Professional Documents
Culture Documents
http://www.moyak.com/papers/knowledge-management.html
1 of 12
10/14/2011 11:31 AM
http://www.moyak.com/papers/knowledge-management.html
can be expressed in words and numbers and can be easily communicated and shared in hard form, as scientific formulas, codified procedures, or universal principles. Tacit or unarticulated knowledge is more personal, experiential, context specific, and hard to formalize. This kind of knowledge is difficult to communicate or share with others, and is generally inside the heads of individuals and teams. Since knowledge may be an organization's only sustainable competitive advantage, it is very important to capture tacit knowledge. How can we transfer it? By putting mechanisms of socialization, mentorships, apprenticeships, and opportunities for face-to-face communication in place. Intranets and email can help it flow through an organization, but tacit knowledge often moves laterally through informal channels of communication, through communities of practice. For example, those groups that hang around the coffee machine are exchanging knowledge, just as are the smokers who huddle near the entrance to the building at break time. The information that is passed in this way is very important because it is useful for helping people to get their work done more effectively, in part, because nobody is willing to question or think about the process very much. Communities of practice must have their place in a comprehensive knowledge management effort. Knowledge is intangible, dynamic, and difficult to measure, but without it no organization can survive; flows of knowledge are an organization's capacity to learn. They are all you really have.
10/14/2011 11:31 AM
http://www.moyak.com/papers/knowledge-management.html
3 of 12
10/14/2011 11:31 AM
http://www.moyak.com/papers/knowledge-management.html
quality management, knowledge management would become embedded in organizations, with knowledge a source of value. Of course, in the long-term the goal will see all members of the organization owning and driving the knowledge management system, and over time, seeing the need for CKOs decline. However, today's CKOs are discovering that knowledge management comprises a large agenda and that making substantial progress takes time. In the beginning, a leader or coordinator is imperative for initiating, keeping up the momentum, deciding on software and systems (with the IT staff), distilling, codifying, and helping others learn to share their unique or tacit knowledge so that an organization can raise its knowledge capabilities. Therefore, appointing a CKO is likely the best place to start when embarking on a knowledge management program, and even if an appointee does not have the title of Chief Knowledge Officer. As long as your CKO has the requisite profile, performs activities that propel a knowledge management project forward, has access to the proper resources, and possesses success factors that work.
10/14/2011 11:31 AM
http://www.moyak.com/papers/knowledge-management.html
management and knowledge sharing. Since Arthur Andersen's Atlanta-based business consulting division established an Intranet two years ago, consultants at the firm post knowledge workplans, methodologies, research, proposals and resumes, so that others in the organization can tap into high-level expertise on an as-needed basis. It's called: not reinventing the wheel logic.
5 of 12
10/14/2011 11:31 AM
http://www.moyak.com/papers/knowledge-management.html
thinking. There is an underlying belief that performance is really driven by "corporate stars" and that internal competition must be in place to attract these superstars since only under-performers can be found in cooperative, team-oriented workplaces. Rewards and incentives signal what behaviors and outcomes are most valued by management. It should not be surprising that knowledge accumulation and sharing are not valued. Management sends strong signals through its compensation policies: different roles are perceived of value according to their allocated compensation. So be careful about sending mixed signals, and keep in mind that culture is more than just compensation, and it is responsive to influences other than paychecks. Management sends signals about what is important through its recruiting priorities, promotions, and, possibly more than anything, through its own behavior. These deeply embedded cultural assumptions are significant. Knowledge management programs need all enabling factors, and not just one or two, if there is to be any real success. Knowledge tools, controls, and new organizational structures will go far to create a new culture in which informed decision making is valued, but explicit efforts to cultivate that culture are still needed. Knowledge and skills can never substitute for the motivation only an effective organizational culture can provide. And that is why it is important to have the knowledge process facilitated by a steady development of a knowledge culture, based on incentives, and strong management leadership that values, shares, and uses knowledge.
6 of 12
10/14/2011 11:31 AM
http://www.moyak.com/papers/knowledge-management.html
There are so many reasons for instituting a knowledge management-intensive learning organization. Here are just a few: 1. There is an increase in employee satisfaction due to greater personal development and empowerment. 2. It helps you keep your employees longer and thereby, reduces the loss of intellectual capital from people leaving the company. 3. Saves money by not reinventing the wheel for each new project. 4. Reduces costs by decreasing and achieving economies of scale in obtaining information from external providers. 5. Increases productivity by making knowledge available more quickly and easily. 6. Provides workers with a more democratic place to work by allowing everyone access to knowledge. 7. You can learn faster with KM. 8. Learning faster means staying competitive. 9. KM software and technological infrastructures allow for global access to an organization's knowledge, at a keystroke. 10. An organization does not have to reinvent the wheel each time a new project comes along, and that saves time.
7 of 12
10/14/2011 11:31 AM
http://www.moyak.com/papers/knowledge-management.html
who like where they work and what they are doing. For a knowledge management effort to work, it must be understood that no progress is sustainable unless innovators learn to understand why the system is pushing back, and how their own attitudes and perceptions contribute to the "pushback." Until they see this, there will be no development of systematic strategies for sustaining profound change. (Once there is intellectual understanding there can be emotional engagement, leading to sustained action, all in a positive feedback loop.) The enhancement of personal results is often the first source of reinforcing energy for sustaining deep change. And, it is inherently satisfying to work in a network of committed people. Given the choice, very few people would not want to become part of a network where there is excitement, perseverance, innovation, experimentation, and commitment. As Dr. W. Edwards Deming used to say, "People seek joy in work." In this day of bottom line focus, when employees often assume that personal needs are subservient to the organization's needs, it is truly liberating to discover that the two can be aligned rather than in opposition. For those who have gone from a run-of-the-mill organization to one, which literally supports learning and knowledge for everyone, feel transformed. They learn to understand just how much they are worth, and what they can give to the workplace. They become intellectuallystimulated, energized, and emotionally-engaged. For significant change to lead to sustainability, hierarchical control must be put aside. The emergence and development of informal networks must be supported so that people can share their tacit knowledge and help one another. Communities of practice can be geared so that people continually learn to help each other. The diffusion of innovative practices needs informal networks through which new ideas can spread in and across organizations. Such informal networks are almost always superior to hierarchical channels for spreading new innovations because these informal networks already exist; experimenting with new ideas requires help and time to think in a safe context; and because there is a strong element of credibility with people whom we know. Without active internal communities of practice, an organization cannot expect profound and sustained change. Managers need to surrender control in order for learning capabilities to be enhanced. This will lead to greater business results by eliminating wasteful practices, and bring about the development of new business practices that lead to better results. And mental models need to be examined. The limits that block organizational learning initiatives have a great deal to do with the mental models embedded in the culture of an organization. For example: hoarders, hierarchies, and stars are the order of the day! For organizations to attain sustainability for their KM efforts, they must be prepared to develop new mental models for thinking about their workplaces and new ways to reach across internal and external boundaries. Mental Models must be managed because they do prevent new and powerful insights and organizational practices from becoming implemented. The process begins with self- reflection, unearthing deeply held belief structures and generalizations, and understanding how they dramatically influence the way we operate in our own lives. Until there is realization and a focus on openness, real change can never be implemented. This is hard work, particularly because the pull of sustainable development as an aspiration may bring diverse groups of people together in collaborations that require breaking down old boundaries and hierarchies. However, once employees are forced to let go of the existing conventional wisdom of the organization, they can be innovative and creative, designing new approaches and learning to learn faster.
Commentary
Much of the confusion and disappointment concerning knowledge management stems from confusion between information and knowledge since not even KM experts link knowledge to action. There is no
8 of 12
10/14/2011 11:31 AM
http://www.moyak.com/papers/knowledge-management.html
clarity. People are investing in systems to capture, organize, and disseminate information, and then call it knowledge. But knowledge, by definition, cannot be converted into an object and given from one person to another. Knowledge only diffuses when there are learning processes whereby human beings develop new capacities for effective action, with internal learning communities in place that offer psychological safety and trust. When there is negativity and unrealistic expectations in the workplace, and arrogant people who believe they know everything, knowledge cannot be diffused. Lack of communication within an organization made evident by continually reinventing the same wheel is one sure sign that the knowledge base is not being utilized and built upon. Much of the interest in knowledge management comes from the problem of diffusing innovative practices within an organization. Improved diffusion of knowledge will not happen simply because the CEO says it should, or because management buys new information technology hardware. Information technology, while critical for enabling the spread of information, cannot capture and store knowledge. Only people can do that. Effective organizational learning infrastructure will need to augment the natural workings of the informal communities of practice that already exist. One of the key challenges of the knowledge-based economy will to foster innovation. The only way to accomplish that goal is to build an infrastructure that is not dependent upon traditional hierarchies because they do not encourage the dissemination of knowledge. And remember, if you want to build an organization for the 21st Century, hire for diversity, curiosity and allow your employees to grow beyond their wildest dreams. Let them explore their own limits, collaborate with each other, and most importantly, give them enough time to reflect on what they know so they can give back to the organization. You may be surprised to find out just how much expertise your company already has in place. How do you know you have a good system in place? When information is widely disseminated throughout the organization. Wherever it is needed, it is accessible, and it is accessible at a fast rate of speed. Related Papers Future Scenarios: The Art of Storytelling Avatar Technology Science and Technology Foresight Web Conference BioSystemics Knowledge Manager's Synthesis Report Geostrategics Synthesis Report Scenario Planning, Science and Technology, National Research and Societal Considerations What Does a Chief Knowledge Officer Do?
Acknowledged Works
Amidon, Debra M. The Challenge of Fifth Generation R&D. Research Technology Management, Jul/Aug 1996, Vol. 39, No. 4, p. 33. Anderson, Howard. A Little Knowledge is a Dangerous Thing. Network World, November 16, 1998, Vol. 15, No. 46, p. 51. Bair, Jim. Knowledge Management: The Era of Shared Ideas. Forbes, September 22, 1997, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 28. Bontis, Nick. There's a Price on Your Head: Managing Intellectual Capital Strategically. Ivey Business Quarterly, Summer 1996, Vol. 60, No. 4, p. 40. Butters, Gerry. Networking in 2005: Its Only Limitations May Be the Boundaries of Imagination. Telecommunications, January 1998, Vol. 32, No. 1, p. 39.
9 of 12
10/14/2011 11:31 AM
http://www.moyak.com/papers/knowledge-management.html
Cole-Gomolski, Barb. Knowledge Managers Need Business Savvy. Computerworld, January 25, 1999 Vol. 33, No. 4, p. 40. Cliffe, Sarah. Knowledge Management: The Well-Connected Business. Harvard Business Review, July/August 1998, Vol. 76, No. 4, p. 17. Darling, Michele S. The Knowledge Organization: A Journey Worth Taking. Vital Speeches of the Day, September 1, 1996, Vol. 62, No. 22, p. 693. Donlon, J. P. Harnessing Knowledge. Chief Executive, March 1, 1999. Earl, Michael J., and Ian A Scott. What is a Chief Knowledge Officer? Sloan Management Review, Winter 1999, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 29-38. Fitzloff, Emily, and Dana Gardner. Web Opens Enterprise Portals. InfoWorld, January 25, 1999, Vol. 21, No. 4, p. 1. Fraone, Gina. The Road to Wellville. Electronic Business, November 1998, Vol. 24, No. 11, p. 36. Greengard, Samuel. Storing, Shaping and Sharing Collective Wisdom. Workforce, October 1998, Vol. 77, No. 10, pp. 82-88. Haapaniemi, Peter. We've Got Too Much Information and Not Enough Knowledge. Chief Executive, 1998, Supplement: Technology and the CEO: Nightmares, Daydreams, Solutions, p. 26. Hansen, Morten T., Nitin Nohria, and Thomas Tierney. What's Your Strategy for Managing Knowledge? Harvard Business Review, March/April 1999, Vol. 77, No. 2, p. 106. Hiebeler, Robert J. Benchmarking: Knowledge Management. Strategy & Leadership, March/April 1996, Vol. 24, No. 2, p. 22. Kelly, Kevin. Proto-Gizmos: Artifact Projections From 2005. Wired, October 1996, Vol. 4, No. 10. Kim, W. Chan, and Rene Mauborgne. Fair Process: Managing in the Knowledge Economy. Harvard Business Review, July/August 1997, Vol. 75, No. 4, pp. 65-75. Kleiner, Art. (1996). The Age of Heretics. New York: Currency Doubleday. Knapp, Ellen M. Unique Challenges: Computing and Telecommunications in a Knowledge Economy. In Defining a Decade: Envisioning CSTB's Second 10 Years. National Research Council of Canada, 1997. Lapp, Ellen M. Knowledge Management. Business and Economic Review, July/September 1998, Vol. 44, No. 4, p. 3. MacDonald, David. Outsourced Knowledge Management is One Option. Computing Canada, March 5, 1999, Vol. 25, No. 9, p. 24. Macleod, Marcia. The Knowledge Chain. Supply Management, February 4, 1999, Vol. 4, No. 3, p. 38. McCartney, Laton. Getting Smart About Knowledge Management. Industry Week, May 4, 1998, Vol. 247, No. 9, p. 30. McNamara, Paul. Q&A: Lotus Bangs the Knowledge Management Drum. Network World, February 1,
10 of 12
10/14/2011 11:31 AM
http://www.moyak.com/papers/knowledge-management.html
1999, Vol. 16, No. 5, p. 29. Mintzberg, Henry. That's Not "Turbulence", Chicken Little, It's Really Opportunity. Planning Review, Nov/Dec 1994, Vol. 22, No. 6, p. 7. Mullin, Rick. Knowledge Management: A Cultural Evolution. The Journal of Business Strategy, September/October 1996, Vol. 17, No. 5, p. 56. Nadler, David A. (1998). Champions of Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Pemberton, J Michael. Chief Knowledge Officer: The Climax to Your Career? ARMA Records Management Quarterly, April 1997, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 66-69. Peters, Tom. (1997). The Circle of Innovation. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Romanczuk, Jeffrey B., and J Michael Pemberton. The Chief Information Officer: Rise and Fall? ARMA Records Management Quarterly, April 1997, Vol. 31, No. 2, p. 14-26. Schifrin, Matthew. The New Enablers: Chief Information Officers. Forbes, June 2, 1997, Vol. 159, No. 11, pp. 138-143. Schwartz, Peter. Post-Capitalist. Wired, Jul/Aug. 1993, Vol. 1, No. 3. Senge, Peter M. Creating Learning Communities. Executive Excellence, March 1997, Vol. 14, No. 3, p. 17. Senge, Peter M. Communities of Leaders and Learners. Harvard Business Review, September/October 1997, Vol. 75, No. 5, p. 30. Senge, Peter. Sharing Knowledge. Executive Excellence, November 1997, Vol. 14, No. 11, p. 17. Senge, Peter. The Knowledge Era. Executive Excellence, January 1998, Vol. 15, No. 1, p. 15. Senge, Peter, and Art Kleiner, et al. (1999). The Dance of Change: The Challenges to Sustaining Momentum in Learning Organizations. New York: Doubleday. Stewart, Thomas A. Why Dumb Things Happen to Smart Companies. Fortune, June 23, 1997, Vol. 135, No. 12, p. 159. Stewart, Thomas A. Does Anyone Around Here Know...? Fortune, September 29, 1997, Vol. 136, No. 6, p. 279. Stewart, Thomas A. Knowledge, the Appreciating Commodity. Fortune, October 12, 1998, Vol. 138, No. 7, p. 199. Stewart, Thomas A. Packaging What You Know. Fortune, November 9, 1998, Vol. 138, No. 9, pp. 253-254. Sunoo, Brenda Paik. How HR Supports Knowledge Sharing. Workforce, March 1999, Vol. 78, No. 3, p. 30. Symoens, Jeff. Could Be a Big Year for 'Knowledge Management' Vendors and Their Products. InfoWorld, December 28, 1998/Jan 4, 1999, Vol. 20, No. 52/1, p. 78.
11 of 12
10/14/2011 11:31 AM
http://www.moyak.com/papers/knowledge-management.html
Teresko, John. Information Rich, Knowledge Poor? Industry Week, February 1, 1999, Vol. 248, No. 3, p. 19. Truran, William R. Pathways for Knowledge: How Companies Learn Through People. Engineering Management Journal, December 1998, Vol. 10, No. 4, p. 15. Verespej, Michael A. Invest in People. Industry Week, February 1, 1999, Vol. 248, No. 3, p. 6. Vogele, Alexander. Germany: Knowledge and Know-How Exchange: Acute Risks for German Subsidiaries of Foreign Multinationals. International Tax Review, February 1999, Vol. 10, No. 2, p. 44. Webb, Dave. Business Intelligence Tools Help Iron Out the Wrinkles. Computing Canada, February 5, 1999, Vol. 25, No. 5, p. 19. Zerega, Blaise. Art of Knowledge Management. InfoWorld, July 27, 1998, Vol. 20, No. 30, p. 61.
Copyright 2011 Moya K. Mason, All Rights Reserved
12 of 12
10/14/2011 11:31 AM