Words: 2886
Many terms commonly used in the field of knowledge management (KM) have multiple uses and sometimes conflicting definitions because they are adapted from other research streams. Discussions of the various hierarchies of data, information, knowledge, and other related terms, although of value, are limited in providing support for KM.
The purpose of this this paper is to define a new set of terminology and develop a five-tier knowledge management hierarchy (5TKMH) that can provide guidance to managers involved in KM efforts. Design/methodology/approach – The 5TKMH is developed by extending the knowledge hierarchy to include an individual and an innovation tier. Findings – The 5TKMH includes all of the types of KM identified in the literature, provides a tool for evaluating the KM effort in a firm, identifies the relationships between knowledge sources, and provides an evolutionary path for KM efforts within he firm.
Research limitations/implications – The 5TKMH has not been formally tested. the chief knowledge officer and can be employed to inventory knowledge assets, evaluate KM strategy, and plan and manage the evolution of knowledge assets in the firm. Originality/value – In this paper, a new set of terminology is defined and a 5TKMH is developed that can provide guidance to managers involved in KM efforts and determining the future path of KM in the firm. Inferences of the Article:- This paper is based on the Proceedings of Greeks and is still being debated in academic circles.
A common theme in the KM literature is that data is combined to create information, and information is combined to create knowledge. There is a consensus that data are discrete facts, but after that, consensus is lacking. The lack of consistent definitions for data, information, and knowledge make rigorous discussions of KM difficult. In this Research paper Knowledge has been defined as follows:- The power to act and make decisions (Kantner, 1999); Information in context coupled with an understanding of how to use it (Davenport and Prusak, 1998); Professional expertise appropriate for the domain (Bourdreau and
Couillard, 1999); Things that are held to be true and drive people to action (Bourdreau and Couillard, 1999); Justified personal belief that increases an individual’s capacity to take effective action (Alavi and Leidner, 1999); Information that has been authenticated and thought to be true (Vance, 1997); Integrated information in context (Galup et al. , 2002); Information made actionable (Maglitta, 1996); and Information made actionable in a way that adds value to the enterprise (Vail, 1999).
The knowledge hierarchy:- Knowledge hierarchy depicts the conventional concept of knowledge transformations, here data is transformed into information, and information is transformed into knowledge. The following represents the Knowledge Hierarchy. The five tiers of knowledge management:- 1 . Individual knowledge is defined as “knowledge contained only in the mind of a person. ” 2. Facts are defined as “atomic attribute values about the domain. ” 3. Influences are defined as “data in context that has been processed and/or prepared for presentation. ” 4.
Solutions are defined as “clear instructions and authority to perform a task. ” 5. Innovation is defined as “the exploitation of knowledge-based resources. ” There is considerable discussion about the best ways to codify knowledge, so let us consider the implementation needs of the two personal knowledge tiers. The innovation tier exploits all classes of knowledge, and includes the strategic and spatial schools in Earl’s (2001) taxonomy. The individual tier represents the knowledge that is stored in the mind of an individual. It may be located through yellow pages” or similar lists.
The sharing of knowledge is predominantly performed on a person-to-person basis. Testing of several hypotheses seems in order, such as:- B Is the tier of KM dictated by the processes in the industry? B Is the tier of KM dictated by the tier of competition in the industry? B Is the tier of KM dictated by management style? A starting set of hypothesis might include the following: KM assets at the lower end of the 5TKMH have larger volume, lower specialty, lower actionability, lower risk, lower cost, lower potential payback, and wider dissemination than those at the higher end of the 5TKMH.
It is hoped that this paper will assist researchers and practitioners in the study of KM through our new set of terminology and the 5TKMH. END OF ARTICLEI Article-2:- A critical review of knowledge management as a management tool Maria Ma?‰rtensson The literature and theories concerning the management of knowledge have grown remarkably during the past couple of years. Nevertheless, what is the contribution from KM? Is it business salvation or the ’emperor’s new clothes”?
Because of downsizing, organizations have been forced to create systems and processes that exploit knowledge more efficiently organizations are now trying to codify and store the individual’s knowledge, i. e. making tacit knowledge explicit and transposing individual knowledge into organizational knowledge. Those transformation processes ave been made possible through the recent and fast development within IT. Because knowledge is largely tacit and individually owned, it is difficult to have charge of and control over the course of knowledge.
Over the past several years there have been intensive discussions about the importance of knowledge management within our society. The management of knowledge is promoted as an important and necessary factor for organizational survival and maintenance of competitive strength. To remain at the forefront organizations need a good capacity to retain, develop, organize, and utilize their employees’ capabilities. Knowledge and the management of knowledge appear to be regarded as increasingly important features for organizational survival.
Explores knowledge management with respect to its content, its definition and domain in theory and practice, its use and implications, and to point out some problems inherent in the concept. The main contribution of this paper is an extensive literature survey on knowledge management. Inferences of the Article:- This article of Knowledge Management discusses the importance of knowledge management (KM) within our society. Scholars and observers from disciplines as isparate as sociology, economics, and management science agree that a transformation has occurred ‘ ‘knowledge” is at center stage.
It also deals with the related strategy concepts are promoted as important and necessary components for organizations to survive and maintain their competitive keenness. It has become necessary for managers and executives to address ‘KM” (Goodman and Chinowsky, 1997). KM is considered a prerequisite for higher productivity and flexibility in both the private and the public sectors. To determine what KM is, a review of the literature is necessary. Since it is not easible to cover all the literature, the aim of the survey is not so much to summarise but to draw some conclusions about KM.
The first step was to search for articles in databases using the keyword ‘ ‘knowledge management” and the combination ‘knowledge management” and ‘strategy”. The literature review is narrow in the sense that only studies using these keywords were included. Most of the literature in this review is of practical nature rather than theoretical (i. e. knowledge based theory and competence-based theory). The emergence of KM seems to a great extent to be business driven (Carrillo, 2000).
The limited number of keywords probably accounts for the skewed distribution of articles in favour of the practical-oriented articles. Another limitation is related to how the concept of knowledge is regarded. What is found in the literature survey is of course Just fraction of what is written about knowledge; however, these are still the things that are pointed out in the literature. In describing knowledge, it is not my intention to give a complete overview of the concept; rather, the description of The paper is organized into three sections.
The first section is devoted to the origins nd domain of KM. The second describes KM as a tool for management, as an information handling tool, and as a strategic tool. Origins and domain of knowledge management Theoretical origins to knowledge management A differentiation between intangible and tangible resources, or an equivalent distinction, appears to be logically required. In a study by Johanson et al. (1998), the question of what is meant by intangibles was raised.
Resources consist of:- physical, human, and monetary resources that are needed for business operations to eventuate; and Information-based resources, such as anagement skills, technology, consumer information, brand name, reputation, and corporate culture. The division one step further, since he divides competence and relational categories into the subgroups individual and collective, depending on whether the employee or the organization is accentuated: described as ‘ ‘the organizational advantages”, rather than focus on the causes and consequences of market failure.
Typically, researchers see such organizational advantage as acquiring from the particular capabilities organizations have for creating and sharing knowledge. Empirical origins to knowledge management:- DiMattia and Oder (1997) argue that the growth of ‘ ‘knowledge management” has emerged from two fundamental shifts: downsizing and technological development. Downsizing Technological development The domain of knowledge management An essential part of KM is, of course, knowledge. To map the domains of knowledge, traits of the concept knowledge have been put forward based on the stream of research reviewed.
KM is often described as a management tool. More precisely, it is described either as an operational tool or as a strategically focused management tool. Tacit and explicit knowledge Another way of defining knowledge is to make a distinction between ‘tacit” and ‘ ‘explicit” knowledge (Polyani, 1966). Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) make the same point in more precise terms: . Explicit knowledge is documented and public; structured, fixed-content, externalized, and conscious (Duffy, 2000). Explicit knowledge is what can be captured and shared through information technology..
Tacit knowledge resides in the human mind, behaviour, and perception (Duffy, 2000). Tacit knowledge evolves from people’s interactions and requires skill and practice. Knowledge management as a strategic management tool KM and its implications are frequently discussed at seminars and conferences. The number of companies claiming to work with knowledge management is growing steadily. A recurrent problem with these studies is that the concepts (e. g. the use of KM) are seldom defined.
This uncertainty has made it difficult to draw the desired inferences from the results of these studies. The central idea underlying a strategy is that organisations must adjust their capabilities (i. e. their resources and skills) to a constantly changing complex external environment (Teece, in GroEnhaug and Nordhaug, 1992). To successfully create and implement a knowledge management strategy, authors have suggested that certain critical elements must be included. The elements I have found to be of particular importance are the following:- . he ‘ ‘so what? ” question; . support from top management; . communication; . creativity; . culture and people; . sharing knowledge; . incentives; . time; . evaluation. Knowledge management and process performance Colin Armistead This paper is concerned with the relevance of knowledge management to operational managers within organisations. The consequences of taking a knowledge-based view f the organisation are examined, with examples drawn from different process types (knowledge-based manufacturing and service).
This article based over the total quality management, business process re- engineering or lean and agile manufacture and supply chain management will remember discussions of how the experience of applying the techniques of each approach resulted in improvement in operational performance. A closer inspection of some of the examples may have led to a feeling that some of the early promises of each approach were not always delivered, but there was nough evidence across sufficient organizations that performance could be improved by using these techniques.
In contrast, a noticeable feature of the dozens of conference presentations on the subject of knowledge management is that they do not use the same hard measures of success consistently. Consequently, the question from an operational perspective is how can a ‘ ‘knowledge” perspective lead to improvements in performance? If we aim for a business process management perspective can the incorporation of ideas about knowledge processes lead to greater effectiveness, both for the organization and operational processes?
Inferences of the Article:- Business process management:- have some stimulus, they bring about some Change, and they use some resources. The inputs and outputs of the process can be described and, to varying degrees, measured. The origins of the process-based view of the organisation (business process management) are predominantly operational and predominantly concerned with managing flows of material people or information. Improvement of the process(es) has focused on attempts to change practices to be more responsive to customers and to improve performance in quality, time, speed and reliability, while educing production costs.
Knowledge-based processes Will taking a knowledge and knowledge management approach help to fill the gaps and open up new possibilities? Discussions about knowledge resonate with those of quality in the past. What is it? How can we measure it? How can we improve it in some form? Is it necessary for all those active within organisations to engage with it or is it the preserve of the expert few? The debate ranged from the philosophical, Just as was the case with quality (Pirsig, 1976), to the highly practical (Deming, 1988).
Any eading of the knowledge management literature shows that the same questions are being addressed about knowledge and the use of knowledge (Wigg, 1997; Teece, 1998). Knowledge creation process:- Knowledge transfer process:- Knowledge embedding process:- Approaches to knowledge management:- Technological channel for knowledge management:- Application of knowledge management and changes in operational contexts (1) increasing turbulence in markets resulting in greater uncertainty variety; (2) reduced tolerance for trade-offs in performance; (3) network organizational structures involving many parties with differing ultures.
Article-4:- Knowledge, management, and knowledge management in business operations Fei Gao, Meng Li and Steve Clarke Purpose – The purpose of this research is to help knowledge managers systematically grasp “knowledge about management knowledge” and get a “deep and full” understanding of the nature, scope and methodologies of knowledge management. Design/methodology/approach – Through presenting a variety of perspectives on knowledge, management, and knowledge management, the article explores the essence of knowledge management in organizations from a perspective of critical ystems thinking.
Findings – Knowledge management in business organizations has the task of managing the activities of knowledge workers or the transformation and interaction of organizational “static substance knowledge” and “dynamic process knowledge” for “products, services, and practical process innovation” and, at the same time, “creating new or Justifying existing organizational systematic knowledge”. Knowledge management is not simply about recording and manipulating explicit knowledge, but needs to address that which is implicit, and from which benefit can therefore be erivedonly through process rather than content.
Originality/value – The comprehensive review and classification of various management theories will expand both knowledge managers’ and knowledge workers’ understanding of the subject and provide a foundation for building a knowledge management toolkit in practice. Keywords Knowledge management, Critical thinking, Organizations This Article/research paper consist of the knowledge managers systematically grasp “knowledge about management knowledge” and get a “deep and full” understanding of the nature scope and methodologies of knowledge management.
Acknowledged as one of the first scholars to recognize the role of knowledge in business organizations, saw acquiring knowledge as a social learning process: This increase in knowledge not only causes the productive opportunity of a firmto change in ways unrelated to changes in the environment, but also contributes to the 1 . Background: differing perspectives on knowledge management in business:- Knowledge is an important issue for business organisations. There have been a number of different perspectives from which researchers and practitioners have approached the management of knowledge.
While the acquisition, transmission, and use of knowledge has always been an important part of human affairs (hence the well-established domain of epistemology), Penrose (1959), Bell (1973) and Drucker (1993a) provide us with a good basis for relating knowledge to twenty-first century business organisations. Drucker symbolically declares knowledge, as we move into the “knowledge society’ (Drucker, 1993b), as the key resource for individual firms and the key driver of competitive advantage for developed nations, competing in knowledge-based industries, living with knowledge communities and societies. Knowledge The meaning of the word “knowledge” is subject to a number of different interpretations. In the past it has been linked with terms such as data, information, intelligence, skill, experience, expertise, ideas, intuition, or insight, which all depend on the context in which the words are used. Plato views knowledge as “Justified true belief”, which was later modified by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) to: “a dynamic human process of Justifying personal belief toward the truth” at the organizational level.
Bell defines knowledge in a broader sense as “a set of organized statements of acts or ideas, presenting a reasoned Judgment or an experimental result, which is transmitted to others through some communication medium in some systematic form” or in general meaning as “{that} which is objectively known, an intellectual property, attached to a name and a group of names and certified by copyright or some other form of social recognition” (Bell, 1973). . Management Peter F. Drucker was the first to identify management as an independent discipline authoring the concept of the corporation (1946) and the practice of management (1954). The term “management” generally means the act of organizing and controlling business or similar organisation. It includes two parts: responsibility and control. The first purposeful efforts at rational thinking about management began with Taylor, Fayol, and Weber.
Ever since then, scholars, experts, and practitioners in various fields from different perspectives have studied the two domains and introduced concepts from science, technology, psychology, social psychology, sociology, biology, cybernetics, or complexity theory to address the issues. 4. Knowledge management “Knowledge management” contains a much more complex meaning than the terms