Strategically Managing Facility Management Knowledge Sharing via Web 2.0

Author(s):  
Donald Henry Ah Pak ◽  
Rita Yi Man Li
Author(s):  
Augusta Rohrbach

This chapter looks to the future of teaching realism with Web 2.0 technologies. After discussing the ways in which technologies of data modeling can reveal patterns for interpretation, the chapter examines how these technologies can update the social-reform agenda of realism as exemplified by William Dean Howells’s attempted intervention into the Haymarket Riot in 1886. The advent of Web 2.0 techologies offers students a way to harness the genre’s sense of social purpose to knowledge-sharing mechanisms to create a vehicle for political consciousness-raising in real time. The result is “Realism 2.0,” a realism that enables readers to engage in their world, which is less text-centric than it was for previous writers.


Author(s):  
Ifeoluwa Adedoyin Adeyemi ◽  
◽  
David Martin @ Daud Juanil ◽  
Sabariah Eni ◽  
Adegbenga Adeyemi ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (14) ◽  
pp. 1-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mike Bresnen ◽  
Damian Hodgson ◽  
Simon Bailey ◽  
Paula Hyde ◽  
John Hassard

BackgroundUnderstanding how managers in the NHS access and use management knowledge to help improve organisational processes and promote better service delivery is of pressing importance in health-care research. While past research has examined in some depth how managers in the NHS perform their roles, we have only limited understanding of how they access management knowledge, interpret it and adapt and apply it to their own health-care settings.ObjectivesThis study aims to investigate how NHS middle managers encounter, adapt and apply management knowledge in their working practices and to examine the factors [particularly organisational context, career background and networks of practice (NoPs)/communities of practice (CoPs)] which may facilitate or impede the acceptance of new management knowledge and its integration with practice in health-care settings. Our research was structured around three questions: (1) How do occupational background and careers influence knowledge receptivity, knowledge sharing and learning among health-care managers? (2) How do relevant CoPs enable/obstruct knowledge sharing and learning? (3) What mechanisms are effective in supporting knowledge receptivity, knowledge sharing and learning/unlearning within and across such communities?Design and settingThree types of NHS trust were selected to provide variation in organisational context and the diversity of services provided: acute, care and specialist foundation trusts (FTs). It was expected that this variation would affect the knowledge requirements faced by managers and the networks likely to be available to them. To capture variation amongst managerial groups in each trust, a selection framework was developed that differentiated between three main cohorts of managers: clinical, general and functional.ParticipantsAfter initial interviews with selected key informants and Advisory Group members, the main empirical phase consisted of semistructured interviews combined with ethnographic observation methods. A purposive, non-random sample of managers (68 in total) was generated for interview, drawn from across the three trusts and representing the three cohorts of managers. Interviews were semistructured and data was collated and analysed using NVivo 9 software (QSR International, Warrington, UK).Main outcome measuresThe analysis was structured around four thematic areas: context (institutional and trust), management (including leadership), knowledge and networks. The research underlines the challenges of overcoming fragmentation across a diffuse managerial CoP in health care, exacerbated by the effects of organisational complexity and differentiation. The research highlights the importance of specific training and development initiatives, and also the value of NoPs for knowledge sharing and support of managers.ResultsThe main findings of the research stress the heterogeneity of management and the highly diverse sources of knowledge, learning, experience and networks drawn upon by distinct management groups (clinical, general and functional); the particular challenges facing general managers in establishing a distinct professional identity based around a coherent managerial knowledge base; the strong tendency for managerial knowledge – particularly that harnessed by general managers – to be more ‘home grown’ (localised) and experiential (as opposed to abstract and codified); and the tendency for this to be reinforced through the difficulties facing general managers in accessing and being actively engaged in wider networks of professionals for knowledge sharing, learning and support.ConclusionsManagement in health care is a complex and variegated activity that does not map onto a clear, unitary and distinct CoP. Improving flows of knowledge and learning among health-care managers involves taking account not just of the distinctiveness of managerial groups, but also of a number of other features. These include the complex relationship between management and leadership, alternative ways of bridging the clinical–managerial interface, the importance of opportunities for managers to learn through reflection and not mainly through experience and the need to support managers – especially general managers – in developing their networks for knowledge sharing and support. Building on the model developed in this research to select managerial cohorts, future work might usefully extend the research to other types of trust and health-care organisation and to larger samples of health-care managers, which can be further stratified according to their distinct occupational groups and CoPs. There is also scope for further ethnographic research that broadens and deepens the investigation of management using a range of observation methods.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Service and Delivery Research programme.


Author(s):  
Chiara Libreri ◽  
Guendalina Graffigna

Web 2.0 has totally changed the health communication world. In particular, it has reconfigured peer exchanges about health. These exchanges are important because they allow knowledge sharing and construction between patients, in particular chronic patients. Although their importance is well established, this field of study brings together a variety of theories not uniformly shared or understood. It is not clear how patients use Web for knowledge processes: what kind of knowledge processes happen in Web 2.0 between patients? How does Web 2.0 sustain or impede these processes? The aim of this research is to map virtual exchanges about diabetes in Italy by developing a systematic exploration of Web using the main search engines (Google, Yahoo) and analyzing the site that hosts posts and exchanges about diabetes. According to a psychosocial perspective, findings highlight the main features of online knowledge processes among patients.


2011 ◽  
pp. 1078-1097
Author(s):  
Meng-Fen Grace Lin ◽  
Curtis J. Bonk ◽  
Suthiporn Sajjapanroj

Web 2.0 technologies empower individuals to contribute thoughts and ideas rather than passively survey online content and resources. Such participatory environments foster opportunities for community building and knowledge sharing, while encouraging the creation of artifacts beyond what any single person could accomplish alone. In this chapter, we investigate the emergence and growth of two of such environments: the highly popular Wikipedia site and its sister project, Wikibooks. Wikipedia has grown out of trends for free and open access to Web tools and resources. While Wikipedians edit, contribute, and monitor distinct pieces of information or pages of documents, Wikibookians must focus on larger chunks of knowledge, including book modules or chapters as well as entire books. Several key differences between these two types of wiki environments are explored. In addition, surveys and interviews, conducted with Wikibookians, shed light on their challenges, frustrations, and successes.


2016 ◽  
pp. 2123-2145
Author(s):  
Chiara Libreri ◽  
Guendalina Graffigna

Web 2.0 has totally changed the health communication world. In particular, it has reconfigured peer exchanges about health. These exchanges are important because they allow knowledge sharing and construction between patients, in particular chronic patients. Although their importance is well established, this field of study brings together a variety of theories not uniformly shared or understood. It is not clear how patients use Web for knowledge processes: what kind of knowledge processes happen in Web 2.0 between patients? How does Web 2.0 sustain or impede these processes? The aim of this research is to map virtual exchanges about diabetes in Italy by developing a systematic exploration of Web using the main search engines (Google, Yahoo) and analyzing the site that hosts posts and exchanges about diabetes. According to a psychosocial perspective, findings highlight the main features of online knowledge processes among patients.


2016 ◽  
pp. 406-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kijpokin Kasemsap

This chapter introduces the framework and causal model of organisational learning, knowledge management, knowledge-sharing behaviour, and organisational innovation. It argues that dimensions of organisational learning, knowledge management, and knowledge-sharing behaviour have mediated positive effect on organisational innovation. Knowledge-sharing behaviour positively mediates the relationships between organisational learning and organisational innovation and between knowledge management and organisational innovation. Organisational learning is positively related to knowledge management. Understanding the theoretical learning is positively beneficial for organisations aiming to increase organisational innovation and achieve business goals.


2011 ◽  
pp. 253-272
Author(s):  
Meng-Fen Grace Lin ◽  
Curtis J. Bonk ◽  
Suthiporn Sajjapanroj

Web 2.0 technologies empower individuals to contribute thoughts and ideas rather than passively survey online content and resources. Such participatory environments foster opportunities for community building and knowledge sharing, while encouraging the creation of artifacts beyond what any single person could accomplish alone. In this chapter, we investigate the emergence and growth of two of such environments: the highly popular Wikipedia site and its sister project, Wikibooks. Wikipedia has grown out of trends for free and open access to Web tools and resources. While Wikipedians edit, contribute, and monitor distinct pieces of information or pages of documents, Wikibookians must focus on larger chunks of knowledge, including book modules or chapters as well as entire books. Several key differences between these two types of wiki environments are explored. In addition, surveys and interviews, conducted with Wikibookians, shed light on their challenges, frustrations, and successes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document