Introduction The connection between knowledge and innovation appears to be simple and easily perceived. People use knowledge to drive their industry or personal achievements forward. However, in the business sphere, the use of one’s experience has a much more complicated process – people should not only understand what the concept of ‘knowledge’ is but also learn how to disseminate and utilize it. According to Cook and Brown (1999), two major views of knowledge exist, linking it to possession and practice. The movement between these stages is what develops different types of people’s understanding. However, this process uncovers new issues for companies, while simultaneously offering many benefits for development. Here, the notion of teamwork arises – people working together bound by one goal. In this case, knowledge and innovation possess a connection that is determined by the information as well as its sharing (Fay et al. 2015). Therefore, one may assume that team members encounter many challenges on their path to innovation. Workers of a business do not have full control of their environment due to organizational structure, relationships, or personal ideologies (Chuang, Jackson & Jiang 2016). Moreover, the contemporary formation of many companies leads to new problems of employing digital communicational and operational channels. To maintain a strong connection between employees’ knowledge and the industry’s need for innovation, human resource management (HRM) is highlighted as a set of approaches and practices that encourage communication and growth. Views and Types of Knowledge To understand how knowledge is connected to innovation, one needs to understand how the former can be defined. The two views of knowledge were summarised by Cook and Brown (1999, p. 383), who described the first type as ‘knowledge as a possession’ and the second one as ‘knowledge as practice’. Here, possession denotes the existence of some facts in one’s mind – a person can be considered knowledgeable if they have information is some or other form. For example, if a mechanic knows how to fix a car, this individual has a particular portion of knowledge but does not imply that this approach to fixing a car is the only ultimate solution. Interestingly, four types of knowledge can be attributed to this concept of ‘having’. All knowledge can be separated into individual and group – it is clear that some persons possess unique expertise, while other facts or theories are common. At the same time, tacit and explicit knowledge exists; tacit knowledge refers to some findings which an individual has but cannot define or articulate to others since they are based on personal experience, observations, or internal logic (Newell et al. 2009; Nonaka 2007). In contrast, explicit knowledge is put in understandable terms and available for sharing in an oral or written form. In businesses, tacit group knowledge is essential as it usually forms the organizational culture and dictates most operations and relations (Nonaka 2007). People employ both types in their daily life, which leads to the second way of interpreting knowledge – as practice. In practice, knowledge is seen as an act of using learned information. Using the previous example, a mechanic with practical knowledge knows how to fix a car and does it. As can be seen, this means that this person engages in practicing the acquired knowledge. Cook and Brown (1999) describe the practice as an acti