Tourism in its modern garb is very new to China. Not until 1978 when the bamboo curtain was parted and the ‘Open Door’ policies introduced was international tourism welcomed. It is only 21 years ago, in 1984, that was tourism approved by the Chinese Government as an appropriate form of economic development that could contribute to the modernization of the country. The form that tourism takes in contemporary China, especially the development and presentation of natural sights and sites, demonstrates qualities that immediately set it apart from western forms of tourism development. While there are similar aspects – all part of the ubiquitous spread of ‘globalization’ – there is much that retains a unique Chineseness that is immediately distinctive. In analyzing the specific qualities of contemporary Chinese tourism it is argued that 4000 years of continuous culture, which has produced a body of understanding known as ‘Chinese common knowledge’, has been fundamental in directing and determining the way in which natural landscapes are utilized for contemporary tourism. The values inherent in this enduring cultural heritage are an amalgamation of Confucian thought, Doaist and Buddhist theology, folklore and an extraordinarily rich literary heritage in which the poem and calligraphy are regarded as the highest art forms. They imbue every natural landscape with a cultural overlay, drawing upon the immense strength of Chinese common knowledge in ways which make many such sights and sites incomprehensible to non-Chinese visitors because no interpretation is provided - since none is needed for their Chinese viewers. One outcome of this research is the identification of a Chinese tourist gaze that has many elements which distinguish it from the western tourist gaze. It is highly structured through sociolinguistic parameters which feature correlative and relational thinking (in which no individual entity exists in isolation but is connected to all things around it in dynamic relationships), and this has produced what I have termed ‘the relational tourist gaze’. The Chinese value system also includes a degree of anthropocentrism and anthropomorphism that stands in opposition to the western biocentric approach to conservation and maintenance of ‘naturalness’ and ‘wilderness.’ There is a pervasive view that nature is imperfect and ‘man’ has a responsibility to improve on nature to forge a symbiotic relationship, these sentiments summed up in the phrase known to all Chinese: ‘man and nature in harmony’. A significant component of a Chinese tourist gaze is thus what I have termed ‘the harmony gaze’ that contrast strongly with current western notions about wilderness and pristine nature. This thesis defines Chineseness and Chinese common knowledge, examines the particularities of the sociolinguistics of Chinese to illustrate the way in which this cultural heritage has been transmitted down through the centuries to the present day, and then analyses the manifestation of this knowledge and its attendant values in incorporating natural landscapes - mountains, caves, rivers – in contemporary tourism in China. The result is - ‘Bie you tian di’ – an altogether different world.

Capturing and sharing individual and organisational knowledge is vital for organisational functioning. Knowledge management systems (KMS) are information technology systems which enable employees to electronically capture and distribute knowledge across the organisation. Because knowledge sharing is often a discretionary behaviour requiring time and energy on behalf of employees, the success of KMS largely relies on their motivation and willingness to share. KMS implemented within organisations have been largely ineffective with failure rates of 80% documented in the knowledge management literature. There is a need for further understanding of the barriers and facilitators for employee contributions to KMS. In particular, there is a dearth of empirical research examining the role of social and organisational factors in knowledge sharing on KMS. To this end, a programme of research was developed which utilised normative and social exchange perspectives to explain employee knowledge sharing on KMS. A combination of research methodologies were employed across five field-based studies. The aim of Study 1 was to identify the determinants of knowledge sharing on KMS. In Study 1, qualitative data were collected through 16 in-depth interviews with employees from a medium-sized private sector organisation. While several barriers and facilitators were identified, the most prevalent themes to emerge from the content analysis were perceived benefits and management support, highlighting the central role of social exchange and normative processes in explaining employee knowledge sharing on KMS. The results of Study 1 were used in conjunction with previous research to design the subsequent quantitative studies. Study 2 examined the mediating role of perceived benefits in the management support – knowledge sharing intentions relationship. It used a cross-sectional survey design and sampled 41 employees from a large private sector organisation. Three main findings emerged. First, management support was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Second, perceived benefits were positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Third, perceived individual benefits mediated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing intentions. Study 3 examined the moderating role of perceived organisational support (POS) in the management support – knowledge sharing intentions relationship. Study 2 and 3 were both quantitative studies taken from the same organisational setting but with different user groups. In Study 2, the users directly contributed their knowledge onto the system. In Study 3 (N = 45), the users shared their knowledge through an intermediary person. Study 3 further extended Study 2 by investigating knowledge sharing behaviour (N = 27) in addition to knowledge sharing intentions. Study 3 had three key findings. First, consistent with Study 2, management support was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Second, POS was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions and knowledge sharing behaviour. Third, POS moderated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing behaviour. Study 4 replicated and extended the findings of the previous studies in a different organisational setting. Two separate studies were conducted in a medium-sized public sector organisation. In Study 4a (N = 295) data were collected at a single point in time. Study 4b (N = 246) extended the previous quantitative studies by examining two forms of management support for the KMS as well as collecting self-reported behavioural data (N= 130) at a second time period. Overall, the findings of these studies provided mixed support for the predictions. First, system-related management support, organisational identification, perceived individual benefit and perceived organisational benefit were directly related to employee knowledge sharing on KMS. However, contrary to prediction, POS was not found to be directly related to employee knowledge sharing across the two studies. Second, organisational identification was found to moderate the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing in Study 4a but not 4b. Third, POS moderated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing in Study 4b, however, no such relationship was found in Study 4a. Finally, across the two studies, both perceived individual and organisational benefit were found to uniquely mediate the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing intentions. On the basis of the findings of the research programme, several conclusions were made. First, system-related support from management is an important determinant of employee knowledge sharing on KMS. Second, employees’ perception of the benefits derived from knowledge sharing has an important influence on their contributions to KMS. Third, the extent to which employees identify with the organisation influences their decision to share knowledge on KMS. Fourth, the extent to which employees perceive support from the organisation influences their decision to share knowledge on KMS.

Abstract Increasing global interest in coaching science research has resulted in a greater recognition of the complexities and dynamics existing in the coaching process (Cushion, Armour, & Jones, 2003). Associated with the dynamic and complex nature of the coaching process are the many social relationships that operate within this process. A high performance coach’s network is often associated with athletes, officials, support staff and administrators. In essence, coaches form dynamic social networks (DSN; (Mallett, Rossi, & Tinning, 2007) that are paramount to developing their coaching practice, and therefore their coaching knowledge. The aim of this project was to understand how high performance football coaches (HPFC) learn. The research questions were as follows: • What are the major sources of information for HPFC? • What sources of information are most valuable to the HPFC? • What role does the interaction with other coaches’ play in developing knowledge? In order to better understand the nature of coach interactions in developing knowledge it is useful to consider the notions of communities of practice (CoP) (Wenger, 1998), networks of practice (NoP) (Nichani & Hung, 2002), informal knowledge networks (IKN) (Allee, 2000) and dynamic social networks (DSN) (Mallett, et al., 2007). This qualitative research was conducted with six high performance football coaches (HPFC) in Australia using semi-structured interviews. Each interview was transcribed and analysed into meaning units through the process of triangular consensus. The coaches in this sample did not display a fully functioning CoP, IKN, or NoP. The HPFCs failed to display the critical element of a joint enterprise. Mutual engagement was partially reported between coaches of the same team but was not reported between opposition coaches. The coaches reported the final element of a shared repertoire. Nichani & Hung’s (2002) notion of a NoP and Allee’s (2000) research on IKN were considered as possible social networks to describe the coaching context. These coaches did not develop relationships that could be characterised as a NoP. The data suggests that the development of knowledge through face-to-face interactions with other people was valued over use of Internet exchanges and chat rooms. There was evidence to suggest the formation of a coaches’ IKN, however it is proposed that this was not the major source for these coaches in developing knowledge. Most importantly it was found that HPFC in the Australian context are engaged in a DSN. It was reported by the coaches in this study that their interactions are dynamic, in that they change throughout their careers to the extent that their people of influence can be numerous; this is due to two key findings. The nature of the work of HPFC is highly contested and thus the information and knowledge is sacred. This is a barrier for information and knowledge transfer and can inhibit learning. In addition finding a person of influence is a lengthy process as it can take years to build mutual trust and respect. By understanding how coaches learn their craft through their interactions with others, coach development could potentially assist coaches through the learning process.

Capturing and sharing individual and organisational knowledge is vital for organisational functioning. Knowledge management systems (KMS) are information technology systems which enable employees to electronically capture and distribute knowledge across the organisation. Because knowledge sharing is often a discretionary behaviour requiring time and energy on behalf of employees, the success of KMS largely relies on their motivation and willingness to share. KMS implemented within organisations have been largely ineffective with failure rates of 80% documented in the knowledge management literature. There is a need for further understanding of the barriers and facilitators for employee contributions to KMS. In particular, there is a dearth of empirical research examining the role of social and organisational factors in knowledge sharing on KMS. To this end, a programme of research was developed which utilised normative and social exchange perspectives to explain employee knowledge sharing on KMS. A combination of research methodologies were employed across five field-based studies. The aim of Study 1 was to identify the determinants of knowledge sharing on KMS. In Study 1, qualitative data were collected through 16 in-depth interviews with employees from a medium-sized private sector organisation. While several barriers and facilitators were identified, the most prevalent themes to emerge from the content analysis were perceived benefits and management support, highlighting the central role of social exchange and normative processes in explaining employee knowledge sharing on KMS. The results of Study 1 were used in conjunction with previous research to design the subsequent quantitative studies. Study 2 examined the mediating role of perceived benefits in the management support – knowledge sharing intentions relationship. It used a cross-sectional survey design and sampled 41 employees from a large private sector organisation. Three main findings emerged. First, management support was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Second, perceived benefits were positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Third, perceived individual benefits mediated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing intentions. Study 3 examined the moderating role of perceived organisational support (POS) in the management support – knowledge sharing intentions relationship. Study 2 and 3 were both quantitative studies taken from the same organisational setting but with different user groups. In Study 2, the users directly contributed their knowledge onto the system. In Study 3 (N = 45), the users shared their knowledge through an intermediary person. Study 3 further extended Study 2 by investigating knowledge sharing behaviour (N = 27) in addition to knowledge sharing intentions. Study 3 had three key findings. First, consistent with Study 2, management support was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Second, POS was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions and knowledge sharing behaviour. Third, POS moderated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing behaviour. Study 4 replicated and extended the findings of the previous studies in a different organisational setting. Two separate studies were conducted in a medium-sized public sector organisation. In Study 4a (N = 295) data were collected at a single point in time. Study 4b (N = 246) extended the previous quantitative studies by examining two forms of management support for the KMS as well as collecting self-reported behavioural data (N= 130) at a second time period. Overall, the findings of these studies provided mixed support for the predictions. First, system-related management support, organisational identification, perceived individual benefit and perceived organisational benefit were directly related to employee knowledge sharing on KMS. However, contrary to prediction, POS was not found to be directly related to employee knowledge sharing across the two studies. Second, organisational identification was found to moderate the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing in Study 4a but not 4b. Third, POS moderated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing in Study 4b, however, no such relationship was found in Study 4a. Finally, across the two studies, both perceived individual and organisational benefit were found to uniquely mediate the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing intentions. On the basis of the findings of the research programme, several conclusions were made. First, system-related support from management is an important determinant of employee knowledge sharing on KMS. Second, employees’ perception of the benefits derived from knowledge sharing has an important influence on their contributions to KMS. Third, the extent to which employees identify with the organisation influences their decision to share knowledge on KMS. Fourth, the extent to which employees perceive support from the organisation influences their decision to share knowledge on KMS.

Abstract Increasing global interest in coaching science research has resulted in a greater recognition of the complexities and dynamics existing in the coaching process (Cushion, Armour, & Jones, 2003). Associated with the dynamic and complex nature of the coaching process are the many social relationships that operate within this process. A high performance coach’s network is often associated with athletes, officials, support staff and administrators. In essence, coaches form dynamic social networks (DSN; (Mallett, Rossi, & Tinning, 2007) that are paramount to developing their coaching practice, and therefore their coaching knowledge. The aim of this project was to understand how high performance football coaches (HPFC) learn. The research questions were as follows: • What are the major sources of information for HPFC? • What sources of information are most valuable to the HPFC? • What role does the interaction with other coaches’ play in developing knowledge? In order to better understand the nature of coach interactions in developing knowledge it is useful to consider the notions of communities of practice (CoP) (Wenger, 1998), networks of practice (NoP) (Nichani & Hung, 2002), informal knowledge networks (IKN) (Allee, 2000) and dynamic social networks (DSN) (Mallett, et al., 2007). This qualitative research was conducted with six high performance football coaches (HPFC) in Australia using semi-structured interviews. Each interview was transcribed and analysed into meaning units through the process of triangular consensus. The coaches in this sample did not display a fully functioning CoP, IKN, or NoP. The HPFCs failed to display the critical element of a joint enterprise. Mutual engagement was partially reported between coaches of the same team but was not reported between opposition coaches. The coaches reported the final element of a shared repertoire. Nichani & Hung’s (2002) notion of a NoP and Allee’s (2000) research on IKN were considered as possible social networks to describe the coaching context. These coaches did not develop relationships that could be characterised as a NoP. The data suggests that the development of knowledge through face-to-face interactions with other people was valued over use of Internet exchanges and chat rooms. There was evidence to suggest the formation of a coaches’ IKN, however it is proposed that this was not the major source for these coaches in developing knowledge. Most importantly it was found that HPFC in the Australian context are engaged in a DSN. It was reported by the coaches in this study that their interactions are dynamic, in that they change throughout their careers to the extent that their people of influence can be numerous; this is due to two key findings. The nature of the work of HPFC is highly contested and thus the information and knowledge is sacred. This is a barrier for information and knowledge transfer and can inhibit learning. In addition finding a person of influence is a lengthy process as it can take years to build mutual trust and respect. By understanding how coaches learn their craft through their interactions with others, coach development could potentially assist coaches through the learning process.

Capturing and sharing individual and organisational knowledge is vital for organisational functioning. Knowledge management systems (KMS) are information technology systems which enable employees to electronically capture and distribute knowledge across the organisation. Because knowledge sharing is often a discretionary behaviour requiring time and energy on behalf of employees, the success of KMS largely relies on their motivation and willingness to share. KMS implemented within organisations have been largely ineffective with failure rates of 80% documented in the knowledge management literature. There is a need for further understanding of the barriers and facilitators for employee contributions to KMS. In particular, there is a dearth of empirical research examining the role of social and organisational factors in knowledge sharing on KMS. To this end, a programme of research was developed which utilised normative and social exchange perspectives to explain employee knowledge sharing on KMS. A combination of research methodologies were employed across five field-based studies. The aim of Study 1 was to identify the determinants of knowledge sharing on KMS. In Study 1, qualitative data were collected through 16 in-depth interviews with employees from a medium-sized private sector organisation. While several barriers and facilitators were identified, the most prevalent themes to emerge from the content analysis were perceived benefits and management support, highlighting the central role of social exchange and normative processes in explaining employee knowledge sharing on KMS. The results of Study 1 were used in conjunction with previous research to design the subsequent quantitative studies. Study 2 examined the mediating role of perceived benefits in the management support – knowledge sharing intentions relationship. It used a cross-sectional survey design and sampled 41 employees from a large private sector organisation. Three main findings emerged. First, management support was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Second, perceived benefits were positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Third, perceived individual benefits mediated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing intentions. Study 3 examined the moderating role of perceived organisational support (POS) in the management support – knowledge sharing intentions relationship. Study 2 and 3 were both quantitative studies taken from the same organisational setting but with different user groups. In Study 2, the users directly contributed their knowledge onto the system. In Study 3 (N = 45), the users shared their knowledge through an intermediary person. Study 3 further extended Study 2 by investigating knowledge sharing behaviour (N = 27) in addition to knowledge sharing intentions. Study 3 had three key findings. First, consistent with Study 2, management support was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions. Second, POS was positively related to employees’ knowledge sharing intentions and knowledge sharing behaviour. Third, POS moderated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing behaviour. Study 4 replicated and extended the findings of the previous studies in a different organisational setting. Two separate studies were conducted in a medium-sized public sector organisation. In Study 4a (N = 295) data were collected at a single point in time. Study 4b (N = 246) extended the previous quantitative studies by examining two forms of management support for the KMS as well as collecting self-reported behavioural data (N= 130) at a second time period. Overall, the findings of these studies provided mixed support for the predictions. First, system-related management support, organisational identification, perceived individual benefit and perceived organisational benefit were directly related to employee knowledge sharing on KMS. However, contrary to prediction, POS was not found to be directly related to employee knowledge sharing across the two studies. Second, organisational identification was found to moderate the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing in Study 4a but not 4b. Third, POS moderated the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing in Study 4b, however, no such relationship was found in Study 4a. Finally, across the two studies, both perceived individual and organisational benefit were found to uniquely mediate the relationship between management support and knowledge sharing intentions. On the basis of the findings of the research programme, several conclusions were made. First, system-related support from management is an important determinant of employee knowledge sharing on KMS. Second, employees’ perception of the benefits derived from knowledge sharing has an important influence on their contributions to KMS. Third, the extent to which employees identify with the organisation influences their decision to share knowledge on KMS. Fourth, the extent to which employees perceive support from the organisation influences their decision to share knowledge on KMS.

This thesis explores knowledge transfer between firms in multinational organisations. The subject of knowledge transfer is undisputedly important because knowledge is the essence of competitive advantage. In addition, multinational organisations are believed to be more effective at facilitating inter-firm knowledge transfer. The theoretical framework of this thesis is based on four constructs of knowledge transfer: motivation to transfer knowledge; richness of communication channels; absorptive capacity and organisational context. The research uses both quantitative and qualitative methods to explore these constructs. The research confirms the positive relationship between these constructs. Importantly, it highlights three knowledge transfer levels namely: pooling; assimilation; application and integration of knowledge into the multinational organisation. The research shows that knowledge must move through each of these levels if the focus is knowledge creation, these levels not to be treated as isolated but in fact overlapping. The research also found that high levels of espoused motivation are not always supported by proactive knowledge transfer behaviours. It demonstrated that at a certain level of knowledge transfer encouragement becomes less important than other motivational factors. Importantly, the multinational needs to manage knowledge transfer. To do this, the nature of knowledge must be considered and there needs to be an understanding that ad hoc knowledge transfer patterns can inhibit knowledge being transferred to where it may be needed. The research highlights how important it is for multinational inter-firm knowledge transfer to begin with the individual and then move to the organisation. The individual needs to have the necessary attitudes and ability to understand the benefits. Also, they need to understand that knowledge is not transferred through acceptance alone, but needs to be implemented. This means the multinational must provide strategic direction and structure that facilitates the movement of knowledge across the multinational organisation. Knowledge transfer routines must be managed to allow knowledge to move to where it can create unique knowledge because it is this unique knowledge that can be a strategic benefit to the organisation.

Thesis (M.S.)--Air Force Institute of Technology, 2006. / AFIT/GIR/ENV/06-01S. "September 2006." Title from title page of PDF document (viewed on: Nov. 16, 2007). Includes bibliographical references (leaves 107-111).

Thesis (M.A.)--Catholic Theological Union at Chicago, 1994. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 158-163).

Thesis (M.B.A.)--Carleton University, 2002. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 157-162). Also available in electronic format on the Internet.