Knowledge transfer &amp; role identity : A case study within the client-consultant relationship

(1)

Knowledge transfer & role identity:

A case study within the client-consultant relationship

MASTER THESIS WITHIN: Business Administration NUMBER OF CREDITS: 30

PROGRAMME OF STUDY: Digital Business AUTHORS: Anton Dusén & Marcus Thörnberg JÖNKÖPING: May 2021

(2)

Master Thesis in Business Administration

Title: Knowledge transfer & role identity: A case study of within the client-consultant relationship

Authors: Anton Dusén & Marcus Thörnberg Tutor: Marta Caccamo

Date: 2021-05-24

Key Terms: Knowledge transfer, Role identity, Role identity ambiguity, Client-consultant relationship, Resourcing processes

Abstract

Background

Due to the increased knowledge gaps that originate from rapid technological change, many organizations are in need of consulting services. As of this, the consulting market has had rapid growth, which has caught the attention of scholars. Previous research has identified an interface between knowledge and identity as two prominent concepts when analyzing the client-consultant relationship. Despite this, there is still a great lack of empirical insights regarding how these two concepts might affect this relationship.

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to explore knowledge transfer within the client-consultant relationship by applying the lens of role identity. Furthermore, the research aimed to increase the understanding of the barriers to knowledge transfer, where they originate from, and how to overcome them.

Method

This research is of a qualitative sort, where abductive reasoning has been applied in order to fulfill our research purpose. Furthermore, a single case study approach was conducted and data was gathered from interviews with both consultants and clients. The gathered data was analyzed by using grounded analysis, where insights have been identified by creating 1st order concepts, 2nd order themes and aggregated dimensions.

Conclusion

The result of this study indicates that different idiosyncratic and conventional role identity meanings create mismatches within the client-consultant relationship. The concept of role identity ambiguity creates barriers for securing knowledge transfer within the client-consultant relationship, and knowledge transfer outcomes affect future role identity meanings. The result of this study contributes to already existing literature regarding role identity, knowledge transfer and the client-consultant relationship. Furthermore, the study presents managerial implications that will increase consultants' understanding of the barriers and suggestions for how to overcome them.

(3)

Acknowledgments

During the last months, we have conducted this research in order to provide theoretical and managerial implications. Throughout this research, we have had great support from some important individuals, which we would like to acknowledge:

Firstly, we would like to thank our supervisor Marta Caccamo for her guidance throughout the process of writing our thesis. No matter when or where we needed support, Marta was there to point us in the right direction, which in the end resulted in a thesis with more quality. For this, we are truly grateful. We could not have wished for a better supervisor.

Secondly, we would like to thank the members of our seminar group who always provided us with important and valuable insights and constructive criticism, allowing us to understand the reader's point-of-view and create a more comprehensive thesis.

Thirdly, we would like to thank our contact person at Atea, who influenced the foundation of our research topic. Furthermore, we would like to thank Atea as a whole for giving us the opportunity to derive valuable insights from the interviewees they contributed with. Finally, we would like to express our gratitude to all the interviewees for investing their time to take part in our research. Sincerely,

Anton Dusén & Marcus Thörnberg May 24, 2021

(4)

List of Tables

Table 1. Different types of clients (Shein, 1997). ... 8

Table 2. Problems that clients are facing (Shein, 1997). ... 9

Table 3. Five domains of knowledge in consulting (Mische, 2018). ... 13

Table 4. Images of the passive and active consultancy client (Sturdy & Wright, 2011). ... 17

Table 5. List of interviewees. ... 27

Table 6. Easterby-Smith et al. (2018, p. 157). ... 31

Table 7. Managerial actions that can be addressed in the project anchoring discussion. ... 59

List of Figures

Figure 1. Knowledge transfer of individuals in a group (Alavi & Leidner, 2001). ... 11

Figure 2. Methodological choices. ... 19

Figure 3. The standard consulting process. ... 23

Figure 4. Location of consultants. ... 28

Figure 5. Coding tree / Gioia method. ... 30

(7)

1

1. Introduction

The introduction chapter aims to provide a background to the thesis topic, where key concepts such as knowledge transfer, identity, and aspects of the client-consultant relationship are presented. The purpose of the thesis and the research question is derived from previous research on the mentioned concepts.

1.1 Background

Due to the rapid technological change, the world is changing, and the demanded skills with it (Stubbings, 2020). One way for organizations to cope with this change is to radically rethink the use of processes, people, and technology by implementing a digital transformation (Boulton, 2020). Companies that have gone through successful digital changes include IKEA, which tackled the difficulties of being a brick-and-mortar business by acquiring an online platform service to help customers by delivering and assembling furniture. Still, they also rethought their product line by dipping into the smart home sector in an attempt to secure their status in the digital landscape (Banerjee, 2020). In 2014, Microsoft changed its desktop-driven revenue focus by moving into cloud computing to stay ahead in the industry, and today they are one of the key players in the cloud computing market (Jimenez, 2020). However, as technology is developing faster than the skills and knowledge are, the world is facing a mismatch in skills, which affects how suited current employees and future employees are for the tasks required in the new digital age (Stubbings, 2020). Furthermore, digital transformation requires significant modifications and adjustments for many parts of an organization, where an internal resistance for change, sharing, and collaboration must be defeated to fully advantage from the digital transformation (Gartner, 2018; Lancefield, 2019). In a global study conducted by PWC (2017), 77 % out of 22 000 people are willing to gain knowledge and skills suitable in the digital age. To gain value from digital tools, it is crucial that people understand why it is needed and not just how to use it (Stubbings, 2020). Many organizations struggle to retrieve this essential knowledge internally, and when this occurs, organizations often turn to consultants (Nikolova & Devinney, 2012; Bradshaw, Pulakanam & Cragg, 2015). Consultants have been argued to function as a knowledge replacer (Clegg, 2004) and a knowledge implementor (Canato & Giangreco, 2011), and the choice of an appropriate partner in a digital transformation project has been recognized as vital (Cooper & Vyas, 2019). According to FEACO (2017), European Federation of Management Consultancies Associations, management consulting firms have average employment growth of 6 % in Europe and average GDP growth of 6.4 %. According to IBIS (2019), the management consulting sector generated revenues of $634 billion from 2018 to 2019. Because of the consulting market’s significant growth and the many dynamics

(8)

2 within the client-consultant relationship, it has caught the attention of scholars (Cerruti, Tavoletti, & Grieco, 2019; Mosonyi, Empson & Gond, 2020).

Despite the importance of collaborating with consultants to obtain relevant knowledge, the client-consultant relationship is facing several challenges, such as inertia from the client, transparency issues, outdated competencies, choosing an appropriate partner to collaborate with, among other barriers (Nikolova, Möllering & Reihlen, 2015; Kragulj, 2020). If the inter-organizational interaction is not highly collaborative, these barriers may affect the transfer of knowledge in the relationship (Sun & Scott, 2005). Understanding how trust is developed and the importance of commitment in the client-consultant relationship has been recognized as factors that enhance collaboration (Klein Woolthuis, Hillebrand & Nooteboom, 2005). A mutual trust within the client-consultant relationship has been argued to be essential for a higher amount of commitment in inter-organizational interactions (Zaheer, McEvily & Perrone, 1998). If both parts of the relationship fail to overcome these challenges, the project is likely to fail, which in turn leads to the transformation costs remaining, but without any gained value (Cooper & Vyas, 2019).

Furthermore, a knowledge barrier can arise between consultants and clients when explaining the value of a project (Alvesson & Kärreman, 2001). This, in turn, could lead to clients being left behind with an impression that they have received value from the consultant, instead of actually receiving it or understanding how to exploit the transferred knowledge (Alvesson & Kärreman, 2001). Building on this, previous research argues that consultants might force companies into unwished services without exactly making notice of the real problem that the client is facing (Nikolova & Devinney, 2012).

1.2 Problem discussion

As implied in the background, the main objective for companies when they collaborate with consultants is to obtain the knowledge they internally lack (Alvesson & Kärreman, 2001). Knowledge is defined as “justified true belief”, which is a mix of experiences, information, expert insights, and values (Nonaka, 1994; Davenport & Pruskas, 1998). Overall, knowledge can increase the opportunities to create competitive advantages in a business context (Alavi & Leidner, 2001). Knowledge transfer, a sub-dimension of knowledge management (KM), refers to exchanging knowledge and competencies between actors, both inter-organizational and intra-organizational (Levin & Cross, 2004). In the context of consulting, knowledge transfer is assumed to be a strategy to utilize and capitalize knowledge since knowledge can be transferred between consultants and clients to leverage this knowledge in new places and new situations (Werr, 2012). One of the factors that are at the root of the challenges in knowledge transfer in the client-consultant relationship is the different identities that characterize clients and consultants (Martinez, Ferreira, & Can, 2016; Mosonyi et al., 2020). Literature looking at identity in the context of client-consultant relationship

(9)

3 has mainly focused on the identity of individuals, such as perceiving oneself as “elite”, “professional” or “expert” and how consultants deal with identity issues in the complex environment of management consultancy (Fincham, 2002; Alvesson & Robertson, 2006). Building on that, consultants experience anxiety when trying to meet the expectations of an “elite” organizational identity (O’Mahoney, 2011). It is also known that these elite identity claims might affect the client's perception of the consultant, which can affect the client-consultant relationship poorly (Harvey, Morris & Müller Santos, 2017). Previous research has also found evidence of mutual anxiety between clients and consultants (Gill, 2015). However, research on identity has paid less attention to both sides of the client-consultant relationship, where an investigation of consultant identity and client identity could bring a more comprehensive understanding of the relationship (Cerruti et al., 2019; Mosonyi et al., 2020).

Among the various concepts that belong to identity theory, the idea of role identity is instrumental in shedding light on the relationship between client and consultants, since clients and consultants have specific roles during their interactions with each other (Fincham, 2002; Alvesson & Robertson, 2006; Carter & Marony, 2018). Previous research of identity has discovered and explored the construct of role identities, meaning that people take on a role in a specific social situation (Carter & Marony, 2018). Role identity is an outcome of two different parts of the identity: the conventional part and the idiosyncratic part, which are culturally influenced and uniquely interpreted (Carter & Marony, 2018; Carter & Mangum, 2020). An example of this is the role one has in their profession and how the combination of the person's perception of the role and how external people perceive it creates the role identity (Carter & Marony, 2018; Carter & Mangum, 2020). The role identities in a profession provide a ground for business-to-business relationships, such as the client-consultant relationship, and are often linked to strong internal and external accountability pressures where knowledge transfer is central (Chua, Ingram & Morris, 2008; Dokko, Wilks & Rothbard, 2009). Despite previous research, the balance between conventional and idiosyncratic influential factors within the role identity construct needs further investigation concerning other processes, such as knowledge transfer (Carter & Mangum, 2020; Mosonyi et al., 2020).

In a systematic review of 219 articles regarding the management consulting industry, Mosonyi et al. (2020) identified knowledge and identity as conceptual themes that have highly influenced the literature in the past 30 years. When the themes of knowledge and identity are analyzed together, literature has theorized knowledge as a resource in constructing consultants’ identity since consultants' knowledge is often related to how they identify themselves (Robertson, Scarbrough & Swan, 2003). Building on that, identity is also a resource in transferring knowledge (Roberson et al., 2003). Therefore, the interface of knowledge and identity is referred to as “Resourcing Processes” (Mosonyi et al., 2020). In the client-consultant relationship, the knowledge and identity interface

(10)

4 play a role since the consultants' knowledge, and therefore their identity could threaten or startle the client if they feel that they are not in control of the situation (Morris, 2001). However, empirical evidence of how the identities of the consultants and the clients affect the knowledge transfer in the client-consultant relationship has generally been overlooked in previous research (Mosonyi et al., 2020).

1.3 Purpose

In our research, we will explore knowledge transfer within the client-consultant relationship by applying the lens of role identity. The interface between knowledge and identity can be used as a guideline when investigating a consultancy-related phenomenon to make theoretical contributions to the literature and empirical contributions (Monsonyi et al., 2020). Our research will analyze how role identity affects knowledge transfer in the client-consultant relationship by conducting a qualitative study. By conducting interviews with both consultants and clients accessed from Atea Sweden AB, a large consultancy firm, the study aims to provide a deeper understanding of knowledge transfer within the client-consultant relationship. This will be done by exploring the interface between knowledge and identity found by Monsonyi et al. (2020) in practice. By exploring this interface through interviews, this research aims to contribute with theoretical implications regarding how role identity might affect knowledge transfer within the client-consultant relationship, which will provide future opportunities for further research to explore other aspects. Furthermore, it will help consultancy firms to understand the barriers to knowledge transfer and where they originate from, allowing them to create prerequisites and strategies to overcome them.

1.4 Research Question

(11)

5

2. Literature review

The literature review aims to provide a theoretical background of the topic. This chapter will generally describe the context of the client-consultant relationship, its actors, and barriers. We will also explain the two main theoretical constructs for this research: Knowledge transfer and Role identity. Knowledge is first described in a general context to extract the concept of knowledge transfer from it. Similarly, identity is generally described to extract role identity from it. We will also explain how knowledge transfer and role identity have been studied in the client-consultant relationship. The section ends by describing an interface between knowledge and identity, referred to as resourcing processes.

2.1 The client-consultant relationship

The client-consultant relationship is bound to the consulting practice (Kellogg, 1984), meaning that consultants function as transmitters of business knowledge and techniques to client organizations (Nikolova & Devinney, 2012). In other words, the client-consultant relationship refers to that consultants function as a professional service that aims to assist organizations in achieving objectives by solving business and management problems, learning changes, and identifying new opportunities (Kubr, 2002). There are three parts of the client-consultant relationship: the client, the consultant, and the relationship, where the relationship is significant for a business project to be successful since research has discovered an interplay between the relationship and the outcome of the project (Kellogg, 1984). This suggests that successful client-consultant relationships result in successful projects and that unsuccessful relationships result in unsuccessful projects (Kellogg, 1984). Therefore, maintaining a good relationship is essential for both sides, as a good relationship lays the foundation for successful projects, which also can attract future clients for consultants (Kipping, 1999; O’Mahoney, 2010). The client-consultant relationship has been recognized as a complex relationship as of its non-routine and high-context characteristics (Nikolova et al., 2015). This, in turn, has revealed different barriers within the relationship, and these barriers are essential to overcome to achieve successful relationships (Sturdy, Clark, Fincham, & Handley, 2009; Chalutz Ben‐Gal & Tzafrir, 2011; Nikolova et al., 2015; Kragulj, 2020).

General barriers within the client-consultant relationship include the securement of trust (Nikolova et al., 2015) and commitment (Chalutz Ben‐Gal & Tzafrir, 2011), overcoming uncertainty, and establishing transparent communication (Kragulj, 2020). Furthermore, it has been shown that clients have a hard time being transparent and open towards consultants regarding intra-organizational aspects, such as cultural aspects within the client organization (Kragulj, 2020). Additionally, consultants tend to face resistance from the client organization when the environment is unwilling to cooperate (Sturdy et al., 2009). This, in turn, is problematic as this information is essential, as an organizations’ culture and history forcefully impact employees’ commitment towards

(12)

6 change (Kragulj, 2020). Research has shown that when explaining the project in terms of investments in costs, time, and resources, it can contribute to an increased commitment from both the client and the consultant (Ariely, Loewenstein & Prelec, 2006; Chalutz Ben‐Gal & Tzafrir, 2011). If both sides successfully overcome these barriers, it increases the possibility of a successful relationship and project (Kragulj, 2020).

An optimal client-consultant relationship is based upon mutual trust and mutual interest in cooperating (Sturdy & Wright, 2011). In these scenarios, the client is enacting an active role, as the client remains in control and the creation of knowledge is of a co-productive sort (Sturdy & Wright, 2011). Despite this, there are different perspectives regarding how consultants and clients are perceived within the relationship (Werr & Styhre, 2002).

2.1.1 Views on consultants in the client-consultant relationship

The two most discussed theoretical perspectives on consultants are the functional and the critical perspective (Greiner, & Metzger, 1983; Kubr, 1996; Alvesson 1993; Clark & Salaman, 1998; Alvesson, 2001; Werr & Styhre, 2002; Clegg, 2004; Kakabadse, Louchart, & Kakabadse, 2006; O’Mahoney, 2010; Nikolova & Devinney, 2012; Cerruti et al., 2019).

From a functional perspective, consultants are recognized as providers of knowledge at the clients’ request (Werr & Styhre, 2002; Cerruti et al., 2019), where the main goal is to move client organizations forward (Kakabadse et al., 2006). From a functional perspective, consultants are perceived as experts who both act as knowledge replacers (Canato & Giangreco, 2011) and knowledge implementers (Clegg, 2004). The need for this service originates from the fact that clients have discovered an insufficiency regarding knowledge, as the consultant is independent of the client's organization, it utilizes the possibility to perceive the organization from an objective perspective (Werr & Styhre, 2002). The objective perspective allows consultants to remain unrelated regarding their clients’ internal struggles (Kubr, 1996) and collect factual information (Greiner & Metzger, 1983).

Additionally, consultants have been argued to provide clients with the expertise that the clients’ organization previously lacked, as they provide original thinking, validate internal decisions, and introduce their clients to new methodologies (O’Mahoney, 2010). From the functional perspective, consulting services are well-defined services bought by competent buyers aware of what they can expect from this purchase (Werr & Styhre, 2002). From this perspective, the client is in control of the relationship and is recognized as immune against consultants that are trying to oversell them with services (Werr & Styhre, 2002). Except for being recognized as experts with the necessary knowledge for solving clients’ organizations, the consultant's primary purpose is to help clients solve their problems by engaging them and educating them about the issue (Nikolova, & Devinney, 2012).

(13)

7 The critical perspective of consulting refers to that consultants create an impression within client organizations to make their clients dependent on the management fads they produce (Alvesson, 1993; Alvesson, 2001). From the critical perspective, consultants’ expertise and formal knowledge are questioned (Werr & Styhre, 2002; Nikolova & Devinney, 2012). Without possessing an appropriate elevated knowledge base, consultants are convincing clients about their consultancy services' value (Werr & Styhre, 2002). From this perspective, the client is no longer in control of the relationship, as the impression of the consultants’ skills and knowledge leaves the client with a positive mindset regarding the consultancy service (Clark & Salaman, 1998). It is argued that consultants are providing clients with advice and strategies that do not end up in any results (O’Mahoney, 2010; Nikolova & Devinney, 2012). Instead of paying attention to what actual problems that the clients are facing, consultants tend to push for standardized solutions and create solutions for manufactured problems (Nikolova & Devinney, 2012).

Consultants have also been criticized for creating their market by introducing new concepts such as knowledge management, and by doing so, they act as a contributor to uncertainty among managers within client organizations (Werr & Styhre, 2002). When expanding the uncertainty among clients, consultants continuously make clients more dependable on consultants, as consultants ensure clients that they will help them reclaim control in an uncertain environment (Nikolova & Devinney, 2012).

2.1.2 Views on clients and their problems

When interacting with consultants, clients are recognized as the part facing a problem that requires external help, and to overcome these problems, clients tend to seek help from consultancy services (Schein, 1997). Three common reasons that influence clients to reach out to consultants are the costs to form an entirely internal solution, lack of internal resources, and a lack of commitment to solve organizational issues (Freedman & Zackrison, 2001). However, previous research has argued differently regarding the entity of the client within this relationship, as some have argued for clients to be of a homogenous sort, while others have argued that clients should be perceived as heterogeneous (Alvesson, 2009; Mattila, Tukiainen, & Kajalo, 2019). This means that there have been dissimilarities regarding if consultants should treat the client as a standardized or as a multi-level construct (Mattila et al., 2019) as a client has different intra-organizational attributes such as knowledge and culture (Jacobson, 2005).

According to Schein (1997), there are six different types of clients, and these clients might have different needs and expectations on a consultancy project:

(14)

8

Table 1. Different types of clients (Shein, 1997).

Furthermore, Schein (1997) simplifies the constructs of clients based on the problems they are facing. The issues that clients face can be classified into seven different levels (Schein, 1997). Depending on the client's problem, the consultant must approach the client differently (Schein, 1997). The six levels of problems are presented in table 2 below:

(15)

9

Table 2. Problems that clients are facing (Shein, 1997).

Because of the different types, needs, expectations, and attributes of clients and the problems that they are facing, it is argued that clients need to be approached differently from the consultants’ perspective (Schein, 1997; Alvesson, 2009; Mattila et al., 2019).

2.2 Knowledge

2.2.1 The concept of knowledge

The concept of knowledge can be traced back to the Greeks and refer to the ever-lasting search of the truth, but more commonly, it is defined as “justified true belief”, where it is essential to emphasize that this belief is personal and must therefore be justified (Nonaka, 1994). Building on that, this belief is a mix of experiences, information, expert insights, and values, an internal framework for evaluating new experiences and information (Davenport & Pruskas, 1998). There are several perspectives that the concept of knowledge can be viewed from, such as a state of mind, an object, a capability, a condition of having access to information, and finally, a process (Alavi & Leidner, 2001). The last perspective, viewing knowledge as a process, is connected to the transfer and application of expertise (Carlsson, El Sawy, Eriksson & Raven, 1996).

Generally, the literature describes two levels of knowledge: tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge (Polanyi, 1966; Nonaka, 1994). Tacit knowledge, also known as silent knowledge, refers to knowledge that we cannot put into words, suggesting that “[...] we know more than we can tell” (Polanyi, 1966). Polanyi (1966) explains tacit knowledge as a more cognitive and philosophical type

(16)

10 of knowledge that individuals express through action and commitment in certain situations. Despite this, Nonaka (1994) implies that “mental models” can be used to articulate and define individuals’ view of the world, by seeing things from different perspectives and therefore mobilize the creation of new knowledge. An example of tacit knowledge is relationship building, where there are no “one-size-fits-all” situations, and the knowledge needed to secure the relationship is difficult to define (Alavi & Leidner, 2001). Another typical example of tacit knowledge is facial recognition, where people tend to recognize other peoples’ faces but cannot describe how they possessed that knowledge since the ability appeared unconsciously (Polanyi, 1966). Explicit knowledge or codified knowledge, on the other hand, refer to knowledge that easily can be expressed and transmitted through a formal, systematic language (Nonaka, 1994). This type of knowledge is easy to pass on from one actor to another, such as product manuals, books, scientific formulas, or IT systems (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995).

2.2.2 Knowledge management

Knowledge management (KM) can be defined as organizational attempts to identify and exploit the collective knowledge in the organization to create competitive advantages (von Krogh, 1998). Building on that, the primary purpose of KM is to increase the innovativeness and responsiveness in organizations and secure its viability and overall success (Wiig, 1997; Hackbarth, 1998). Moreover, there are three components of KM: process, people, and technology, whereas process refers to aligning the knowledge within the organization, people refer to the knowledge culture within the organization, and technology stands for the implementation of platforms and systems, for the employees to share and communicate the knowledge (Leibowitz, 2012). Putting it simply, KM is a conscious strategy of providing the proper knowledge to the right people at the right time, where the overall improvement of organizational performance is in essence (Davenport & Pruskas, 1998). Within KM, there is a framework of four processes that can be used to analyze and discuss the role of information technologies in KM: (1) knowledge creation, (2) knowledge storage/retrieval, (3) knowledge transfer, and (4) knowledge application (Alavi & Leidner, 2001). Knowledge creation refers to replacing existing knowledge with new tacit and explicit knowledge, whereas Nonaka (1994) created the SECI-model to describe the different modes of continual interplays between tacit and explicit knowledge (Alavi & Leidner, 2001). Knowledge storage/retrieval refers to the strategies of securing knowledge since organizations tend to forget or lose track of existing knowledge in their mission of creating new knowledge (Argote, Beckman & Epple, 1990). Knowledge transfer refers to the exchange of knowledge between groups, across groups, and between individuals, which is displayed in figure 1 (Alavi & Leidner, 2001). Finally, knowledge application refers to applying the existing knowledge, which can be facilitated by directives, self-contained task teams, and organizational routines (Grant, 1996; Alavi & Leidner, 2001). As mentioned before, there are several perspectives of knowledge, and if knowledge is perceived as a process, then the focus of the

(17)

11 knowledge management should be on the processes of the creation, sharing, and transfer of knowledge (Carlsson et al., 1996; Alavi & Leidner, 2001).

Figure 1. Knowledge transfer of individuals in a group (Alavi & Leidner, 2001).

2.2.3 Knowledge transfer

Knowledge transfer in organizations, which lies at the core of this research, refers to processes where actors in the organization - such as individuals, teams, or units - receive, exchange, or are influenced by the knowledge or experience of other actors (van Wijk, Jansen & Lyles, 2008). Argote & Ingram (2000) imply that successful knowledge transfer occurs when the knowledge and the practice from one organization are transferred and adapted into a routine in another organization. Previous research suggests that knowledge transfer across organizations (inter-organizational) is more difficult to obtain than knowledge transfer within organizations (intra-organizational) (Inkpen & Tsang, 2005). Building on that, inter-organizational knowledge transfer is likely to be more successful if the two organizations have similar capabilities and cultures, when the practice and knowledge transferred from one organization can be recreated in the other (Wang, 2015). Furthermore, the process of knowledge transfer between a transferor and a recipient can be divided into two parts, whereas in the first part, the transferor communicates knowledge, and in the second part, the recipient evaluates the knowledge and the transferor (Wang, 2015). The recipient can only adopt the knowledge if the transferor gets access to the proper knowledge and can communicate it effectively

(18)

12 and if the recipient evaluates the transferor and the knowledge positively (Oddou, Osland, and Blakeney, 2009).

Furthermore, there have been mixed opinions about organizational characteristics that affect knowledge transfer, such as the organizational size and the organizational age (van Wijk et al., 2008). While Gupta & Govindarajan (2000) and Laursen & Salter (2006) argue for positive correlations between knowledge transfer and organizational size, other authors (Makino & Delios, 1996; Tsang, 2002) have found the correlation non-significant or negative. Similarly, some previous research (Frost, Birkinshaw & Ensign, 2002) has found organizational age to be positively correlated to knowledge transfer since younger organizations do not suffer from inertia, while other research (Gray & Meister, 2004) has not found any strong empirical evidence of such relation. Even though some research has argued that information technologies will enhance the knowledge transfer within and across organizations (Gupta & Govindarjan, 2000), Davenport & Pruskas (1998) imply that the corporate culture must favor these activities for the knowledge transfer to be successful.

Generally, there are two different mechanisms in knowledge transfer: personalization and codification (Davenport & Pruskas, 1998). The former mechanism refers to knowledge that is transferred through person-to-person contacts from the person who developed the knowledge, and the latter mechanism refers to knowledge that is codified and stored in databases, where more people can access the knowledge (Davenport & Pruskas, 1998). Building on that, the personalization mechanism is connected to tacit knowledge and is difficult to transfer since it cannot fully be articulated and transcripted but must be learned from experience, while codification is an explicit knowledge transfer mechanism (Empson, 2001). Even though it would be reasonable to believe that organizations use both mechanisms in their knowledge transfer, Hansen, Nohria & Tierney (1999) showed that 80% of consulting organizations only involve one type of knowledge transfer mechanism in their organizations (Sudhindra, Ganesh & Arshinder, 2017).

2.2.4 Knowledge transfer in the client-consultant relationship

The consulting industry is considered to be included in knowledge-intensive business service (KIBS), where the services provided highly rely on the knowledge and competencies of the service firms (Løwendahl, Revang & Fosstenløkken, 2001). Therefore, Mishe (2018) calls for another definition of knowledge in the management consulting sector, which specifies knowledge as “[...] any relevant intellectual capital, information, learning and personal perspective of a situation, environment, process, doctrine, method of codification of data and information”. Building on that specific definition, consulting knowledge can be characterized into five domains (Sun & Scott, 2005; Mische, 2018):

(19)

13

Table 3. Five domains of knowledge in consulting (Mische, 2018).

Previous research has focused on the intra-organizational knowledge transfer within consulting firms but has not extensively researched inter-organizational knowledge transfer between consultants and clients (Mosonyi et al., 2020). Since the service delivery processes among KIBS firms are highly unstructured and customized, clients must act as co-creators or co-producers of the knowledge-based solutions, both tacit and explicit (Bettencourt, Ostrom, Brown & Roundtree, 2002). One codification method in the client-consultant relationship from a consultant point-of-view is to dissect previous experiences of projects and codify them into explicit knowledge that can be shared and used in other projects, such as market analyzes, interview guides, and work schedules (Davenport & Pruskas, 1998). On the other hand, from a client point-of-view, tacit knowledge such as project objectives, key players, how and why things are done as they are in the client firm, must be personalized for the knowledge transfer to be successful and the relationship to be prosperous (Bettencourt et al., 2002).

The knowledge transfer within the client-consultant relationship is distinctive from other socioeconomic relationships, such as agency theory, where it is assumed that the principal and agent have similar sets of knowledge, but in the client-consultant relationship, the consultant (principal) has a knowledge monopoly and the client (agent) must have relevant skills to interpret the transferred

(20)

14 knowledge effectively (Fincham, 2002). Furthermore, for the knowledge transfer to be successful, the client must demonstrate a willingness to accommodate the desires and expert judgment of the consultant, act as a vocal advocate for the project within the client firm, stay informed of project progress, and reflect a sense of personal dedication and obligation for project success (Bettencourt et al., 2002).

2.3 Identity

2.3.1 The concept of identity

Identity is a widespread concept with roots in many different fields, such as sociology, history, political science, and psychology, but generally has tremendous variability in the conceptual meaning and theoretical definition (Stryker & Burke, 2000). For example, while Calhoun (1994) uses identity to describe the culture and ethnicity of a people, Tajfel (1982) connects identity to describe collectivities or social categories, also known as social identity. Lastly, Stryker & Burke (2000) uses identity to describe how people attach different roles in differentiated societies, also known as role identity. Identity theory and social identity theory have been widely discussed in previous research, where some authors argue that these theories are completely different, while others imply that substantial similarities overlap between the two views (Hogg, Terry & White, 1995). For example, social identity theory discusses personal identity to address categories or groups, while identity theory discusses personal identity to address roles (Stets & Burke, 2000). Building on that, Burke & Stets (2009) implies that personal identity is the view of a person as a distinctive individual such as being more or less (or more) controlling, while social identity is based on individual membership in a group and role identity is based on the structural social positions of individuals such as being a student.

An increasing number of scholars have turned to identity theories to describe how people act in certain situations, which is affected by how they perceive themselves and if their behavior is consistent with that view (Powell & Baker, 2017). While social identity relates to the interpersonal behavior where the identity is affected by collectives and personal identity is associated with the intrapersonal behavior where individual attributes shape the identity, role identity combines the inter-and intrapersonal behaviors and focuses on the individuals’ role-based relationships (Tajfel, 1982; Terry, Hogg & White, 1999). For example, the role identities in a profession provide a ground for business-to-business relationships, such as the client-consultant relationship (Chua, Ingram & Morris, 2008).

(21)

15

2.3.2 Role identity

Previous research of role identity has revealed insights regarding how individuals anticipate (Carter & Mangum, 2020), acquire (Thornton & Nardi, 1975), and exit social roles (Turner, 1990). Additionally, previous research has explored outcomes and influences regarding role distance, role strain (Snoek, 1966), and role conflict (Stryker & Macke, 1978). This thesis applies the theoretical lens of role identity, which is defined as the role a person devises for themselves as a resident of a particular social position or the imaginative view of oneself as being and acting as a resident of that specific position (Carter & Marony, 2018; Carter & Mangum, 2020). Each role identity consists of a combination of conventional and idiosyncratic aspects, where the dominance of any of the sides between these two differs from role-to-role and person-to-person for every individual (McCall & Simmons 1978; Carter & Mangum 2020). Conventional meanings are rooted in the expectations from the social structure and function as cultural guidelines based on how external people expect someone to behave in a specific role (McCall & Simmons, 1978; Carter & Marony, 2018; Carter & Mangum, 2020). The idiosyncratic perspective relates to how the role holder uniquely interprets the role and how an individual's behaviors and meanings differ from expectations of the role (Carter & Marony, 2018; Carter & Mangum, 2020). This means that some interpretations are modified to the extreme from a cultural perspective, while others might add a small amount to the expectations that they have learned (Carter & Mangum 2020). There is still a lack of empirical research to address how the balance between the two role meanings might affect the individual (Carter & Mangum 2020). An example of a role identity that an individual enacts is the role within a specific working position, where the social expectations combined with the individual's unique interpretations create individuals’ role identity for that working position (Carter & Mangum 2020). Role identity has been recognized in terms of how individuals enact them during interactions (Thoits & Virshup, 1997), in terms of relationships, and as an influencer of behaviors and relationships (Burke, 1991). The concept of role identity is a complex construct, as each role is socialized by others and uniquely interpreted by every individual (McCall & Simmons, 1978). In other terms, this means that there is no precise definition of a particular role, as the meanings of enacting a role varies from person-to-person and role-to-role (Carter & Mangum, 2020). Building on the complexity of role identity, Burke & Stets (2009) argues that every individual has several identities, meaning that a person has several identities based upon different meanings. Identity meanings might be wholly aligned with each other or separated, but in some cases, the meanings from the different identities collide with each other (Burke & Stets, 2009). When meanings collide, it causes problems for the individual, as the person then has to choose between which role to enact within the specific situation (Burke & Stets, 2009). An individual's identity has the most significant commitment for will be shown in that particular situation (Burke & Stets, 2009). An example of how people might enact different role identities can be in social gatherings, where colleagues, family, and friends are gathered. In these situations, an individual, who might have certain types of role identities toward each of these people,

(22)

16 might have to choose which identity to enact if these different identities would not be either aligned or completely separated (Burke & Stets, 2009; Carter & Mangum 2020). Furthermore, as of the possible conflicts between identities, role identity is more likely to change than personal and social identities (Carter & Marony, 2018).

The concept of role identity lacks empirical insights regarding how individuals define roles from conventional or idiosyncratic perspectives (Carter & Mangum, 2020).

2.3.3 Role identity in the client-consultant relationship

As previously mentioned in the literature review, role identity is based upon conventional and idiosyncratic meanings and occurs as an individual enacts the role in a specific situation (Carter & Marony, 2018; Carter & Mangum, 2020). The role of consultants and the professional identity have consistently been recognized as complex to formulate (Fincham, 2002). Previous research has discovered different types of role identities in the relationship between consultants and clients (Mosonyi et al., 2020). Some of the different roles identities that consultants enact during the client-consultant relationship are the role of being an expert or professional (Fincham, 2002), having an

enterprising- or heroic-self, being elite (Alvesson & Robertson, 2006), or acting as a change agent

(Wright, Nyberg & Grant, 2012). These roles are argued to emerge when construction of oneself and the organization are intelligibly superior to clients (Alvesson & Robertson 2006), consultants awareness of that strategy and reflexivity is a part of their identity (Cerrutti et al., 2019), and when consultants battle with different identity roles to conduct projects for a noble cause or the greater good (Wright et al., 2012). Despite the designation of the role that a consultant enacts during these interactions, they are all similar from the perspective that the identity does contribute to the expectations from the client and on the consultants themself (O’Mahoney, 2011). These expectations of the consultant might affect the relationship poorly (Gill, 2015) and create mutual anxiety within the client-consultant relationship (Harvey et al., 2017).

According to previous research, clients enact two common types of roles when interacting with consultants: either a passive or an active client role, where both roles have different meanings for how the client interacts with the consultant (Sturdy & Wright, 2011). Table 4 visualizes how clients are perceived and acts during interactions with consultants, both from the passive and active perspective:

(23)

17

Table 4. Images of the passive and active consultancy client (Sturdy & Wright, 2011).

The passive client role is recognized as dependent on the consultant's knowledge, as there is a lack of knowledge within the client organization, which results in the client tending to exclude evaluations of consultants, and becomes vulnerable to consultants’ sales strategies (Sturdy & Wright, 2011). As for the lack of knowledge (Czerniawska, 2002) and passivity, clients tend to accept the implementation of ideas that are trendy at a particular time, despite if it is suitable for their organization or not (Sturdy & Wright, 2011). Therefore, quadrant A represents a low assertion of control over consultants, and quadrant C represents a low assertion of control over ideas (Sturdy & Wright, 2011).

Unlike the passive client, the active client enacts a controlling role within the client-consultant relationship (Karantinou & Hogg, 2009; Sturdy & Wright, 2011). In this role, the client possesses knowledge and experience that utilizes criticism and evaluation regarding the choice of consultants, and the choices consultants make during the consulting process (Sturdy & Wright, 2011). When enacting this role, the client is recognized as both a suitable purchaser of services and co-producer within the project (Hicks, Nair & Wilderom, 2009), such as acting as a project manager together with the consultant (Sturdy & Wright, 2011). Although an active client might be perceived to contribute to a healthier client-consultant relationship, the active role can also result in consultants only being hired for a symbolic perspective to prove a manager’s point (Sturdy & Wright, 2011). Additionally, active client roles might create a resistance to implement strategies produced by the consultant, as externals might pose a threat to the client’s expert identity (Sturdy, 1997). Therefore, quadrant B represents a high assertion of control over consultants, and quadrant D represents a high assertion of control over ideas (Sturdy & Wright, 2011).

Lastly, as conventional meanings are external perceptions of how a specific role is supposed to act (Carter & Marony, 2018; Carter & Mangum, 2020), there is a scope to involve the organizational identity when formulating the role identity in the client-consultant relationship (Mosonyi et al., 2020). Although the interplay between individual and organizational identity is in many cases assumed to be unproblematic (Gill, 2015), previous research has shown that consultants can experience anxiety when they are identified with an elite organizational identity (Gill, 2015; Mosonyi et al., 2020).

2.4 Resourcing processes

Mosonyi et al. (2020) recently conducted a systematic review of 219 articles from the last 28 years of scholarly management consulting. In their research, Mosonyi et al. (2020) revealed an interface between knowledge and identity was discovered, whereas these concepts have previously been described and clarified as two separate themes, but not extensively as a relationship between the two

(24)

18 themes. Mosonyi et al. (2020) argue for knowledge to function as a resource for the identity of consultants, as they identify themselves via the knowledge that they produce and enact their professional roles through it. In a client-consultant interaction, where the consultant is perceived as an expert because of the possessed knowledge, it can threaten the clients’ managerial identity, as the managers might feel incompetent and experience a loss of control in interaction with the consultant (Robertson et al., 2003). Furthermore, if the knowledge is codified and the knowledge transfer is mainly based on explicit knowledge, it might affect the professional identity of the consultants since they might experience that they do not possess any extraordinary competence (Morris, 2001). At an organizational level, the identity of the consultancies is grounded in their shared knowledge base, recruited employees’ superior expertise, and the form and content of organizational knowledge in general (Alvesson & Empson, 2008). This interface is recognized by Mosonyi et al. (2020) as

resourcing processes as both constructs function as a resource for the other. Identity is a resource for

the knowledge cycle, and knowledge is a resource for identity as consultants define themselves from their possessed knowledge (Abbott, 1988). Despite this recognition, more empirical data is needed to understand how the resourcing processes in the knowledge-identity interface affect each other within the client-consultant relationship (Mosonyi et al., 2020).

(25)

19

3. Method

In this chapter, the philosophical stances of the thesis are presented. These stances permeate the methodological choices throughout this chapter, meaning that the research design, research approach, research strategy, and techniques are chosen in relation to our chosen research philosophy. Furthermore, a presentation of the case and the interview structure is provided, as well as research ethics and quality issues.

Figure 2. Methodological choices.

3.1 Research philosophy

Before conducting a study, researchers need to understand philosophical issues, as an understanding of these issues clarifies what research designs and research methods that are suitable for the particular research, which in turn is crucial to contribute to the research field (Easterby-Smith, Thorpe, Jackson, & Jaspersen, 2018).The research philosophy consists of two different parts, ontology and epistemology (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Ontology is philosophical assumptions regarding the nature of reality, and epistemology represents a broad set of assumptions regarding ways of questioning the heart of the world (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). This can be simplified by referring to ontology as the perception of reality and epistemology as the perception of knowledge (Alvesson, & Sköldberg, 2009).

There are four different types of ontologies: realism, internal realism, relativism, and nominalism. Each ontology interprets reality differently, which means that perception of truth varies from internal realism, where only one truth exists, to nominalism, where no truth exists (Easterby-Smith

(26)

20 et al., 2018). In between these two, we find less extreme ways of interpreting reality, where internal realism believes that an unclear truth exists, while relativism advocates for many truths and that facts depend on the observer (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Relativism believes that different individuals' statuses, backgrounds, interests, and preferences affect the interpretation of a particular situation and that people, therefore, have different viewpoints (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Internal realism assumes that there is only one reality, even though it is only possible to gather indirect evidence of that reality (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2009).

There are two contrasting views of epistemology: positivism and social constructionism (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Positivism is more related to quantitative research methods such as generalization, operalization, and hypothesis, as it perceives the social world as external and its properties measurable (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Social constructionism stems from the belief that reality is socially constructed and should not be perceived objectively (Saunders et al., 2009). According to social constructionism, it is necessary to understand individuals' different experiences rather than search for fundamental laws that determine specific behaviors (Bryman & Bell, 2017; Easterby-Smith et al., 2018).

Our research aimed to understand how role identity affects knowledge transfer within the client-consultant relationship. As role identity is interpreted differently by every individual as of its conventional and idiosyncratic meanings, it is crucial to be open-minded and accept that there are many truths of how role identity might play a role when transferring knowledge within the client-consultant relationship. Therefore, we argue that the interplay between role identity and knowledge transfer cannot be defined by one truth, which is why this research ontology is of a relativistic sort (Saunders et al., 2009). Arguably, this research relates to nominalism (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018) as every role identity is unique. Still, we believe that people observe roles differently as of the different meanings within a role identity, rather than establishing their own truth about a role. Therefore a nominalistic philosophy is not suitable for this research. Building on this, we aimed to understand consultants’ and clients’ experiences from previous interactions and how they believe that their meanings and knowledge might affect the client-consultant relationship and less on fundamental laws that explain behaviors. This research created theoretical abstraction by increasing the understanding of the role identity plays in knowledge transfer within the client-consultant relationship as qualitative data will be collected from a smaller number of clients and consultants. Regarding these aspects and our choice of ontology, the suitable epistemology for this research is social constructionism (Bryman & Bell, 2017; Easterby-Smith et al., 2018).

With our subjective epistemology (Guba & Lincoln, 1994), we have analyzed how consultants’ and clients’ role identities that they enact during interactions in the client-consultant relationship play a

(27)

21 part in the knowledge transfer between the two parts. Lastly, to make appropriate methodological choices, our chosen research philosophy influenced the research design of this study.

3.2 Research design & approach

This thesis aimed to gain a greater understanding of the client-consultant relationship and what role identity is in the knowledge transfer, which was presented in the introduction. While role identity, knowledge transfer, and the client-consultant relationship as three separate fields have been extensively researched in the past, the combination of these is leaving gaps in the research. Therefore, the research design of our thesis will be exploratory, which is particularly useful when researchers want to clarify the precise nature of a phenomenon and access it in a new light (Saunders et al., 2009). Unlike descriptive research designs, where the researcher aims to portray and describe phenomena as it currently is, and explanatory research designs, which can be described as a follow-up to descriptive research, the exploratory study wants to move into fields that have not been researched yet to establish a foundation for further investigation (Saunders et al., 2009). Since we aimed to investigate with an exploratory design, qualitative research is considered to be the most suitable since it allowed us to enable unstandardized interview questions (Cooper & Schindler, 2008), whereas quantitative research is limited in the sense that only standardized questions and answers can be gathered (Saunders et al., 2009).

Furthermore, the social constructionist philosophy is generally connected to an inductive research approach since it aims to generate theory through qualitative data collection from small samples, whereas a deductive research approach often is based on the positivist philosophy and aims to test large samples of quantitative data which is built on existing theories (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). However, according to Dubois & Gadde (2002), there is a third research approach called abduction, which is typically useful when conducting a case study where the researcher works iteratively between empirical observations and theory to expand the understanding for both empirical and theory phenomena. Therefore, an abductive research approach can be used to conclude a discovery that needs to be explained and existing knowledge (Rambaree, 2018). We used an abductive research approach because both inductive and deductive research follow a somewhat linear research process. Thus, new insights that emerge during the research process are ignored when using a deductive or an inductive research approach, which we did not want (Dubois & Gadde, 2002).

3.3 Research strategy

The choice of research strategy must align with the ontological and epistemological philosophies in the study (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018), which in our research was relativism and social constructionism with an exploratory research design. Since we wanted to analyze knowledge transfer in the client-consultant relationship in a new light through a role identity lens, a case study strategy

(28)

22 was adopted, which involves doing an empirical investigation of a phenomenon within the real-life context and is of interest if the researcher wants to gain a rich understanding of the processes being enacted within that context (Morris & Wood, 1991; Saunders et al., 2009). Case studies can generate answers to questions such as “What?”, “Why?” and “How?” (Saunders et al., 2009), which is in line with our research question of “How role identity affects knowledge transfer within the client-consultant relationship?”.There are two different case studies: a single case study and a multiple case study, whereas the former refers to one single case as the main data collection, and a multiple case study has one or more cases (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Generally, researchers with a research design of multiple case studies come from a positivist epistemological point-of-view, whereas researchers with a social constructionist epistemological point-of-view use single case studies (Saunders et al., 2009; Easterby-Smith et al., 2018), which influenced our choice of conducting a single-case study.

Furthermore, our single case study is regarded as a holistic single case study, which means that we do not consider any relevant sub-units since it would not help us fulfill the purpose of the thesis (Yin, 2009). The unit of analysis is the client-consultant relationship, and we did not want to analyze either the consultants or the clients separately on a deeper level, but more how they act in the relationship. Therefore, this type of case study was the most valuable for us in our research since it allowed us to gather data from the client side and the consultant side without losing focus of our purpose and understanding of the phenomenon in the real-life context. However, according to Yin (2009), holistic single case studies can be problematic if the researchers do not study a specific phenomenon and stay on a more abstract level. We argue that this was not an issue in our study since the phenomenon of role identity and its impact on knowledge transfer within the client-consultant relationship was always the main focus. Another concern regarding case studies overall is that they are assumed to be time-consuming. Still, according to Yin (2009), researchers can create a study of high quality regardless of how much time they spend doing the research. Saunders et al. (2009) imply that a cross-sectional case study can be done by studying a particular phenomenon at a specific time. Hence, we acknowledge the challenges of a holistic, cross-sectional single case study and still argue that this strategy was best suited for our research.

3.4 Case description

The researcher must be transparent with the strategy of the research for the results to be believable, including how the data access was granted, how the selection of informants came about, how the data was created and recorded, and how the data was transformed into ideas and results (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018).

Atea is an IT consultancy firm that assists companies with implementing both hardware and software services regarding IT. Regarding software services, Atea is providing companies with

(29)

23 services within information management, data centers, digital workplaces, cloud services, and analytics. Atea helps companies with different technologies, such as business intelligence, the internet of things, artificial intelligence, and machine learning. Atea is working towards the private and public sectors, with most of their clients being within the public sector. Their clients within the public sector are municipalities, schools, and healthcare. Furthermore, Atea believes that they have three different areas of responsibility: among themselves, in their businesses with clients, and as a leading actor towards society (Atea, 2020). During the autumn of 2020, one of the authors performed a three-month internship at Atea, handling issues regarding digital transformation and the client-consultant relationship. During this period, the idea of this thesis came about, as the Atea representative and the author had acknowledged barriers that caused problems within the client-consultant relationship. The author and the representative at Atea discussed different interesting topics for research. According to our criteria, the representative at Atea granted access to interviewees, which are displayed later in this method section.

During the interviews with the respondents, the standard processes of consulting were described (figure 3). The method displays how a typical project between consultants and clients is performed, starting with clients contacting the consultancy with a problem. In the project anchoring stage, consultants are trying to figure out the foundations of the client's issues for the consultancy to put together a team of consultants that fits the problem description and is considered appropriate to provide a solution to the client. After that, the consultants implement the solution and hand it over to the client, where the knowledge transfer is assumed to take part.

Figure 3. The standard consulting process.

3.4.1 Sample

Researchers need to decide on appropriate sampling strategies to collect valid and valuable data (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). There are two different types of sampling designs, probability- and nonprobability research designs (Bryman & Bell, 2017; Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). These two differ

(30)

24 in many aspects and are both valuable to us regarding the purpose of the study (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Probability sampling designs utilize preciseness about the relationship between the population and the sample size, and it allows researchers to quantify the collected data and reduce uncertainty regarding claims of the data (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). With a non-probability sample design, it is more difficult to assure a relationship between the sample and the population as of the smaller data subject (Bryman & Bell, 2017; Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). The most significant advantage of using a non-probability sample design is that it allows the researcher to be more precise in choosing interviewees and assure that they fulfill necessary criteria that make them suitable as data subjects (Bryman & Bell, 2017; Easterby-Smith et al., 2018).

Before selecting our case company and interview subjects, we had a clear idea of which criteria they needed to fulfill to collect pertinent data that could make us answer our research question. To do this, we needed to be precise in our selection of interviewees, which resulted in the non-probability sample design, purposive sampling. Our chosen sampling design is the most suitable sample design for our study to answer our research question by allowing us to gather data from predetermined criteria as a purposive sampling strategy is a reasonable strategy when conducting a case study (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornill, 2016). A significant challenge with purposive sampling design is the risk of biasness, as only people with personal interests might participate (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2007). We have chosen consultants from different local offices with diverse expertise and clients from different companies to avoid this. After our contact person at Atea provided us with our first interviewees, we used snowball sampling (Bryman & Bell, 2017; Easterby-Smith et al., 2018), by asking consultants to find relevant clients for our study, which they previously had interacted with.

To ensure that our case company could provide us with suitable interviewees, we presented our criteria for Atea before we were provided with contact persons. Additionally, before conducting interviews with the interviewees, we controlled that the subjects' profiles matched our criteria. As of the great size of Ateas’ organization, we have collected data subjects with a great diversity in expertise and location, both regarding consultants and clients.

3.4.1.1 Criteria for sample selection

To be precise in our purposive sampling strategy, we formulated three criteria that our sample needed to fulfill.

First criterion: Engaging in client-consultant relationship

This criterion was crucial that the interviewees fulfilled. Otherwise, they would not provide us with insights regarding their experiences and interactions within the client-consultant relationship.

Knowledge transfer &amp;amp; role identity : A case study within the client-consultant relationship