The Knowledge Management Culture

Author(s):  
Marcello Chedid ◽  
Leonor Teixeira

Knowledge management is defined by different authors as the process that enables the sharing, capture and application of knowledge from the individual to the group and further to organizational level. The organizational atomization observed in the academia imposes importance in paying attention to a culture that encourages knowledge management and also assigns equal importance to the cooperation and the work in team. However, due to the different levels of heterogeneity among and within these organizations there is not just one model that fits well. Through a literature review on the knowledge management in the academia, the purpose of this chapter is an exploratory study that identifies the main cultural challenges in the development and implementation of a knowledge management system in the academic context.

Author(s):  
Marcello Chedid ◽  
Leonor Teixeira

Knowledge management is defined by different authors as the process that enables the sharing, capture and application of knowledge from the individual to the group and further to organizational level. The organizational atomization observed in the academia imposes importance in paying attention to a culture that encourages knowledge management and also assigns equal importance to the cooperation and the work in team. However, due to the different levels of heterogeneity among and within these organizations there is not just one model that fits well. Through a literature review on the knowledge management in the academia, the purpose of this chapter is an exploratory study that identifies the main cultural challenges in the development and implementation of a knowledge management system in the academic context.


Author(s):  
Mohammad Fakhrulnizam Mohammad ◽  
Rusli Abdullah ◽  
Marzanah Ab. Jabar ◽  
Rozi Nor Haizan Nor

Author(s):  
Shahnawaz Muhammed ◽  
William J. Doll ◽  
Xiaodong Deng

Success of organizational level knowledge management initiatives depends on how effectively individuals implementing these initiatives use their knowledge to bring about outcomes that add value in their work. To facilitate assessment of individual level outcomes in the knowledge management context, this research provides a model of interrelationships among individual level knowledge management success measures which include conceptual knowledge, contextual knowledge, operational knowledge, innovation, and performance. The model was tested using structural equation modeling based on data collected from managerial and professional knowledge workers. The results suggest that conceptual knowledge enhances operational and contextual knowledge. Contextual knowledge improves operational knowledge and is also a key predictor of innovations. The innovativeness of an individual’s work along with operational knowledge enhances work performance. The results support the proposed model. This model can potentially be used for measuring knowledge management success at the individual level.


Author(s):  
Meir Russ ◽  
Robert Fineman ◽  
Jeannette K. Jones

This chapter will provide the reader with two definitions of knowledge, one at the individual level, the other at the organizational level. This will be followed by connecting the knowledge base of the organization to its sustainable competitive advantage by using a multiple-layer framework of organizational knowledge. Then, the chapter will discuss the frameworks of knowledge management vision, mission and goals for the organization. Temporary and functional gap analysis frameworks will follow. The chapter will end with a brief description of three tools developed by the authors.


2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (10) ◽  
pp. 2491-2511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sushil S. Chaurasia ◽  
Natashaa Kaul ◽  
Babita Yadav ◽  
Dhirendra Shukla

Purpose This paper aims to identify the prominent themes of open innovation for sustainability (OIS) and establish their inter-relationships. Moreover, it examines the importance of success factors (i.e. knowledge management system, openness and organizational structure) and their configuration for co-creating shared value for OIS in manufacturing micro small and medium enterprises. Design/methodology/approach The first stage of investigation determines the relationship between concepts using the bibliometric technique. The second stage examines predictors (e.g. knowledge management system, openness and organizational structure) that contribute to the desired outcomes (creation of shared value in OIS) through necessary condition analysis. Findings The investigation demonstrates that all three conditions are necessary for (at different levels) creating shared values for OIS. More specifically, the investigation shows that the different levels of creation of shared value outcomes do require organizations to configure organizational interventions at different levels of the knowledge management system, openness and organizational structure. Practical implications To use the concept of open innovation (OI), organizations need to expand their view beyond their existing resource pool and business environment, to include their partners and stakeholders for more inclusivity. Such creation of shared value for OI does require active participation, interaction and collaboration with both manufacturer, retailers and other stakeholders, for developing an insight in creating value for sustainability problem-solving context. Originality/value The investigation advances the existing body of knowledge that propagates the significance of knowledge management system, openness and organizational structure as the antecedent to increase the creation of shared value for sustainability by organizations. The investigation advances the existing body of knowledge that propagates the significance of knowledge management system, openness and organizational structure as an antecedent to increase the creation of shared value for sustainability by organizations.


Author(s):  
Theodora Asimakou

The chapter discusses the relationship between knowledge management and innovation; specifically, it examines how knowledge in organizations affects the creation of new knowledge and what the implications are for innovation management. The core argument is that in a knowledge-based company, where competition is assessed at the edge of rare expertise and the development of innovations (Boisot, 1998; Drucker, 1993; Sveiby 1997), knowledge, which is always interwoven with power, becomes a precious resource, on the grounds of which struggles are inevitably enacted over its control (Foucault, 1980; Clegg, 1989). To argue this, the chapter brings together two related fields, knowledge management and innovation, which even though in principle they examine similar phenomena, i.e. the creation and sharing of new knowledge, in practice they appear disconnected (Asimakou, 2009b). To support the arguments, two innovation mechanisms in two business groups of a major oil company are discussed. The study used a set of qualitative techniques for data collection (in-depth interview, participant observation, documentary analysis) and a sample of 41 employees, which represented the groups participating in the innovation game (manager, scientists, assistant scientists, administration staff and students). I argue that two mainstream innovation management approaches (the rational planning and the cultural approach) have shaped the understanding and actions of the Business Groups in setting up the innovation mechanisms; however, power struggles at the individual, group and organizational level impacted upon the innovation processes to the extent that the latter became passive ‘technical solutions’.


Author(s):  
Irina Atkova ◽  
Marika Tuomela-Pyykkönen

This chapter introduces knowledge management as a means to analyse the process of knowledge sharing in organisations, specifically knowledge-sharing barriers faced by companies in procurement on the level of an individual employee, as well as at the level of an organisation. It argues that at the individual level knowledge sharing process is frequently hoarded by internal resistance, lack of trust, insufficient motivation, gap in awareness and knowledge, and at the organizational level, by bureaucracy and hierarchy, paradigm incoherency, lack or organisational reciprocity, absence of common legitimate language, organisational and national cultures, competition between the business units and departments, poor communication infrastructure, and localization. The chapter does not aspire to provide a complete list of the knowledge-sharing barriers faced by the companies within procurement but instead to draw attention to the complexity and problematic of the knowledge-transfer process. Awareness of the potential knowledge-sharing barriers allows the managers and companies to proactively respond to these challenges and develop solutions for a specific organisation.


2016 ◽  
pp. 1684-1701
Author(s):  
Irina Atkova ◽  
Marika Tuomela-Pyykkönen

This chapter introduces knowledge management as a means to analyse the process of knowledge sharing in organisations, specifically knowledge-sharing barriers faced by companies in procurement on the level of an individual employee, as well as at the level of an organisation. It argues that at the individual level knowledge sharing process is frequently hoarded by internal resistance, lack of trust, insufficient motivation, gap in awareness and knowledge, and at the organizational level, by bureaucracy and hierarchy, paradigm incoherency, lack or organisational reciprocity, absence of common legitimate language, organisational and national cultures, competition between the business units and departments, poor communication infrastructure, and localization. The chapter does not aspire to provide a complete list of the knowledge-sharing barriers faced by the companies within procurement but instead to draw attention to the complexity and problematic of the knowledge-transfer process. Awareness of the potential knowledge-sharing barriers allows the managers and companies to proactively respond to these challenges and develop solutions for a specific organisation.


Author(s):  
Gee-Woo ("Gilbert") Bock ◽  
Chen Way Siew ◽  
Young-Gul Kim

Of the 260 responses from a survey of European multinationals, 94% believed that knowledge management requires employees to share what they know with others within the organization (Murray, 1999). Among the processes of knowledge management—creation, sharing, utilization and accumulation of knowledge—sharing is what differentiates organizational knowledge management from individual learning or knowledge acquisition. However, the process of sharing knowledge is often unnatural to many. Individuals will not share knowledge that is regarded to be of high value and importance. In fact, the natural tendency for individuals is to hoard knowledge or look suspiciously at the knowledge of others. Thus, incentive schemes—where employees receive incentives as a form of compensation for their contributions—are common programs in many organizations. Such schemes have met their fair share of success as well as failure in the field of knowledge management. On the one hand, the carrot and stick principle used in Siemens’ ShareNet project turned out to be a success (Ewing & Keenan, 2001). On the other hand, the redemption points used in Samsung Life Insurance’s Knowledge Mileage Program only resulted in the increasingly selfish behavior of its employees (Hyoung & Moon, 2002). Furthermore, despite the plethora of research on factors affecting knowledge sharing behavior, little concerns discovering effective ways to encourage individuals to voluntarily share their knowledge. Early studies on knowledge management began by trying to discover key factors pertaining to knowledge management in general, instead of knowledge sharing in particular, as summarized in Table 1. Although research on knowledge sharing started around the mid 1990s, it focused mainly on knowledge sharing at the group or organizational level in spite of the fact that knowledge itself actually originates from the individual. Even at the group or organizational level, most studies dealt with a specific knowledge type, such as best practices (Szulanski, 1996) or a specific context, such as between dispersed teams (Tsai, 2002). In addition, factors such as trust, willingness to share, information about the knowledge holder, and the level of codification of knowledge were considered in abstract. Although these factors are valuable, they require further empirical research before they could be used to explain the individual’s fundamental motivation to share knowledge. Thus, this study aims to develop an understanding of the factors that support or constrain the individual’s knowledge sharing behavior in the organization, with a special interest in the role of rewards. This is done according to Fishbein and Ajzen’s (1975) Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), a widely accepted social psychology model that is used to explain almost any human behavior (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980).


Author(s):  
Hauke Heier ◽  
Hans P. Borgman

The case study describes the issues surrounding the development and global rollout of the Intranet-based Knowledge Management System (KMS) HRbase at Deutsche Bank. It sets the stage for a decision situation that Deutsche Banks Global Head of Human Resources (HR), Heinz Fischer, faced in 2001. Based on low usage rates and ambiguous feedback from his 15 most senior HR executives, he had to decide about HRbases future: it would either be funded from an earmarked budget in 2001, changed significantly, or discontinued. Meanwhile, the responsible project manager Hilger Pothmann and the HRbase project team understood the necessity to turn the project around and to come up with a proposal for technical improvements and a sound change in management strategy. The case description provides a chronological account of the planning, development, and global rollout of HRbase, paying specific attention to project management issues, change management interventions, and the global cross-cultural challenges that emerged.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document