Multidisciplinary Nature of Knowledge Management - Coursework Example

Running head: Knowledge Management Your name Course name Professors’ name Date Chapter 1: Introduction to Knowledge Management Knowledge management can be defined as a purposeful and orderly coordination of organization’s people, technology, processes, and organizational structure with a view of adding value through reuse and innovation. This is realised by creating, sharing, and applying knowledge. Additionally, valuable lessons learned and best practises ought to be injected into corporate memory to bolster organizational learning. Presently, the creation and diffusion of knowledge is critical in achieving competitiveness. Knowledge is constantly gaining recognition as a product and intellectual asset. At the same time, knowledge has some paradoxical characteristics outlined as follows: Knowledge is not consumed when used Knowledge is not lost when transferred Knowledge is abundant but usage ability is scarce At the end of a day, organization’s valuable knowledge walks out the door It is vital to note that emergence of internet and websites have availed unlimited information, which acts as a source of knowledge. Organizations are now moving away from labour intensive manufacturing to knowledge-based where few people are needed to do several tasks. Moreover, initial organizational hierarchies are being substituted with knowledge work that requires teamwork. There is no doubt therefore that the current knowledge age is characterised by learning and action based on the best available information. An organization seeking to succeed in the present challenging organizational environment needs to learn from past mistakes. The objectives of knowledge management are summarised as follows: Ease transition from retiring employees to successors who are employed to fill the positions left vacant. Reduce loss of corporate memory following attrition and retirement Identify essential resources and critical areas of knowledge necessary for an organization Strategize on how to curb possibility of losing intellectual capital. Multidisciplinary Nature of KM Knowledge management captures diverse fields including organizational and cognitive science, education and training, literature, collaborative technology, technical writing and journalism, and communication studies. This indicates that KM is strongly rooted on varied fields, both art and science consequently presenting a familiar foundation for any person to understand and practise KM. As an example, a person coming from a journalism background can use such skill to capture knowledge from experts and convert it to organizational stories that are stored in corporate memory. Importance of KM Four key areas have necessitated application of knowledge management: Organizations are becoming global in nature Technology is advancing which have enhanced connectivity. It is the expectation that people can now e present virtually and respond within the shortest time. Knowledge management is also necessary given the mobility of workforce where a person is not expected to work for a specific company for the entire career The pace and intensity of workload is increasing which calls for knowledgeable workers who can keep pace with the speed and workload. Chapter 3: Knowledge Management Models The Von Krogh and Roos Model of Organizational Epistemology This model gives a distinction between individual and social knowledge. From the cognitive perspective of organizational epistemology, organizational knowledge is a self-organizing system where human beings are transparent to information from outside and use such information to build on mental models. Organization therefore picks information from the environment and processes it locally just like the human brain. By utilising information search, alternative courses of actions are obtained. At the same time, cognitive competence of an organization varies directly with individual cognitive resources. On the other hand, connectionist approach is against a view that the brain sequentially processes symbols but it perceives wholeness, global properties, patterns, synergies, and gestalt. In this scenario, learning rules oversee how the various components of the whole network are interconnected. Connectivity approach further recognises internal source of information where individuals are interconnected nodes allowing acquisition of knowledge after an interactive process. This means that knowledge is present both in the individual minds and in connections among these persons. Von Kroch and Roos support this connectionist approach where knowledge resides in individuals and at a social level. It is the responsibility of organizations to put knowledge enablers for stimulating individual knowledge, group sharing of knowledge, and mechanism to retain valuable knowledge-based content. The Nonaka and Takeuchi Knowledge Spiral Model From the research done by Nonaka and Takeuchi on success of Japanese companies, organizational innovation emanates from highly subjective insights described in the form of metaphors, slogans, or symbols. This model is based on holistic model of knowledge creation and the management of serendipity. To create knowledge and subsequently lead to innovation, tacit knowledge and the individual/group/organizational knowledge is indispensible. In a bid to enhance grasp of this model, Nonaka and Takeuchi presented knowledge conversion model capturing socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization processes. The model recognises knowledge creation as spiral in nature, which depends on continuous and dynamic interaction between tacit and explicit knowledge. In this case, knowledge spiral is continuous activity of knowledge flow, sharing, and conversion by individuals, communities, and organization. The Choo Sense-Making KM Model The model emphasises sense making, knowledge creation, and decision-making. Choo Sense-Making KM Model focuses on selection of information elements and their subsequent injection into organizational actions. After absorbing information from the environment, an organization takes action. Briefly, external stimulus is necessary in all phases of sense making, knowledge creation, and decision-making. Sense making is simply an attempt to derive meaning of stimuli from external environment and consists of ecological change, enactment, selection, and retention processes. The phase of knowledge creation is responsible for widening spectrum for decision making by providing knowledge and new competencies. The Wiig Model for Building and using knowledge According to this model, knowledge will be useful and valuable if it is organized depending on its intended application. Dimensions including completeness, connectedness, congruency, and perspective and purpose are necessary in the model. The model further presents levels of internalization starting with novice, beginner, competent, expert, and finally mastery at the advanced level. Besides, Wiig Model highlights three forms of knowledge i.e. public knowledge, shared expertise, and personal knowledge that combines with types of knowledge to present a KM matrix. In summary, Wiig Model suggests hierarchy of knowledge consisting of public, shared, and personal knowledge. The Boisot I-Space KM Model This is based on key concept of information good. The model gives a distinction of data and information by stating that information is what an observer extracts from data by using prior knowledge. Movement of information good is facilitated by sharing context and coding scheme. In relation to this, Boisot proposes two key points. The first one is ease of constructing and converting data into information, which then increases its ability to diffuse. Secondly is the existence of shared context of structured data to increase diffusion. Boisot Model can be viewed as a three dimensional cube with activities such as coding, abstracting, diffusing, absorbing, impacting and scanning contributing to organizational learning. The model effectively links content, information, and knowledge management. Complex Adaptive System Models of KM Complex adaptive systems consist of independent agents that interact with each other closely. In the complex adaptive systems, intelligent part comprises of people empowered to self-organize but maintains their position in the corporate hierarchy. Intelligence in an organization facilitates innovation, learning, adaptation, and quick response to unprecedented situations. The key processes in ICAS KM model are; understanding, creating ideas, solving problems, making decisions, and taking actions to achieve desired results. The European Foundation for Quality Management KM Model This model examines way in which knowledge management is utilised to reach organizational goals thus drawing a strong relationship between KM processes and expected organizational results. Components of this model are leadership, people, policy and strategy, partnership and resources, and performance. This means that knowledge management plays a role of enabling an organization achieve its goals. The Inukshuk KM Model This model was developed to aid Canadian government departments to manage its knowledge. After reviewing major models, five key enablers of technology, leadership, culture, measurement, and process were extracted. This model was chosen in Canada mainly because of its familiarity among the people, it emphasises role played by the people, and it reflects divergence in KM in various organizations. Implication of the Models Models enhance understanding of separate pieces of puzzle and the ensemble that they make. It supplements concept analysis approach Chapter 7: Role of Organizational Culture Corporate culture can be defined as a set of understandings i.e. norms, values, attitudes, beliefs, and paradigms, shared by members of a community. Its creation and integration in people’s lives is unconscious thus, people may not know that the aforementioned understandings are standardised assumptions, which should be passed to next generations. Types of cultures One dimension used to create distinct type of culture is sociability that measures friendliness. People in a high sociable culture behave friendly to each other without expecting anything in return. Sociability indicates high people orientation, high team orientation, and focus is on process as opposed to outcome. The second dimension is solidarity that measures task orientation. Under a high solidarity, people can work together towards a common goal. These two dimensions produce four types of organizational culture namely communal culture, networked culture, mercenary culture, and fragmented culture. A communal culture can guarantee its members a sense of belonging but is also task driven. Leaders under communal culture are inspirational and charismatic but exert too much influence consequently denying other members their say. A networked culture is characterised by members being treated as friends and loved ones thus willingness to help each other. A disadvantage to this type is inability of people to criticize poor performance owing to the fact that people are so kind to each other. A mercenary culture focuses on meeting strict goals and those who are unable to do that are treated inhumanely. Lastly is a fragmented culture where a sense of belonging and identification with an organization is weak. Culture at the Foundation of KM Corporate culture is needed for smooth flow of critical knowledge and information in an organization. To succeed in management of knowledge a culture of knowledge sharing should be built. This is where people work together, collaborates, share, and are rewarded for doing that. Knowledge sharing culture is made possible by communication and coordination between groups. In this scenario, experts would not keep knowledge to themselves but share it across different levels of organizational hierarchy. Organizational Maturity Model Maturity models can be traced back to software engineering where it has been defined as a model that gives features of a good process. Although the capability maturity model, CMM, was developed to assist in software development, the model can be extended to cover Knowledge Management processes to assist in assessing current level of organizational readiness for KM. As a form of maturity model, Infosys model associates some key results with the level of default, reactive, aware, convinced, and sharing. This model is closely associated with specific knowledge behaviours that can be distinguished at organizational, group, and individual levels. The CoP maturity model presents a plan to move communities to the next level. This model shows that a community should have attained the maturing and stewardship of knowledge levels before creating value for members and the whole community. Chapter 11: Organizational Learning and Organizational Memory Organizational learning is defined as grasping knowledge of what worked and what did not work in the past and transferring this experiential knowledge to present and future workers. This shows that organizational learning improves an organization by availing innovation for reuse and by taking appropriate steps to curb repeat of past mistakes. There are five key attributes that a learning organization should have. They include mental models, shared vision, personal mastery, team learning, and system thinking. Frameworks to Access Organisational Learning and Organizational Memory These frameworks evaluate organizational readiness in terms of organizational learning processes, organizational memory containers, and enablers i.e. technology and culture. To build the learning capacity of an organization, speed of learning, depth of learning, and breadth of learning are critical dimensions to be considered. The Management of Organizational Memory Organizational memory serves the purpose of capturing, organizing, disseminating, and recycling or rather reusing knowledge that has been created by employees. Organizational memory not only aids in accumulating and preserving knowledge but also enhances sharing. It further increases transparency of the organization as well as perception of transparency. However, there are a number of barriers to an effective organizational memory system, which falls under cultural and technical categories. Learning in an organization can take the form of top-down learning or bottom-up learning. In the bottom up approach, employees actually participate in doing tasks while the top don approach is where management requires employees to grasp certain knowledge. Lessons learned is evident in bottom up approach, which filters out important employee experiences. The steps followed in this lesson-learned process are collection, verification, storage, and dissemination. A major milestone facing organizations now is prevention of knowledge loss following employee attrition and transferring knowledge to others. This kind of challenges is often referred to as knowledge continuity. To prevent this loss, an organization ought to concentrate on tacit knowledge that resides in individuals and groups. Traditionally, organizations employed coaching, mentorship, and job shadowing. On the contrary, an organization can avail tangible legacy materials that have been produced, shared, and stored in intellectual capital store. A three-tiered approach to knowledge capture and transfer identifies critical intellectual knowledge that is present in individual, community, and organizational levels. The long run effect is that an organization will be able to generate and maintain competitive advantages, barriers to entry, and continued innovation and learning. Chapter 13: Future Challenges for KM Political Issues Relating to Internet Search Engines Search engine can only produce limited results while the rest is returned simply because of issue to do with information overload. Some websites are also automatically excluded due to political and technical issue surrounding internet information. Elements inhibiting information search must be considered in organizational management systems to obtain the best possible content, retrieve it, and avail for usage by the organizational workers. Politics of Organizational Context and Culture The five models of information politics used to characterise politics of organizational context and culture are: Technocratic utopianism – too much reliance is on emerging technologies thus content is driven by information systems. Anarchy model – absence of information management policy and individuals are left to obtain and manage their information using personal computers. Feudalism model – the basis is on management of individual business units. The units define own information needs and the limited information is reported to the corporation. Monarchy – leaders takes up the task of defining categories and reporting structures. Furthermore, these leaders dictate rules for managing information. Hence takes the form of top down model. By identifying type of political model operating in an organization, KM barriers are anticipated. Shift to Knowledge-Based Assets There is a shift from resource-based to knowledge base creation of value. Traditionally, land, labour, and physical factors constituted creation of value but this has changed to knowledge base. Firms with knowledge assets can easily realise competitive advantage. The transfer of knowledge assets requires codification and abstraction, which has associated costs. Intellectual capital model draws a relationship between human capital, customer capital, and organizational capital as a result maximises ability to create value. Intellectual property issues Intellectual property issues revolve around attribution and unwanted attribution. Attribution is discomfort emanating from the possibility that knowledge resource may link author or rather creator with the actual knowledge. If KM has taken appropriate steps to ensure connection between author and actual knowledge then the fears have been dispelled. The second concern is fear of knowledge being modified once it is released from author’s hands. Creator is also concerned of knowledge being watered down, invalidated, or modified in any other form and still accredited to the same person. To mitigate such practises, tried-and-true document management and version control best practises should be followed to the latter. Provision of incentives for Knowledge Sharing Remunerative incentives – employee anticipates material rewards as a consequence of acting in a specific manner Moral incentive – some choices are classified as decent and upon making such choices, one expects a sense of self esteem, approval, and admiration Coercive incentive – force is used when an employee fails to act in a particular way. Other incentives can take the following forms System of recognition i.e. knowledge sharer of the month, which then motivates employees to share knowledge Employees can be allowed to choose their reward from a list. Read More