A Scoping Review on Project-Based Organization’s (PBOs) Knowledge Transfer Using the Systemic Lessons Learned Knowledge (Syllk) Model as an Interpretative Structural Model (ISM)

Abstract

A scoping review was conducted in order to systematically map the research featuring Project Based Organizations (PBOs) in relation to knowledge transfer. This scoping review considered over 50 years of research to ascertain how PBOs transfer knowledge by using an interpretative structural model (ISM) to illustrate the outcomes of the investigation via the Systemic Lessons Learned Knowledge (Syllk) Model, created by Duffield and Whitty (2015). We wanted to illustrate what knowledge transfer elements from the authors’ original model outlining six key themes were sustained and prevalent in literature as representative of this knowledge transfer process. The six elements are: learning, culture, social, technology, process and infrastructure. Employing an ISM also helped identify gaps in existing knowledge. The following research questions formed the basis of our study: Research Question 1: How does the Syllk model help interpret and categorize knowledge transfer dynamics in PBO contexts? Research Question 2: What adaptations are required, if any, to the Syllk Model (Duffield & Whitty, 2015) to better facilitate knowledge transfer within PBOs? Research Question 3: What are the key barriers to knowledge transfer in PBOs? Findings: Extant literature indicated that knowledge sharing depends on the willingness of individuals to participate, without which lessons cannot be learned. The results of this scoping review illustrated how some of the elements within the original Syllk Model by Duffield and Whitty (2015) are not fully exploited by organizations. Moreover, several terms possess hazy definitions which further disadvantaged outcomes as it makes some reserch outputs open to question because concensus on the ideology for each element considered as a key theme is subject to interpretation. We propose the Aspirational Syllk (ASyllk) Model as a reconceptualized ISM that enables PBOs to systematically capture and assess experiential learning outcomes. Methodology: A scoping review was undertaken looking at 202 peer reviewed journal papers:  Scoping reviews differ from a systematic review in that the former maps a broad body of literature on relevant topic areas and provides tabular outputs, as well as identifying gaps. Whereas the latter considers a far narrower range of research material as it possesses a dedicated synthesis. We subscribed to the scoping review protocol advocated by Bragge et al. (2011) in that we delineated our area of exploration, thereafter we conducted an extensive literature review and then we reported upon these sources to accurately assess the barriers to organizational learning and, thus, identify the gaps in literature. We also considered the antecedents that go into knowledge transfer in PBOs. Significance: Despite a half century of research on knowledge transfer, our findings indicated that knowledge transfer is not intrinsic to PBOs, thus illustrating the need for robust project termination processes to garner key lessons learned for subsequent organizational learning capacity. Through our extensive examination of existing literature, covering over 200 sources, we illustrated a detailed understanding of the barriers to knowledge transfer within PBOs. This scoping review serves as a powerful resource for researchers and practitioners by offering insights into an ammended model to test in future research.