develop the ability to respond to the dynamics of
future organizational changes. The results of this study are consistent with the
statement from Brewer & Brewer (2010) that talent development as a firm-specific
human capital will support superior learning activities. Superior learning is required in
the knowledge creation process, which involves collaborative interactions between
individuals to exchange tacit and explicit knowledge (Nonaka et al., 2001).
Identification of training needs, online training platforms, and career development in
the form of further studies and certifications encourage individuals to always look for
alternative solutions or the best ways of working and collaborate to gain new
knowledge.
Knowledge creation can be an idea exploration and new concept by combining
existing knowledge. This is very relevant to the setting of this research where
universities, during the pandemic, are required to think creatively and produce
innovative performance in order to survive and carry out their mandate optimally.
Given the strategic nature of education, which carries out the mandate to educate the
nation's life. Thus, it should not stop or lower its service quality standards under any
circumstances. Forms of talent management at the respondent's universities include
financing for competency certification and further study scholarships, international
short courses, as well as training programs on Islamic leadership and foreign languages
in a structured and continued.
Hypothesis 2 stated that knowledge creation has a positive effect on innovation
performance. Based on Table 3, the parameter estimation for testing the effect of these
variables show the original sample value of 0.586 with t statistics of 6.267 (> 1.96).
Therefore, there is sufficient statistical evidence to accept this hypothesis. It can be
concluded that knowledge creation has a significant positive effect on organizational
innovation performance.
Knowledge creation is similar to knowledge exploration, where individuals
and teams produce new ideas and concepts, by combining existing knowledge

Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 26 No. 2 Oktober 2023, 331 - 348

341

(Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). Knowledge creation is closely related to the product and
service innovation (Subramaniam & Youndt, 2005). To create this innovation and
innovative work, an employee’s individual knowledge creation ability has an
important role. Knowledge creation capability is defined as the extent to which
individuals have access to each other and other stakeholders, are able to combine
information and knowledge into new knowledge and feel the value of the knowledge
exchange process. Innovation products produced by respondent universities include
patents, modification of laboratory equipment, online learning platforms, virtual home
care for the community, Intellectual Property Rights (HaKI) in collaboration with
SMEs (Small and Medium Enterprises), integrated academic information systems,
learning media innovations, and international publications with current research
issues. The lecturer’s ability to identify best practices in the implementation of routine
and non-routine work and the ability to collaborate has proven to support the speed of
universities in producing innovative works that are better than their competitors. These
findings align with the results of research by Mardani et al. (2018), which proves that
knowledge creation significantly impacts innovation speed, quantity, and quality.
Hypothesis 3 stated that social capital has a positive effect on knowledge
creation. Based on Table 3, the parameter estimation for testing the influence of social
capital on knowledge creation shows the original sample value of 0.431 with a t
statistic value of 2.411 (> 1.96). Statistically, there is sufficient evidence to accept
hypothesis 3. It can be concluded that social capital has a significant positive effect on
knowledge creation.
The process of converting knowledge from tacit knowledge to explicit
knowledge and vice versa, involves four phases, namely socialization, externalization,
combination, and internalization (Bandera et al., 2017). Socialization is the conversion
of tacit knowledge to new tacit knowledge. Externalization converts tacit knowledge
to explicit knowledge. The combination is the phase of creating new explicit
knowledge from existing explicit knowledge. Meanwhile, internalization is the process
of converting explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge. The process of knowledge
creation is not only a conversion of knowledge types, but also has implications for the
movement of knowledge from the individual level to the organizational level.
Therefore, social interaction among individuals in organizations plays an important
role in supporting the knowledge creation process (Tu, 2020). Knowledge creation
should focus on the exchange and sharing of information. The commonly adopted
approaches by the respondent universities are brainstorming and workshops, and teambased work. Knowledge creation relies on internal communication of information and
focuses on the flow of information disseminated through communities of practices
within the university.
Hypothesis 4 stated that ICT support has a positive effect on knowledge
creation. Based on Table 3, the estimated value for testing the effect of the two
variables shows the original sample value of 0.071 with t statistics of 0.497 (<1.96).

342

Integration of talent management and knowledge (Wikaningrum, Kartikasari)

Statistically, there is not enough evidence to accept this hypothesis. This means that
ICT support is not proven to have a significant positive effect on knowledge creation.
Several empirical evidences showed that ICT-based practices can facilitate
knowledge creation, especially in the Combination phase where there is a process of
creating new explicit knowledge from existing explicit knowledge. At this stage, the
knowledge that has been understood and applied by employees is organized into a
more formal format, for example in the form of written rules, standard operating
procedures, and updating information systems on the university internal website.
Lecturers who are the subjects of this research are required to adapt quickly, be
flexible, and remain the best performers with changes in job design during online
learning and work from home in this pandemic era. Conditions that demand the speed
of thinking, learning, and acting as well as the demands for quickly mastering new
knowledge and skills will be more effectively supported by a personalization approach.
Real forms that occur at the respondent universities include interprofessional
collaboration, joint research, and CoP (Communities of Practice) in the form of
WhatsApp Groups to make the flow of information and knowledge among teaching
team members more effective. Although using technology, this approach emphasizes
collaborative work between individuals and teamwork. As Dávideková & Hvorecký
(2017) emphasized that technology is less effective at transferring contextual
information and emotions. The tacit knowledge transfer stage is more effective through
direct interaction than virtually using technology. This could explain why information
and communication technology support did not have a significant impact on
knowledge creation in this research setting.

CONCLUSION, LIMITATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS
There are several conclusions from the results of this study. First, if the
university wants to improve innovation performance, it is not the knowledge that
matters, but the university's ability to apply knowledge effectively to create new
knowledge. Therefore, knowledge and the ability to develop and utilize it is the main
resource for universities to build and enhance a sustainable competitive advantage.
Second, the source of information comes from the information connection. Therefore,
knowledge creation should not only focus on the exchange and sharing of information,
both internal and external information communication of the university. Knowledge
management also requires potential human resources who have the ability to exchange
and access information internally and externally. This is a challenge for universities to
integrate knowledge management with talent, based on social interaction, competence,
and technology support. Social interaction will facilitate the practice of sharing
knowledge, and competence will improve the quality of knowledge conversion and
knowledge creation. Meanwhile, technology is expected to increase the efficiency and
effectiveness of the knowledge creation process so that it will support the creation of

Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 26 No. 2 Oktober 2023, 331 - 348

343

innovation. Third, to support the quality of social interaction, which was proven to be
significant in this research, higher education should maintain a low power distance for
lecturer to feel more comfortable in their social interactions. Therefore, knowledge is
more easily spread to all members of the organization. The lecturers will also have
more freedom to perform creative tasks. On the other hand, higher education with high
power distance has strong control mechanisms in regulating activities between
individuals. Therefore, it will obstruct creative activities such as knowledge creation.
This research has been appropriate in using the knowledge organization
research setting. However, the ICT applied to the three research subjects is still
dominant in using e-learning. The information systems to support lecturer knowledge
management (technology-based knowledge management) have not been implemented
optimally. Future research needs to pay attention to this limitation, by ensuring that
the research setting is an organization that has implemented knowledge management
based on both personalization and technology.

REFERENCES
Abu-Shanab, E., & Subaih, A. (2019). The role of knowledge sharing and employees’
satisfaction in predicting organizational innovation. Journal of Information &
Knowledge
Management,
18(3),
1950026.
https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219649219500266
Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Knowledge management and knowledge
management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS
Quarterly, 25(1), 107–136. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250961
AlKerdawy, M. M. A. (2016). The relationship between human resource management
ambidexterity and talent management: The moderating role of electronic
human resource management. International Business Research, 9(6), 80–94.
https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v9n6p80
Bandera, C., Keshtkar, F., Bartolacci, M. R., Neerudu, S., & Passerini, K. (2017).
Knowledge management and the entrepreneur: Insights from Ikujiro Nonaka’s
Dynamic Knowledge Creation model (SECI). International Journal of
Innovation Studies, 1(3), 163–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijis.2017.10.005
Barney, J. B., & Clark, D. N. (2007). Resource-based theory: Creating and sustaining
competitive advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bhatt, G. D. (2000). Organizing knowledge in the knowledge development cycle.
Journal
of
Knowledge
Management,
4(1),
15–26.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270010315371
Borghini, S. (2005). Organizational creativity: Breaking equilibrium and order to
innovate.
Journal
of
Knowledge
Management,
9(4),
19–33.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270510610305
Bouty, I. (2000). Interpersonal and interaction influences on informal resource

344

Integration of talent management and knowledge (Wikaningrum, Kartikasari)

exchanges between R&D researchers across organizational boundaries.
Academy
of
Management
Journal,
43(1),
50–65.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1556385
Brewer, P. D., & Brewer, K. L. (2010). Knowledge management, human resource
management, and higher education: A theoretical model. Journal of Education
for Business, 85(6), 330–335. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832321003604938
Cabrera, E. F., & Cabrera, A. (2005). Fostering knowledge sharing through people
management practices. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 16(5), 720–735. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190500083020
Cabrilo, S., & Dahms, S. (2018). How strategic knowledge management drives
intellectual capital to superior innovation and market performance. Journal of
Knowledge Management, 22(3), 621–648. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-072017-0309
Chadee, D., & Raman, R. (2012). External knowledge and performance of offshore IT
service providers in India: The mediating role of talent management. Asia
Pacific
Journal
of
Human
Resources,
50(4),
459–482.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7941.2012.00039.x
Chami-Malaeb, R., & Garavan, T. (2013). Talent and leadership development
practices as drivers of intention to stay in Lebanese organisations: The
mediating role of affective commitment. The International Journal of Human
Resource
Management,
24(21),
4046–4062.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.789445
Chib, A. (2010). The Aceh Besar midwives with mobile phones project: Design and
evaluation perspectives using the information and communication technologies
for healthcare development model. Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication,
15(3),
500–525.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.10836101.2010.01515.x
Crane, B., & Hartwell, C. J. (2019). Global talent management: A life cycle view of
the interaction between human and social capital. Journal of World Business,
54(2), 82–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2018.11.002
Daraei, M. R., Karimi, O., & Vahidi, T. (2014). An analysis on the relation between
strategic knowledge management and talent management strategy in
profitability of the Southern Khorasan Electric Distribution Company
(SKEDC). Global Journal of Management and Business, 1(2), 21–35.
Darroch, J. (2005). Knowledge management, innovation and firm performance.
Journal
of
Knowledge
Management,
9(3),
101–115.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270510602809
Dávideková, M., & Hvorecký, J. (2017). Collaboration tools for virtual teams in terms
of the SECI model. In Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (Vol.
544, Issue January, pp. 97–111). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50337-0_9
Dee, J., & Leisyte, L. (2017). Knowledge sharing and organizational change in higher
education.
The
Learning
Organization,
24(5),
355–365.

Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 26 No. 2 Oktober 2023, 331 - 348

345

https://doi.org/10.1108/TLO-04-2017-0034
Desouza, K. C., & Awazu, Y. (2006). Knowledge management at SMEs: Five
peculiarities. Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(1), 32–43.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270610650085
Fernhaber, S. A., & Patel, P. C. (2012). How do young firms manage product portfolio
complexity? The role of absorptive capacity and ambidexterity. Strategic
Management Journal, 33(13), 1516–1539. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.1994
Gateau, T., & Simon, L. (2016). Clown scouting and casting at the Cirque du Soleil:
Designing boundary practices for talent development and knowledge creation.
International Journal of Innovation Management, 20(4), 239–269.
https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919616400065
Gloet, M., & Terziovski, M. (2004). Exploring the relationship between knowledge
management practices and innovation performance. Journal of Manufacturing
Technology
Management,
15(5),
402–409.
https://doi.org/10.1108/17410380410540390
Hair, J. F., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th
ed.). London: Cengage Learning.
Jordão, R. V. D., & Novas, J. C. (2017). Knowledge management and intellectual
capital in networks of small- and medium-sized enterprises. Journal of
Intellectual Capital, 18(3), 667–692. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-11-20160120
Khan, N. U. Z., Rasheed, S., Sharmin, T., Ahmed, T., Mahmood, S. S., Khatun, F.,
Hanifi, S., Hoque, S., Iqbal, M., & Bhuiya, A. (2015). Experience of using
mHealth to link village doctors with physicians: Lessons from Chakaria,
Bangladesh. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 15(62), 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-015-0188-9
Kumar, J. A., & Ganesh, L. S. (2009). Research on knowledge transfer in
organizations: A morphology. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(4),
161–174. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270910971905
Lahiri, N. (2010). Geographic distribution of R&D activity: How does it affect
innovation quality? In The Academy of Management Journal (Vol. 53, Issue
5).
Lee, H., & Choi, B. (2003). Knowledge management enablers, processes, and
organizational performance: An integrative view and empirical examination.
Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(1), 179–228.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2003.11045756
Liao, C., Wang, H.-Y., Chuang, S.-H., Shih, L., & Liu, C.-C. (2010). Enhancing
knowledge management for R&D innovation and firm performance: An
integrative view. African Journal of Business Management, 4(14), 3026–3038.
Liu, Y., & Meyer, K. E. (2020). Boundary spanners, HRM practices, and reverse
knowledge transfer: The case of Chinese cross-border acquisitions. Journal of
World Business, 55(2), 100958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2018.07.007

346

Integration of talent management and knowledge (Wikaningrum, Kartikasari)

Lopez-Nicolas, C., & Soto-Acosta, P. (2010). Analyzing ICT adoption and use effects
on knowledge creation: An empirical investigation in SMEs. International
Journal
of
Information
Management,
30(6),
521–528.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.03.004
Mardani, A., Nikoosokhan, S., Moradi, M., & Doustar, M. (2018). The relationship
between knowledge management and innovation performance. The Journal of
High
Technology
Management
Research,
29(1),
12–26.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hitech.2018.04.002
Mitchell, R., & Boyle, B. (2010). Knowledge creation measurement methods. Journal
of
Knowledge
Management,
14(1),
67–82.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13673271011015570
Müller-Seitz, G. (2012). Leadership in interorganizational networks: A literature
review and suggestions for future research. International Journal of
Management Reviews, 14(4), 428–443. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14682370.2011.00324.x
Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the
organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1998.533225
Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation.
Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.5.1.14
Nonaka, I., Konno, N., & Toyama, R. (2001). Emergence of “Ba”: A conceptual
framework for the continuous and self-transcending process of knowledge
creation. In Nonaka, I. & Nishiguchi, T., Eds., Knowledge emergence. social,
technical, and evolutionary dimensions of knowledge creation (pp.13-29).
https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.2002.11506518
Ofek, E., & Sarvary, M. (2001). Leveraging the customer base: Creating competitive
advantage through knowledge management. Management Science, 47(11),
1441–1456. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.47.11.1441.10249
Scaringella, L., & Malaeb, R. C. (2014). Contributions of talented people to knowledge
management. Journal of Applied Business Research (JABR), 30(3), 715–724.
https://doi.org/10.19030/jabr.v30i3.8556
Singh, J. B., Chandwani, R., & Kumar, M. (2018). Factors affecting Web 2.0 adoption:
Exploring the knowledge sharing and knowledge seeking aspects in health care
professionals. Journal of Knowledge Management, 22(1), 21–43.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-08-2016-0320
Smith, K. G., Collins, C. J., & Clark, K. D. (2005). Existing knowledge, knowledge
creation capability, and the rate of new product introduction in high-technology
firms.
Academy
of
Management
Journal,
48(2),
346–357.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2005.16928421
Sparrow, P. R., & Makram, H. (2015). What is the value of talent management?
Building value-driven processes within a talent management architecture.
Human
Resource
Management
Review,
25(3),
249–263.

Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis, Volume 26 No. 2 Oktober 2023, 331 - 348

347

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.04.002
Srivastava, S. C., & Shainesh, G. (2015). Bridging the service divide through digitally
enabled service innovations. MIS Quarterly, 39(1), 245–268.
Steinfield, C., Scupola, A., & López-Nicolás, C. (2010). Social capital, ICT use and
company performance: Findings from the Medicon Valley Biotech Cluster.
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(7), 1156–1166.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.03.004
Stevens, R. H. (2010). Managing human capital: How to use knowledge management
to transfer knowledge in today’s multi-generational workforce. International
Business Research, 3(3), 77–83. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v3n3p77
Subramaniam, M., & Youndt, M. A. (2005). The influence of intellectual capital on
the types of innovative capabilities. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3),
450–463. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2005.17407911
Tripathi, V. R., Popli, M., Ghulyani, S., Desai, S., & Gaur, A. (2021). Knowledge
creation practices at organizational boundaries: The role of ICT in sickle-cell
care for tribal communities. Journal of Knowledge Management, 25(3), 595–
617. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-09-2019-0521
Tu, J. (2020). The role of dyadic social capital in enhancing collaborative knowledge
creation.
Journal
of
Informetrics,
14(2),
101034.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2020.101034
Vaiman, V., & Vance, C. (2008). Smart talent management: Building knowledge
assets for competitive advantage (V. Vaiman & C. M. Vance (eds.)). UK:
Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781848442986
Whelan, E., & Carcary, M. (2011). Integrating talent and knowledge management:
Where are the benefits? Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(4), 675–687.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13673271111152018
Wikaningrum, T. (2021). MOC approach and its integration with social network and
ICT: The role to improve knowledge transfer. In Lecture Notes in Networks
and Systems (Vol. 278, pp. 357–364). Springer Science and Business Media
Deutschland GmbH. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79725-6_35

348

Integration of talent management and knowledge (Wikaningrum, Kartikasari)