The New Edge in Knowledge: How Knowledge Management Is Changing the Way We Do Business by Carla O''''Dell and Cindy Hubert_13 docx

Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc... Copying or distributing m print or electronic forms without written PY = «“ = permi

Trang 1

is advantageous for organizations to be able to have the largest transmission capacity and the fastest transmission speed that they can afford to transmit large amounts of data, and bandwidth-hungry video, graphics and sound Addition- ally, the extensive use of the Web for e-commerce requires the ability to produce images quickly and relies on secure, stable and swift communications Theconcept of an intellectual bandwidth has been discussed in conjunction with

an organization’s ability to create value “The effectiveness with which an organization can create valucis bounded by its potential intellectual bandwidth,

which is its collective potential to acquire information, make sense of it, and

take action with respect to a goal.” (Nunamaker et al., 2001, p.5) Opining on this concept and building on previous literature on knowledge creation, absorptive capacity, and innovation, the author suggests that any organization can gauge its potential to create knowledge by considering “media” or enablers influencing the rate of knowledge creation These key enablers, listedin Figure

|, are leadership, culture, knowledge-creators and technology and communi-

cation (Belardo & Belardo, 2002; Cohen & Levinthal, 1990; Von Krogh, et

al., 2000)

Leadership

“Knowledge creation is often chaotic and disorderly but if managed correctly

can result in the creation of new skills and competencies” (Bhatt, 2000)

Trang 2

Leadership plays a critical role inidentifying the knowledge that an organization will acquire and use and should define the organization’ s mission in terms of

knowledge (Zack, 2003) Leaders determine whom the organization listens to

externally and to what degree this knowledge is disseminated within the organization Leaders must understand the difference between the overt demonstrations of organizational behavior and the inherent thinking that leads

to such demonstrations and develop the strategic architecture to reengineer the organizational genetic code, asit were (Hamel & Prahalad, 1994) They must also examine the basis for rewarding employee performance and a fine balance must be struck between rewarding units or teams for the sharing of knowledge and rewarding individuals in cases where their tacit knowledge leads to innovations Jack Welch of General Electric Corporation and Leif Edvinsson

of Skandia Insurance Company, Ltd are examples of leaders that helped make these organizations innovation forerunners

Culture

“Culture shapes the processes by which new organizational knowledge—with its accompanying uncertainties—is created, legitimated, and distributed.” (DeLong & Fahey, 2000, p 126}

Culture is a reflection of the values and practices of the organization; it can serve

to facilitate or restrict the flow of knowledge While organizations may have difficulty distinguishing the true culture from the espoused culture, people learn quickly by observation what values and practices are acceptable, despite what

is formally advertised by management (Schein, 1999) Strategies for change need to be grounded in a clear understanding of the true organizational culture and the mental models that shape beliefs Itis important that the models that shape individuals beliefs about the organization include a firm conviction that it encourages experimentation and risk-taking and does not punish failures, because itrealizes that all are essential parts of new competency development

(Belardo & Belardo, 2002; Zack, 2003) Chaparral Steelis anexample of an

organization that recognizes that not ail experimentation leads to successful outcomes Individuals are not penalized when them efforts fail; the information

is used as alearning tool

PY = «“ =

permission of Idea Group Inc is prohibited.

Trang 3

292 Miller

While culture has a significant influence in the management of knowledge, the ability of an organization to put together teams of individuals with diverse but complementary experiences can serve to ignite sparks of creativity where they might otherwise lie dormant Socialization and activities where individuals can informally share knowledge with teammates and other colleagues is vital

(Brown & Duguid, 2001; Davenport & Prusak, 1998; Von Krogh et al.,

2000) The development of micro-communities and virtual communities, which allow individuals to meet across geographic regions and functional titles, is essential to the development of knowledge

Ixnowledge Creators

“Knowledge workers cannot be bullied into creativity or information sharing; and the traditional forms of compensation and organizational hierarchy do not motivate people sufficiently for them to develop the strong relationships required for knowledge creation on a continuing basis.” (Von Krogh et al.,

2000, p 4)

The capability of an organization to build on existing knowledge is affected by

an organization’ s intellectual capacity, whichis largely a function of the level of

prior related knowledge (Cohen & Levinthal, 1990; Kogut & Zander, 1992)

tis important that the organization employ individuals whose experience will

enable them to recognize and assimilate new sources of information, produce

something unique and innovative or contribute to tearm productivity

Knowledge creators are knowledge workers; they are individuals who have a role in seeking out knowledge sources Knowledge creators recognize the potential of information to be reused in novel ways and are able to create new orimproved products and services by working individually orin groups with other knowledge creators Gatekeepers are knowledge workers who play an important role mn the organization, for they constantly span the external environment for sources of new information Organizations that realize the importance of having individuals who function as gatekeepers and individuals who can absorb this information and see new possibilities will actively seek these characteristics in those they employ They will provide intellectual sustenance needed to allow this potential to develop more fully among their employees (Davenport & Prusak, 1998) They will foster an environment that

Trang 4

facilitates relationship formation and collaboration Siemens’s “Xenia,” City of

Knowledge, is anexample of a vehicle for people to meet and exchange ideas and solutions

Technology & Communication

facilitate teammaking, elicit tacit knowledge or build trust (Belardo & Belardo, 2002; Davenport & Prusak, 1998) As knowledge creation has more to do

with “relationships and commiunity-building than databases ” “Investments in information technology alone cannot make the knowledge-creating company happen” (Von Krogh et al., 2000) Technology should be used to design systems to support collaboration and communication, and to facilitate the flow

of imformation throughout the organization There are knowledge management tools and technologies that support the identification of new knowledge opportunities, such as sophisticated Group Ware, Web retrieval software and

recommender systems (Resnick & Varian, 1997; Stenmark, 2001) However,

unless the information system is user-friendly and is perceived as beneficial, there will be little incentive to use it (Davis, 1989) The right technology can increase business performance by bringing about reduced work-coordination

costs, streamlined work processes, and increased interorganizational relationships Sambamurthy et al., 2003)

Communication should be multi-dimensional, thatis, formal, informal, social,

oral and written, and it must mitiate at all levels within the organization The ability to express and share ideas must be encouraged and fostered When people trust that what they say will not result in negative criticism or retribution, they will feel free to communicate their ideas (DeLong & Fahey, 2000) When communication is encouraged and varied opportunities to foster dialogue are

PY = «“ =

Trang 5

Characteristics of Organizations with

High Intellectual Bandwidth

Organizations with high intellectual bandwidth for knowledge creation are regularly inthe forefront of imovation and share certain characteristics in the areas of leadership, culture, and technology andcommiunication Organizations seeking to innovate need to identify opportunities for improvement and they should determine how many of the following characteristics, which are found

in innovative organizations, are present in their organization

Leadership

® Creates aclear, concise positive vision thatis articulated throughout the organization

e Fosters the view of the organization as a knowledge-based organization

e Identifies knowledge gaps and develops processes to close these gaps

e Champions innovation and strategically aligns knowledge management activities with organizational performance and goals

e (Creates the right contextto foster dialogue and communication across job

functions

e Recognizes and advocates environmental boundary spanning

e Develops andchampions areward system that recognizes and rewards information sharing and discourages information hoarding

Culture

* Anatmosphere of trust permeates the organization

* thical behavioris the norm and expected at all costs

Trang 6

* Experimentation and risk-taking are encouraged and openly supported

* Mistakes are considered opportunities for learning and improvement, are openly discussed and solutions are shared

* Diversity is fostered, including diversity in learning styles, and is exemph- fied in core competency training

* Customer input at all stages is encouraged and solicited

* Periodic assessments are done within the organization to assess its capability to foster innovation and knowledge creation

e Information flows are multi-directional

e Technology is user friendly, flexible and open

e Recognition of diversity is supported in language translation tools and communication methods

Trang 7

Conclusion

Knowledge creation doe not occur by chance; it must be carefully orches- trated Organizations wishing to improve their knowledge creating ability must value the factors that support innovation and place less reliance on technology

to resolve problems or create opportunities Organizations must develop the characteristics necessary to become a learning organization andremain ina perpetual state oflearning: from the external forces that influence its operations and from the internal forces, which shape who listens to whom and what Organizations need to develop the leadership characteristics, culture, and technology that will support an innovative organizational personality and employ individuals with the experience and expertise needed to enable the desired state to become areality Moreover, they must identify the constraints

to organizational innovation and develop methods for overcoming them Organizations must continually reassess their intellectual bandwidth for know!1- edge creation

Trang 8

References

Alavi, M., & Leidner, D.E (2001) Knowledge management and knowledge and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and re-

search issues MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107-136

Baum, G.C., Ittner, D.L., Low, T.S., & Malone, M.S (2000, April 3)

Introducing the new value creation index Forbes ASAP

Belardo, 8 (2001) Learning organizations and knowledge management:

A conventional and alternate view Lecture slides Albany

Belardo,S., & Belardo, A.W (2002) Innovation through learning Albany: Whitston Publishing Company, Inc

Bhatt, G.D, (2000) Information dynamics, learning and knowledge creation in organizations The Learning Organization, /(2), 89-90

Brown, J.S., & Duguid, P 2001) Knowledge and organization: A social- practice perspective Organization Science, 12(2), 198-227

Cohen, W.M., & Levinthal, D.A (1990), Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation Administrative Science Quarterly,

35, 128-152

Davenport, T.H., & Prusak, L.(1998) Working knowledge Boston: Harvard

Business School Press

Davis, F.D (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology M/S Quarterly, 13(3)

DeLong, D., & Fahey, L (2000) Diagnosing cultural barriers to knowledge management The Academy of Management Executive, 14(4), 113-

Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C.K (1994) Competing for the future Harvard Business Review, 72(95), 64

PY = «“ =

Trang 9

298 Miller

Huber, G (1991) Organizational learning: The contributing processes in

literature Organization Science, 2, 88-115

Kogut, B., & Zander, U (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combinative

capabilities, and the replication of technology Organization Science, 3(3), 383-397,

Krasner, J 001, October 13) Tech icon Polaroid files for bankruptcy company slashes workers, benefits The Boston Globe, A4

Nestor-Baker, N.S., & Hoy, W.K (2001) Tacit knowledge of school superintendents: Its nature, meaning and content Fducational Adminis-

tration Quarterly, 371), 86-129,

Nevis, E.C., DiBella, A.J., & Gould, 1.M 11995) Understanding organiza-

tions as learning systems Sloan Management Review, 73-85

Nonaka, [., & Takeuchi, H (1995) The knowledge-creating company:

How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation New

York: Oxford University Press

Nunamaker J.P., Briggs, R.O., & de Vreede, G.R (2001) Value creation

technology nG.W & G.D Dickson (Eds.), Information technology and the future enterprise: New models for managers (pp 102-124) New York: Prentice-Hall

Polyani, M (1998) The tacit dimension In L Prusak (Ed.), Knowledge in

organizations (pp 135-146) Boston: Butterworth-Heineman

Porter, M (1998) Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining supertor performance The Free Press

Resnick, P., & Varian, H.R (1997) Recommender systems Communica- tions of the ACM, 40(3), 36-58

Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj, A., & Grover, V (2003) Shaping agility through digital options: Reconceptualizing the role of information technology incontemporary firms MiS Quarterly, 27(2), 237-263

Schein, E.H (1999) The corporate culture survival guide: Sense and nonsense about culture change San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Stenmark, D (2001) Leveraging tacit knowledge Journal of Management

information Systems, 17(3), 9-24

Unknown Forbes Magazine

Von Krogh, G., Ichijo, K., & Nonaka, I (2000) Enabling knowledge

creation New York: Oxford University Press

Trang 10

Zack, M.H (1999) Developing a knowledge strategy California Manage-

Trang 11

300 Cook & Cook

Chapter XIV

Jack 3 Cook Rochester Institute of Technology, USA

Laura Cook State University of New York at Geneseo, USA

is creating an environment that encourages individuals to share their knowledge

Trang 12

Introduction

Knowledge management (KM) is critical to organizations today Completely andeffectively documenting knowledge lessens the chance that an organization

will fail Successful KM turns real-life work experiences, hidden practices,

facts and know-how into an organizational resource Peter Drucker first pointed out that the “U.S had shifted from an economy of manufactured goods

to a ‘knowledge economy’” (Stewart et al., 2001, p 41) He stated that,

“knowledge is the most important resource — more important than labor, capital and land—and, indeed, the only meaningful resource today” (Gore & Gore,

1999, p.$555) James Quinn explains that “knowledge is the new power base

of the modern corporation and that the value of most products and services depends primarily on how ‘knowledge-based intangibles’ —such as techno- logical know-how, product design, marketing presentation, understanding of the customer, personal creativity and innovation—can be developed” (Gore & Gore, 1999, p S555), If knowledge-based intangibles represent the greatest share of the value of most products and services, what are companies doing to promote sharing of knowledge? Realizing the growing importance of managing knowledge, progressive corporations proactively learn how to better capture knowledge By identifying what knowledge is vital to securing and sustaiming a competitive advantage, organizations can make the first step towards KM SUCCESS

This chapter explores how to take an organizational approach to knowledge sharing Strategies to gain a competitive advantage through effective KM are given A survey was administered to gauge employees’ willingness to share knowledge and those results are discussed In addition, strategies that promote knowledge sharing are given

Solutions through Behavior versus Technology

Technology no longer provides acompetitive advantage, since everyone has it and uses it However, knowledge can continually bring an advantage if the Knowledge base and knowledge activities are continuously maintained and enhanced (Awad & Ghaziri, 2004) Mostknowledge management initiatives fall short of their goals (Desouza, 2003), largely due to taking atechnologist perspective rather than a humanistic or balanced perspective (Desouza, 2003) Understanding how people are innately motivated to apply their personal

PY = «“ =

Định dạng
Số trang	25
Dung lượng	286,07 KB