The depth of KM

Citation

Chase, R.L. (2006), "The depth of KM", Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 10 No. 6. https://doi.org/10.1108/jkm.2006.23010faa.001

The depth of KM

The depth of KM

I continue to be amazed at the breadth and depth of knowledge manegement research and applications. Disciplines as diverse as architecture, cognitive science and product design, and all types of organizations, including for-profit, non-profit and public sector, are investigating and implementing numerous KM frameworks and model in pursuit of knowledge-driven excellence. This issue reflects this breadth and depth of KM studies.

The purpose of the paper by Sven C. Voelpel, Heinrich von Pierer and Christoph K. Streb is to provide managers and academics with valuable insights into how global organizations can better manage innovation. This paper is the result of an eight-year in-depth theoretical and practical research study mainly undertaken within Siemens AG. It is based on a total of 68 interviews conducted with distinguished company experts in related fields. According to the authors, in order to leverage innovation as one of the most important resources of competitiveness and business success, organizations have to abandon out-dated organizational models and engage in mobilizing their knowledge resources. The authors propose the MOBILE model, which consists of the six mobilizers: Mobilizing, Orientating, Believing, Implementing, Leveraging, and Expanding. They examine the model’s structure and implementation.

John P. Girard’s paper, “Where is the knowledge we have lost in managers?” examines the relationship between knowledge loss and manager type. Specifically, the purpose of this research is to determine if some types of middle managers report lower levels of information anxiety. A manager’s knowledge classification is based on the research of Davenport and Prusak, and Nonaka and Tacheuchi. A sample of Canadian Public Service middle managers completed an online survey instrument. An empirical examination revealed that most of the sample reported relatively mow levels of information anxiety. They type of tasks performed by the respondents was not a major factor; however, there was a significant negative relationship between frequency of task and information anxiety. The discovery of a weak positive relationship between tacit knowledge use and information anxiety provides the promise of future research opportunities.

Many practitioners and theorists believe that the different objectives of government, military and commercial organizations require different KM philosophies, methodologies and technologies to achieve success. Most experts agree that technology is not the most important element of knowledge integration. However, they also are of the opinion that knowledge management technologies (KMTs) can enable knowledge integration and contribute to efficiencies in organizations. William D. Schulte Jr and Travis L. Sample explore the perceived differences of the impact of KM technologies among commercial, military and government users. The study applies hypothesis testing through a case study of an enterprise in the military sector – the United States Department of the Navy’s (DON) Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR). The primary conclusion of this study is that there is a significant difference in expectations among contractors, government civilian and uniform military knowledge workers on expected efficiencies from KMTs. Contractors and uniform military have similar expectations. Government civilians have significantly lower expectations. Contractors have the highest expectations from KMTs.

Yuan Fu Qiu, Yoon Ping Chui and Martin G. Helander’s paper, “Knowledge identification and management in product design”, seeks to improve our understanding by studying designers’ cognition and behavior. The authors focus on the internal human activities and explore knowledge management research utilizing a human factors perspective. Knowledge in product design is defined, identified and classified based on design decision-making processes. KM process improvements to assist collaborative decision-making are presented.

Militiadis D. Lytras and Athanasia Pouloudi discuss the critical issue of learning and knowledge convergence in knowledge-intensive organizations. Their paper brings together previous research in knowledge management and provides a critique for the lack of integration of previous studies with learning, a key process for efficient knowledge management. Stemming from this critique, an integrative framework for knowledge management support from a learning perspective is proposed. This framework provides a starting point when discussing the technological issue that can enhance current knowledge management practices.

The paper by Joseph R. Sasson and Ian Douglas describes how a conceptual integration of the fields of performance analysis, knowledge management and technology to create a net-centric knowledge management system (KMS). The design methodology incorporates an interdisciplinary approach and the involvement of various US government agencies that provided a basis for creating a process-centered KMS. Three prototypes have been created and demonstrate the viability and value of this type of KMS.

Organizational success is linked to how well enterprises create, use, measure and manipulate intangible assets. This realization has led to the development pf a range of approaches within organizations. According to Peter Sharp, there are three broad categories of approach. One category emphasizes the use of information technology (IT). Another category focuses on the use of non-IT tools and techniques, and a third category bridges the gap between the two by using non-IT tools and techniques to inform the was Information Systems (IS) are developed. The author’s research falls within the third category, where a need has been identified to develop KM methods that help prioritize requirements and assist in Information Systems (IS) development strategy. This paper presents MaKE™, which stands for “Manage Knowledge Effectively”. It has three main components: MaKE First Steps (a collaborative process for creating a definition of knowledge for an organization), MaKE Next Steps (helps employees articulate requirements, prioritize them and suggest ways to change the organizations), and MaKE Measures (designed to help employees select appropriate measures to monitor changes implemented in the organization).

The paper by Ravi Shankar, M.D. Singh, Rakesh Narain and Adish Kumar reports on the findings of a postal survey carried out to access the impact of KM practices in Indian manufacturing industries. Data was collected and analyzed for 71 industries. The results indicate that the main reasons why these organizations are focuing on KM are to gain competitive advantage and create new knowledge. However, culture and financial constraints are among the highest ranked barriers to KM implementation in Indian manufacturing companies.

Rory L. Chase