Maria Elisabeth Zendrato
2091011006
International Management Class
Knowledge Management (paper assignment)
Chapter 11: Factors Influencing Knowledge Management
The contingency factors and KM infrastructure affect the suitability of KM processes in
two ways:
a. by increasing or reducing the need to manage knowledge in a particular way; and
b. by increasing or reducing the organization’s ability to manage knowledge in a
particular way.
KM processes that are appropriate for an organizational subunit (e.g., a department, a
geographic location, etc.) depend on the nature of its tasks. Here, two task characteristics
which task uncertainty and task interdependence that are considered as influencing the
appropriate KM processes.
Three knowledge characteristics which are explicit versus tacit, procedural versus
declarative, and general versus specific. The first two of these knowledge characteristics
directly affect the suitability of KM processes. The underlying contingency argument is
that certain KM processes may have greater impact on the value that one type of
knowledge contributes to the organization, while some other KM processes might affect
the value of another type of knowledge.
Organization size affects KM processes by influencing the choice between the two
processes supporting knowledge application (direction, routines) and the two processes
supporting knowledge sharing (socialization, exchange).
A methodology for identifying appropriate KM solutions. The methodology includes the
following seven steps:
1. Assess the contingency factors.
2. Identify the KM processes based on each contingency factor.
3. Prioritize the needed KM processes.
4. Identify the existing KM processes.
5. Identify the additional needed KM processes.
6. Assess the KM infrastructure and identify the sequential ordering of KM
processes.
7. Develop additional needed KM systems, mechanisms, and technologies.
Chapter 12: Leadership and Assessment of Knowledge Management
The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and the executive board have a direct impact on how
the organization views KM. In order for KM to be practiced across the organization,
leaders at the top must endorse and stress the importance of KM programs.
The assessment of knowledge management is a critical aspect of a KM implementation.
Several reasons attest to the need for conducting a KM assessment, as described below:
1. A KM assessment helps identify the contributions being currently made by KM.
2. A KM assessment enhances the understanding of the quality of the efforts being
put into KM as well as the intellectual capital produced through these efforts.
3. A KM assessment helps understand whether the costs of the KM efforts are
justified by the benefits they produce.
4. A KM assessment helps recognize the gaps that need to be addressed in the KM
efforts by individuals or the organization.
5. A KM assessment can also help in making a business case to senior executives in
an organization for additional investments in KM efforts.
KM assessments can be classified in a number of different ways. Three possible ways of
considering alternative KM assessments are described here. They are related to the
following aspects:
1. When is KM assessed?
2. How is KM assessed?
3. What aspects of KM are assessed?
KM solutions and the knowledge they help to create, capture, share, and apply can impact
individuals, products, processes, and the overall performance of organizations.
Chapter 13: The Future of Knowledge Management
The future calls for the development of KM systems that support the human aspects of
decisions: the personal, organizational, ethical, and aesthetic perspective. Thus, KM
systems should help decision makers make more humane decisions and enable them to
deal with wicked problems.
Two interrelated and emerging aspects of knowledge management focus on involving
collaborations of a large numbers of individuals:
a. from across various levels within the organization
b. from outside the organization to share and create knowledge.
Three main problems constrain individuals’ contributions to KM: (a) privacy concerns;
(b) concerns related to “knowledge as power”; and (c) senior executives’ reluctance to
adapt.
The benefits from knowledge management are considerable, and progress in information
technology as well as the experience gained within the field of knowledge management
implies that there are also some valuable ways of managing knowledge so as to increase
efficiency, effectiveness, and innovation for both organizations and individuals.
The future of KM is one where people and advanced technology will continue to work
together, enabling knowledge integration across diverse domains and with potentially
high payoffs. However, the new opportunities and greater benefits will require careful
management of people and technologies, synthesis of multiple perspectives, and
effectively dealing with a variety of tradeoffs. Even though interesting challenges lie
ahead for knowledge managers, the future of KM is clearly exciting because of the
opportunities it promises for generations to come.
Chapter 14: Knowledge-intensive firms and knowledge worker
Frenkel et al.'s three dimensional conceptualization of work:
1. Creativity, Measured on a sliding scale from low to high.
2. Predominant Form of Knowledge Used, Characterizes work as involving the use
of two predominant forms of knowledge: contextual knowledge and theoretical
knowledge.
3. Type of Skills lnvolved, Characterizes work as involving three main categories of
skill: intellective skills, social skills, and action-based skill.
The key knowledge processes within knowledge-intensive firms can be divided into three
broad categories: knowledge creation/application, knowledge sharing/integration, and
knowledge codification.
Alvesson suggests such workers represent the ideal subordinates (2000, 1104), and
suggests four reasons why knowledge workers are prepared to make such efforts:
1. they find their work intrinsically interesting and fulfilling;
2. such working patterns represent the norms within the communities they are a part
of;
3. a sense of reciprocity, whereby they provide the organization with their efforts in
return for good pay and working conditions;
4. such behaviour reinforces and confirms their sense of identity as a knowledge
worker, where hard work is regarded as a fundamental component.
The factors that are typically argued to make knowledge workers a distinctive element in
an organization's workforce are:
o they are typically very highly qualified, and also require to continually develop
their knowledge;
o their knowledge and skills are particularly important to organizational
performance;
o their knowledge and skills are difficult to codify and are typically highly tacit;
o their knowledge and skills are typically scarce and highly valued in labour
markets, making it relatively straightforward for knowledge workers to change
jobs; and
o their work tasks, focused as they are on the creation, utilization, and application of
knowledge, are highly specialized in nature.