scholarly journals Knowledge and strategic management

2012 ◽  
Vol 52 (No. 3) ◽  
pp. 101-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Hron

The article summarizes recent developments in the field of knowledge management and its vital influence on strategic management. Knowledge has become a resource of key importance with regard to the competitive advantage of a business. It thus strengthens the resource-based view of competitive advantage and develops it further by providing guidelines for developing, storing, and sharing knowledge within a business with the use of the concept of organisational learning. Tacit and explicit knowledge is distinguished in order to differentiate their contribution towards the competitiveness of a business. Based on these developments major trends affecting current development of strategic management are defined as well as recommendations drawn from the experience of leading subjects in the field.

2011 ◽  
pp. 286-293
Author(s):  
V. K. Narayanan

Historically, the focus of IT infrastructure had been to capture the knowledge of experts in a centralized repository (Davenport & Prusak, 1998; Grover & Davenport, 2001; Nolan, 2001). The centralized databases contained knowledge that was explicit and historical (e.g., competitor pricing, market share), and the IT infrastructure served to facilitate functional decision making or to automate routine tasks (as in reengineering). The users of technology approached the repository to obtain data in a narrowly defined domain (Broadbent, Weill, & St. Clair, 1999). Consequently, IT originally played a significant, yet ultimately limited role in the strategy creation process. Management information systems (MISs) arguably generated information that was less applicable to strategy creation, as noted in early writings on the linkage between MIS and strategic planning (e.g., Lientz & Chen, 1981; Shank, Boynton, & Zmud, 1985; Holmes, 1985). The active management of knowledge was similarly underdeveloped. Despite the fact that strategic decision makers had always emphasized the role of tacit knowledge, the actual importance of knowledge was not explicitly recognized. Formalized knowledge management (Davenport & Prusak, 1998; Dalkir, 2005), with its associated terminology and tools, is a recent development and as such did not inform the strategic planning process. However, the shifts that have taken place in IT infrastructures over the last decade and the recent developments in knowledge management (KM) have brought them closer to the creators of strategy. Indeed, both IT and knowledge management are increasingly enablers in the contemporary strategic management practice: 1. IT infrastructure is transitioning in its focus from the functional work unit to a process orientation. Whereas computer systems were once the focal point, the new infrastructure is network centric, with an emphasis on business knowledge (Nolan, 2001). For example, traditional search engines utilized rule-based reasoning to identify elements matching specific search criteria; the “state-of-the-art” knowledge management systems employ case-based search techniques to identify all relevant knowledge components meeting the user’s request (Grover & Davenport, 2001). 2. IT now takes into account contexts that include crossfunctional experts, knowledgeable on a wide variety of potentially relevant issues. Additionally, there is greater emphasis on the integration of infrastructure with structure, culture (Gold, Malhotra, & Segars, 2001), and organizational roles (Awad & Ghaziri, 2004). In many ways, the newer IT infrastructures have enabled the garnering of explicit knowledge throughout the organization to speed up strategy creation. The objective of this article is to outline how the developments in IT and KM are facilitating the evolution of strategic management to strategic experimentation to create quantum improvements in strategy creation and unprecedented developmental opportunities for the field if IT.


Author(s):  
V. K. Narayanan

Historically, the focus of IT infrastructure had been to capture the knowledge of experts in a centralized repository (Davenport & Prusak, 1998; Grover & Davenport, 2001; Nolan, 2001). The centralized databases contained knowledge that was explicit and historical (e.g., competitor pricing, market share), and the IT infrastructure served to facilitate functional decision making or to automate routine tasks (as in reengineering). The users of technology approached the repository to obtain data in a narrowly defined domain (Broadbent, Weill, & St. Clair, 1999). Consequently, IT originally played a significant, yet ultimately limited role in the strategy creation process. Management information systems (MISs) arguably generated information that was less applicable to strategy creation, as noted in early writings on the linkage between MIS and strategic planning (e.g., Lientz & Chen, 1981; Shank, Boynton, & Zmud, 1985; Holmes, 1985). The active management of knowledge was similarly underdeveloped. Despite the fact that strategic decision makers had always emphasized the role of tacit knowledge, the actual importance of knowledge was not explicitly recognized. Formalized knowledge management (Davenport & Prusak, 1998; Dalkir, 2005), with its associated terminology and tools, is a recent development and as such did not inform the strategic planning process. However, the shifts that have taken place in IT infrastructures over the last decade and the recent developments in knowledge management (KM) have brought them closer to the creators of strategy. Indeed, both IT and knowledge management are increasingly enablers in the contemporary strategic management practice: 1. IT infrastructure is transitioning in its focus from the functional work unit to a process orientation. Whereas computer systems were once the focal point, the new infrastructure is network centric, with an emphasis on business knowledge (Nolan, 2001). For example, traditional search engines utilized rule-based reasoning to identify elements matching specific search criteria; the “state-of-the-art” knowledge management systems employ case-based search techniques to identify all relevant knowledge components meeting the user’s request (Grover & Davenport, 2001). 2. IT now takes into account contexts that include crossfunctional experts, knowledgeable on a wide variety of potentially relevant issues. Additionally, there is greater emphasis on the integration of infrastructure with structure, culture (Gold, Malhotra, & Segars, 2001), and organizational roles (Awad & Ghaziri, 2004). In many ways, the newer IT infrastructures have enabled the garnering of explicit knowledge throughout the organization to speed up strategy creation. The objective of this article is to outline how the developments in IT and KM are facilitating the evolution of strategic management to strategic experimentation to create quantum improvements in strategy creation and unprecedented developmental opportunities for the field if IT.


Author(s):  
Muhammad Shujahat ◽  
Saddam Hussain ◽  
Sammar Javed ◽  
Muhammad Imran Malik ◽  
Ramayah Thurasamy ◽  
...  

Purpose The purpose of this study is primarily to discuss the synergic and separate use of knowledge and intelligence, via knowledge management and competitive intelligence, in each stage of strategic management process. Next, this paper aims to discuss the implications of each stage of strategic management process for knowledge management and competitive intelligence and vice versa. Design/methodology/approach A systematic literature review was performed within time frame of 2000-2016. Extracted information from reviewed studies was synthesized and integrated in strategic management model of Fred David. Findings A strategic management model with lens of knowledge management and competitive intelligence is proposed. Each stage of knowledge management process has implications for knowledge management and competitive intelligence and vice versa. In addition, synergic and separate use of knowledge and intelligence results in effective decision-making, leading to competitive advantage. Research limitations/implications Learning curve of knowledge management and competitive intelligence and being limited to the use of Fred David model are among the many key limitations. Practical implications Experts of knowledge management, competitive intelligence and strategic management can use this study to gain competitive advantage based on knowledge and information resources. Organizations should have knowledge management function and competitive intelligence to support the strategy formulation, implementation and evaluation. Social implications Readers can take a view for how they can manage their knowledge and information resources from a strategic perspective. Originality/value This study proposes a strategic management model with lens of knowledge management and competitive intelligence. The model discusses ways for synergic and separate use of knowledge and intelligence in each stage of strategic management, leading to competitive advantage. In addition, it discusses the holistic and integrated implications of knowledge management and competitive intelligence for each stage of strategic management process and vice versa.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Dmaithan Almajali ◽  
Musa AL-Lozi

Knowledge, its effective use, and the acquisition of new knowledge are considered the only way organizations can sustain a competitive advantage in today’s highly competitive environment. This paper reviews the associations among knowledge management, knowledge management infrastructure, and job satisfaction.


2011 ◽  
pp. 2646-2659
Author(s):  
Gabriel Cepeda-Carrion

Knowledge management has been proposed as a fundamental strategic process and the only sustainable competitive advantage for firms (Grant, 1996; Davenport, 1998). A key to understanding the success and failure of knowledge management efforts within organizations is the ability to identify the relevant knowledge to manage and to extract value out of this knowledge. In the last decade past research has focused heavily on defining what knowledge is and on using different typologies (e.g., tacit vs. explicit knowledge, individual vs. collective) to characterize the different types of knowledge available to firms (e.g., Polanyi, 1967; Spender, 1996). In addition, researchers have described the processes through which knowledge is created, developed, retained, and transferred in firms (e.g., Argote, 1999; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995), and the role played by leadership (Bryant, 2003; Vera & Crossan, 2004) and decision-making styles (Kalling, 2003) in influencing these processes. Unfortunately, despite the growing interest in knowledge management, little specific has been said about the mechanisms firms use to identify key knowledge areas and to gain competitive advantage out of knowledge management investments. The recognition of the important knowledge resources for a firm is critical, because the effectiveness of knowledge and learning can only be assessed on the basis of its utility in guiding behavior relative to the firm’s relevant domain (Crossan, Lane, & White, 1999; Cepeda, Galán, & Leal, 2004; Zack, 1999). Knowledge for the sake of knowledge is not useful to firms.


Author(s):  
Kostas Ergazakis ◽  
Kostas Metaxiotis ◽  
Emmanouil Ergazakis

Nowadays, knowledge is considered as one of the most valuable assets of an enterprise which has to be managed efficiently and effectively in order to gain a competitive advantage in the knowledge economy era. Knowledge Management (KM) evolved into a strategic management approach, finding application not only in the business world but also in other areas such as education, government and healthcare. In this way, the new link between KM and KBD created the appropriate environment for the advent of a new concept in the scientific and practitioners’ communities, the concept of “Knowledge City” (KC). Nowadays, the theme of KCs is a ‘hot’ topic of interest and discussion. The process for developing a KC, is neither quick nor simple. This seems to be already understood by the research community, which the last few hears has begun to concentrate its efforts so as to develop appropriate frameworks, methodologies, tools, systems, etc so as to support the development of KCs. In this context, and given that there are still many pending issues, this article attempts to propose a taxonomy of KC research, by co instantaneously presenting the status with these major themes of KC research. The discussion presented on this article should be of value to researchers and practitioners.


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.


2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
PD Steyn ◽  
ASA Du Toit

The knowledge economy impacts on the way enterprises should address their business requirements, forcing many of them to review the potential mechanisms they could employ to improve their competitive advantage. The business incubator approach is one such mechanism. This article explores the application of knowledge management, knowledge creation and innovation in a corporate incubator. It focuses on the process of knowledge management, to ensure that a culture and appropriate strategies conducive to enhancing knowledge creation are developed in an enterprise. Innovation as a strategic imperative is considered, as well as the challenge of driving it within an enterprise. The purpose of this empirical survey was to determine whether the corporate incubator model applied by Eskom conforms to the attributes of knowledge management, knowledge creation and innovation, and whether the synergies to be exploited amongst these disciplines can be harnessed to give Eskom a competitive advantage.  


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document