No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
New rationale for the need for CKOs long-term: a systems perspective on observations
Abstract
Purpose: This paper aims to clarify the need for Chief Knowledge Officers (CKOs) and explain how some recent views on competencies for educational guidelines, a Knowledge Management (KM) competency model and expansion of practice management concepts make the need for CKOs clearer. Design/methodology/approach: This viewpoint was developed in response to recent publications disparaging the idea of a CKO. The method used was to extract ideas from published and in-work papers to establish the basis for and explain the postulated Unified Competency Theory of KM and its implications regarding the need for CKOs. Findings: CKOs are needed to ensure that all organizationally relevant functions’ knowledge and KM assessments and/or audits are individually complete and collectively sufficient. A risk/opportunity management role also provides justification. Research limitations/implications: This paper mainly limits its discussion to the papers that comprise research leading to the Unified Competency Theory of KM, its implications and an updated practice management model. Other points of view that might substantiate or refute the conclusions have not been addressed. Practical implications: The KM field needs to better identify KM’s risk and opportunity management role and functional imperative. Organizations may need to reevaluate their directions with regards to KM and a CKO. Originality/value: It extends the concept of practice management to permit differentiating disciplines. It provides new rationale for CKOs.
VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management
Systems, Vol. 47 Issue: 3, pp.337-352
Additional: CKOs are needed from a practice management perspective - https://www.growkudos.com/publications/10.1108%25252Fvjikms-08-2016-0044/reader
AVAILABLE FROM: https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/VJIKMS-08-2016-0044
... (TBR) Wrong 2) Differentiating areas: "focus or orientation, artifacts, how knowledge is managed and risk/opportunity goals" (Sisson & Ryan, 2017b, p. 344) 2) Risk management goal Disciplines have different risk mitigation and opportunity exploitation goals. (Sisson & Ryan, 2017b) 3) Organic functions (Sisson & Mazzuchi, 2017) 1) Permits identifying KMc functions 2) Provides a means to audit educational programs 4) Knowledge artifacts 1) Demonstrate clear differences between disciplines. i.e. engineering models versus dentistry teeth molds. ...
This paper reports on findings from a seventeen-year systems approach investigation into the Knowledge Management (KM) domain, reviewing and reporting on system approach results into KM models commonality. Observations resulting from research papers developing the Unified Theory of Knowledge Management are consolidated into dissertation findings. Over sixty observations are presented, including verification of the necessity and sufficiency of the operationalized functions of the theory; a comparison of KM models based on macro verb and attribute concepts; validation that the explanatory scope of Wiig's (1977) three tables and ISO 30401 span KM-centric (KMc) functions; and differentiation of macro-and mini-KM hows. Knowledge artifacts provide a mechanism to help with KM asset inventories. The theory merges Bloom's Educational Objectives Domain and KM skills and provides a demonstration of the difference between IT and KM. It provides an integrated view of KM's operationalized functions, KM competencies, and KM roles. Other findings (Sisson, Forthcoming (2022)) elucidate KM and the need for additional research. The theory's operationalized functions offer a practical and useable construct based on commonality across KM publications. While other approaches and inputs could yield different results, this paper provides comprehensive, complementary, practical views of KM and clarifying observations.
... As "the Commonwealth of Virginia … [suggests,] the importance of correct terminology" (Sisson and Ryan, 2017b, Standards of Learning (SOL) and Testing, 2012-2014) means basic KM terms should be known and used. Begin by teaching "knowledge" of KM as accumulate, organize, reason, and use (Sisson and Mazzuchi, 2018). ...
The purpose of this paper is to suggest how to begin to teach Knowledge Management (KM) fundamentals and skills starting in primary school. It connects competency objectives and KM skills instruction, identifies fundamental KM skills to teach, and suggests needed skills for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) in terms of STEM organic functions. The methodology approach is analysis and synthesis of related topics to induce, deduce, and abduce commonality and new perspectives. This paper discusses how the Eight Ways to Learn, Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities (KSAs), a taxonomy of educational competency objectives, and critical thinking contribute to seeing revised Bloom can be effectively used to teach basic KM. STEM functional needs are identified in developing STEM as an example. With a shift of perspective, the revised taxonomy’s separation of knowledge from the cognitive objectives provides a vehicle for a template for integrating educational competency objectives and traditional subjects. The US Government’s KSA résumé requirements show support for Bloom from a competency perspective. KM education already occurs indirectly in current primary school education. Competency objectives for STEM fit the revised Bloom model and provide an example for concurrent KM skills instruction. The analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, and abduction approach excludes other potentially useful inputs. Extending the concepts in Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives supports the ideas of functional, educational competency objectives and blends with topic objectives such as STEM. The paper suggests practical ways to tie KM education to current primary school activities.
SEE EXAMPLES IN PRESENTATION: ECKM 2019 - Using Revised Bloom as a Template for Primary KM Education - STEM as an Example
==> == > This document only contains backup notes <== <==
The dissertation, “Verifying the Unified Theory of Knowledge Management's Operationalized Functions Using Macro Verb and Attribute Concepts,” conducted tests to verify the sufficiency and necessity of the theory’s seven functions.
The verification needed verbs to use as requirements for testing. This document provides additional detail on the sources used to extract those verbs.
The purpose of this article is to present a mental model of knowledge as a concept map as an input to knowledge management (KM) investigations. This article’s extended knowledge concept map can serve as a resource where the investigation, development, or application of knowledge would be served with a broad mental model of knowledge. Previously unrelated concepts are related; knowledge concepts can sometimes be expressed as a range, i.e., certainty related states: view, opinion, sentiment, persuasion, belief, and conviction. Extrathesis is identified as a potential skill level higher than synthesis, and associated with the concepts: discovery, institution, insight (the event), revelation, or illumination that precedes innovation. Qualitative methods were used to gather and document concepts. System engineering and object analysis methods were applied to define and relate concepts. However, the theoretical sampling and theoretical saturation methods applied do not guarantee all appropriate concepts have been identified. Given the breadth, depth, and dimensionality of concepts of knowledge, later researchers may add additional concepts. This article provides evidence of additional things people know, an alternative to psychology’s acquaintanceship, understanding and placement of newer categorizations of knowledge in relation to older ones, and suggests that ranges for knowledge terms exist. This article extends the 2015 paper on this topic by: 1) taking a deeper look into epistemological terms and relationships, 2) providing contextual definitions, 3) suggesting extrathesis as an idea beyond synthesis, 4) updating the concept map; and 5) providing new insight on the overloaded knows including adding an eleventh know. It provides a much more solid basis for KM investigations than typical presentations, providing a broad understanding of knowledge that is beneficial.
This poster is an update of one presented at GWU Research Days, March 29, 2016. A graphic placeholder in the educational area was relabeled from Hierarchy of Educational Objectives to Classification and the ranges of suggested educational competencies shown. In the proceedings, paradigm shifts were replaced with questions for future research. This online version matches the one in the posters section of the conference proceedings; although, another was printed and displayed at the conference. Sources for the models are included. This poster is 3 feet by 4 feet when printed full size.
This poster summarizes research into a competency term for Knowledge Management (KM) and the other competencies that should comprise basic education that were discovered at the same time. Suggested definitions are included.
Purpose – This article examines organizational learning models to develop a mental model integrating them as an input to generalizing Knowledge Management (KM). Before Senge’s coining of the term learning organization, and more recently with Marquardt’s (2002) Systems Learning Organization Model (SOLM), researchers have presented different aspects of organizational learning. These models present interesting but differing viewpoints. This paper investigates their common aspects and how this can be visually displayed. It then moves past these models to identify eight ways (to prepare) to learn.
Approach – Qualitative approaches were used to find and partition models discovered using seeds from an in-work KM domain term model. System engineering approaches were also applied, helping to identify which concepts to further evaluate and present.
Findings – Crossan, Lane, and White’s (1999) framework of four processes across the three levels of organizational learning provides the best overall generalization of organizational learning and is used to differentiate the others. Marquardt’s (2002) SOLM provides an organizational level framework. Schwandt’s (Schwandt and Marquardt, 2002) and Lewis’s (2014) provide multi-level models from different perspectives. Parts of other organizational models seem to apply more at the individual or group levels. The eight identified ways to learn: be taught, study, discuss, reflect, practice, experiment, sense/experience, and question, collectively, directly address options in common English words.
Originality/Value –This integrated perspective provides a mental model for relating selected organizational models. The eight ways to learn represent a more complete view of learning in common terms. Ways they can be considered offer a range of opportunities for organizations to learn that might not otherwise be considered.
Keywords: Organizational Learning, Learning Models, Individual Learning, Group Learning, Ways to Learn
Sisson, P.W., and Ryan, J., J.C.H., An Integrated Organizational Learning Models Perspective: Eight Ways to Learn, in 17th European Conference on Knowledge Management, September 1-2, 2016, Ulster University, Northern Ireland, UK, Academic Conferences and Publishing International, Reading, UK, pp. 1143-1148. Pagination differs from actual proceedings.
This paper examines evidence that the Unified Competency Theory of Knowledge Management (KM) has merit as a precursor to selecting the first formal justification approach. The theory postulates KM can be explained by three competencies that are operationalized as accumulating and organizing (kennacy), using and reasoning about (cognitacy), and representing, storing, and communicating (mediumacy) knowledge.
Theories can integrate data, be predictive, or make something comprehensible. In systems engineering, validation is the suitability of the solution to meet its intended use. Verification examines solutions against requirements. These provide ways to look at evidence that a theory is justifiable, may be true, and can be believed.
For this paper, exploratory research, qualitative methods, and brainstorming were used to identify and develop examples to consider. Topics in the author’s publications, considered for the principal author’s dissertation KM literature review, and entries in an in-work System-Engineered KM model provided the initial seeds for identifying other possibilities.
Topics examined from an evidentiary perspective include: 1) Words used in publications and a recent KM cycle model are compared and contrasted with the theory’s viewpoint. 2) Personal KM is viewed through the lens of educational guidelines and mediumacy. 3) A more comprehensive view of practice management flows from the investigation of the theoretical model.
Insights gained from looking at KM topics from a competency perspective indicate its explanatory usefulness and suitability for its intended purpose, as well as its unique perspective.
Keywords: Knowledge Management, KM Theory, KM Competencies, KM Strategy, Verification, Validation
Sisson, P.W., and Ryan, J., J.C.H., Indications of a Justifiable Unified Theory of Knowledge Management (Ph.D Colloquium), in 17th European Conference on Knowledge Management, September 1-2, 2016, Ulster University, Northern Ireland, UK, Academic Conferences and Publishing International, Reading, UK, pp. 1080-1089. Pagination differs from actual proceedings.
Research into identifying a competency term for KM resulted in three terms, clarified some common educational guidelines by specifying competency terms, added competency terms for the three domains of Bloom’s Taxonomy, and suggests an additional competency term for creating, making and doing. The presentation includes definitions for the new terms, hypothetical dependences between them, and a preliminary classification and range graphic.
Presentation begins with some of the approach that led to discovering kennacy and then follows with a definition of the Unified Theory of KM as envisioned at that time. Subsequent slides show an integrated model of sub functions of kennacy and cognitacy and mediumacy mediums. The title page introduces relationships between four postulated KM roles and the three KM competencies.
Poster presented at The George Washington University (GWU) Research Days, March 29, 2016. Updated, March 30, 2016 with additional relationships and the Hierarchy of Educational Objective concept box.
In researching Knowledge Management (KM) competencies from a new viewpoint, people and institutions, and then information, were recognized as knowledge containers. That opened the door to examining mediums as vehicles for storing and communicating knowledge and mediumacy as the general competency for doing both. It encompasses mediums that represent and store and/or communicate knowledge. Media ecology considers media as environments and addresses a wide range of topics to include media theory. Cultural literacy, media related literacies, and mediology are discussed in confirming the need for mediumacy and mediums as new terms. Mediumacy is one of the competencies identified as three parts of the Unified Theory of Knowledge Management (KM). In this paper, media theory taxonomy models are examined in the development of mediumacy. Then media taxonomies and other categorizations are reviewed leading to a preliminary taxonomy of mediumacy mediums. Inputs from KM competencies sources were combined to construct summary categories that informally showed that mediumacy generalizes KM representation, storage, and communication competencies, and with the other two competencies, is sufficient in terms of addressing KM competencies. An example of applying media ecology concepts to KM mediums is presented and suggestions for future research identified.
The Oxford Dictionary of Psychology states knowledge is “anything that is known” (Colman
2009: praxis) (Colman 2009: knowledge). Forensic news focuses on the core elements of “who, what,
when, where, why and how” (Pompper 2005: 816; Wilson & Ibrahim 2011) to explain an event. But what
we know is more than just these six.
This paper examines “What are the fundamentals of knowing/knowledge?” A grounded theory
approach was used to identify useful concepts. The concepts represent terms on knowledge, its attributes
and related terms that were drawn from a list of over a thousand candidate Knowledge Management (KM)
terms. Then the concepts were used to develop a basis for identifying other types of knowing and
provide information on how the concepts are related in order to construct a visualization of knowledge
that can be used for KM investigations.
Thomas Nagel in 1974 used a bat’s knowing what it was like to experience its echo-locatory senses as
an example of consciousness (Van Gulick 2011). Dancers also know-like in how they move.
Accepting Plato’s definition of knowledge as a “justified true belief” (Blackburn 2008: Gettier examples)
identifies the need for validity – know-valid as something one knows and also raises the idea of how one
knows it is justified – know-basis (one perspective of know-why). Know-competent is implied by
proficiency.
“Knowledge is a highly multidimensional phenomenon and can be studied from many points of view”
(Ein-Dor 2011: 1490). This paper looks at epistemology, psychology, and KM to uncover additional
categories of knowing.
Ten types of knowns (mentioned above and know-that) plus subcategories for some of them are
named. The presented concept map relates diverse concepts such as mental processes, reasoning,
justification, Gardner’s multiple intelligences, Bloom’s Taxonomies, scales and measures of proficiency
and certainty as well as other topics.
The paper concludes by suggesting using know-like or know-like’s attribute familiarity as the term to
better describe psychology’s third category of knowledge (acquaintanceship).
A review of the knowledge management experiences of BP, Royal Dutch Shell, Chevron, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, Halliburton, Schlumberger, Paragon Engineering Services, BHP, Marathon Oil, and Murphy Oil identified two major types of knowledge management practices: applications of information and communications technology to the management of explicit knowledge and the use of person-to-person knowledge management techniques to facilitate the transfer of tacit knowledge. The study pointed to the challenges of converting tacit into explicit knowledge and the importance of knowledge management initiatives that combined the enthusiasm of bottom-up initiatives with strong top-down support from senior management.
The emergence of knowledge-based economies has placed an importance on effective management of knowledge. The effective management of knowledge has been described as a critical ingredient for organisation seeking to ensure sustainable strategic competitive advantage. This paper reviews literature in the area of knowledge management to bring out the importance of knowledge management in organisation. The paper is able to demonstrate that knowledge management is a key driver of organisational performance and a critical tool for organisational survival, competitiveness and profitability. Therefore creating, managing, sharing and utilizing knowledge effectively is vital for organisations to take full advantage of the value of knowledge. The paper also contributes that, in order for organisations to manage knowledge effectively, attention must be paid on three key components - people, processes and technology. In essence, to ensure organisation’s success, the focus should be to connect people, processes, and technology for the purpose of leveraging knowledge.
Knowledge Management has been a subject of significant management interest for some 15 years. During that time it has been subjected to a variety of criticisms including the argument that it is little more than a "fad" --something that catches management"s attention for a while and then fades away because of a lack of sustainability. It has been compared to other major management fads such as quality circles and business process re-engineering. This paper examines the discipline of Knowledge Management (KM) through the lens of management fashion theory. It demonstrates that KM is not a fad and that it has become an enduring management activity. Management Fashion Theory (Abrahamson and Fairchild, 1999) is an extension of Rogers" Theory of Diffusion of Innovations (Rogers, 2003), that takes a skeptical view of business innovations, viewing the discourse about and the diffusion of innovations as a cultural phenomenon rather than a rational decision making process. After a brief introduction to the field of Knowledge Management (KM), a review of the theories of Diffusion of Innovations and Management Fashion is presented, along with a description of the methodology used to apply Management Fashion Theory to the discourse on KM. Bibliometric and content analysis techniques are used to examine publications and discourse in the field from 1990 to 2009. The analysis of discourse on KM demonstrates a significant period of "latency" from the late 1980s to 1994, during which foundational ideas and precursors to KM appear. Then a rapid growth period is identified, from 1995-2001 during which KM becomes an innovation of interest to most major organizations. Finally, it appears that discourse has settled at a steady state, with no decline apparent. However, detailed analysis has also indentified a potential conflict between the interests of practitioners and researchers, with a separation of the discourse into distinct groups that may have inconsistent views on what is or is not "Knowledge Management". In summary, this paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the evolution of discourse on KM. It provides bibliometric evidence that there has been a sustained interest in KM that is quite unlike that of other popular management themes over the last 30 years. It raises some questions about the relevance of some of the research being carried out.
An exploratory study of the existing performance measures carried out through reviews of websites revealed a variety of approaches that organizations use in implementing knowledge management. The main measures are the balanced scorecard and the intangible assets monitor, both of which provide a comprehensive, developed and tested approach to performance measurement of knowledge management. Additional measures include Skandia's intellectual capital taxonomy and AFS business navigator, the business excellence model, the intellectual capital index, Montague Institute's 12 techniques used to value intangible assets and the APQC measurement efforts.
The academic discipline of Knowledge Management is maturing. The maturity of knowledge management scholarship has been considered as well as its curricular coverage and alignment with the needs of business. This research suggests that a mature academic discipline is grounded on a mature academic programme. The research defines five dimensions of a mature academic discipline, including: (1) curriculum design; (2) nature and coverage of research programmes; (3) faculty credentials and status; (4) academic programme administration; and (5) programme goals. Maturity factors are identified for each of the five dimensions. In 2012, an open public survey was conducted to determine the level of maturity of academic programmes in knowledge management. The survey results suggest that while there is notable maturity in curriculum design, the remaining four dimensions — research, faculty credentials, programme administration and programme goals — are immature. The research suggests that additional focus be given to these maturity factors in terms of standards. The research further suggests that an annual survey is needed to track progress towards a mature academic discipline.
Purpose
– Recently, the demise of the dot.com mania, coupled with slow economic growth has caused organizations to cut costs in an attempt to improve efficiency and the bottom line. Discontinuing or suspending knowledge management efforts and disbanding the chief knowledge officers' (CKOs) role is one common response from most organizations faced with these cost and efficiency pressures. The purpose of this paper is to describe why firms choose to cut knowledge management efforts and point to the deleterious long‐term effects of this course of action.
Design/methodology/approach
– The approach is based on discussions with executives.
Findings
– The paper highlights three common reasons why firms choose to cut knowledge management efforts, namely: knowledge management is seen as a luxury, not a necessity; knowledge management is subsumed under information technology methods; and investment in knowledge management does not offer immediate results. Moreover, the paper argues that cutting knowledge management efforts does more harm than good for a corporation in the long run.
Originality/value
– The paper describes techniques that CKOs should employ to gain support of their executive peers.
Although interest in organizational learning has grown dramatically in recent years, a general theory of organizational learning has remained elusive. We identify re- newal of the overall enterprise as the underlying phenomenon of interest and organ- izational learning as a principal means to this end. With this perspective we develop a framework for the process of organizational learning, presenting organizational learning as four processes-intuiting, interpreting, integrating, and institutionaliz- ing-linking the individual, group, and organizational levels.
Purpose
The purpose of the paper is to present a vocabulary of terms that clearly define knowledge management (KM) activities in order to move towards consensus in the adoption of a common language within the field.
Design/methodology/approach
Existing literature across several disciplines has been integrated to provide a clear description of the sorts of activities an individual undertakes in order to move from knowledge acquisition to innovation, and a clarification of the terms used to describe such activities is put forth.
Findings
Adoption of a common vocabulary to describe KM activities provides a platform to better understand how best to manage these activities, and enables clearer identification of the knowledge management capabilities held by various sectors within the broader business community.
Research limitations/implications
There is a need to undertake empirical research and in‐depth case studies of knowledge management practices using a common vocabulary as a framework with which to interpret findings.
Practical implications
The adoption of a common frame of reference to describe knowledge management activities will deepen understanding of current KM practices, enable identification inhibitors and facilitators of KM, lead to increased dialogue between academia and industry, and present opportunities to the education sector to incorporate such a vocabulary into its curriculum.
Originality/value
The framework presented here will remove the veil of mystery that currently clouds knowledge management and facilitate broader uptake of KM practices, thereby realising the benefits of a knowledge‐based economy in the broader business community.
Purpose
This paper aims to argue that the current malaise and fragmentation within knowledge management are at least partially caused by a lack of awareness of its own historical roots.
Design/methodology/approach
A comprehensive literature review shows that very explicit knowledge management concepts and practices were in circulation 50 years ago and that current knowledge management literature has very little historical depth.
Findings
The current canonical knowledge management literature almost universally ignores significant antecedents to knowledge management thinking and practice dating back to the 1960s.
Practical implications
There are three practical implications: for knowledge management education to recover its historical antecedents; for KM theorists and practitioners to connect KM theory and practice to historically‐related work in economics, sociology and information management, from which it is currently isolated; through an understanding of its roots to help knowledge management theorists build a meaningful and coherent agenda for the discipline.
Originality/value
This is the most extensive exploration to date of the historical origins of knowledge management, with significant implications for recovering a productive agenda for the discipline.
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to look at how knowledge management (KM) has entered into a new phase where consolidation and harmonisation of concepts is required. Some first standards have been published in Europe and Australia in order to foster a common understanding of terms and concepts. The aim of this study was to analyse KM frameworks from research and practice regarding their model elements and try to discover differences and correspondences.
Design/methodology/approach
A total of 160 KM frameworks from science, practice, associations and standardization bodies have been collected worldwide. These frameworks have been analysed regarding the use and understanding of the term knowledge, the terms used to describe the knowledge process activities and the factors influencing the success of knowledge management. Quantitative and qualitative content analysis methods have been applied.
Findings
The result shows that despite the wide range of terms used in the KM frameworks an underlying consensus was detected regarding the basic categories used to describe the knowledge management activities and the critical success factors of KM. Nevertheless regarding the core term knowledge there is still a need to develop an improved understanding in research and practice.
Originality/value
The first quantitative and qualitative analysis of 160 KM frameworks from different origin worldwide.
This paper presents a review on Knowledge Management (KM) performance measurement in the past two decades. Various tools and techniques that have been developed are discussed and presented chronologically to show how KM performance measurement has changed during this period. Each tool and technique is evaluated and classified based on the types of measures and approaches used. This paper also proposes six new categories: traditional, advanced, deterministic, stochastic, general result oriented, and specific result oriented, to complement the previous classification schemes. Future research directions for KM performance measurement are identified and presented in a holistic framework to act as a guideline for new researchers who wish to embark on this field.
Evidence-based management (EBM) is the use of the best available evidence to improve the quality of managerial decision making. It comprises four fundamental activities that can be applied to the everyday exercise of management judgment and decision-making: (i) use of the best available scientific findings; (ii) gathering of and attending to organizational facts, indicators, and metrics in a systematic manner to increase their reliability and usefulness; (iii) on going practice of mindful, reflective judgment, and use of decision aids to reduce bias and improve decision quality; and (iv) consideration of ethical issues including the short- and long-term impact of decisions on stakeholders. It reflects a broader trend in professions including medicine, education, public administration, and so on for evidence-based practice; that is, the increased and more effective use of scientific findings in practice-related decisions. EBM builds on the body of management and social science research to make more systematic decisions that incorporate the best available organizational and scientific evidence.
Keywords:
evidence-based practice;
using scientific evidence;
decision making;
managerial ethics;
management practice
The Unified Theory of Knowledge Management (KM) answers decade long calls for a general model of
KM by identifying one based on required KM competencies. Operationalized, KM is knowledge
accumulating, organizing, using, reasoning about, representing, storing, and communicating knowledge.
The authors conducted exploratory research using systems engineering requirements definition and
grounded theory concepts to identify and relate terms in looking for commonality across KM generalizations. Observations led to examining educational objectives and guidelines which supported the need for KM and helped understand KM more generically through its competency requirements.
This paper reviews the process that led to identifying the need for a KM competency term and
how the three KM competencies were discovered. Included is a graphic showing integrated KM activities
based on the sub-elements of two competencies, an illustrative list of KM mediums, and a discussion of
how the theory can be validated and verified.
Paper available from HICSS-49 proceedings web site (HICSS-49 Online Proceedings - Login: hicss16 - Password: conf16 - http://conferences.computer.org/hicss/2016/. Use author index selecting "S" and then scrolling down to:
Sisson, Philip William
Towards a Unified Theory of Knowledge Management (KM)
Developing best practice through benchmarking features as a critical activity in the business world as it is a vital approach for sharing and transferring knowledge. Companies across the globe have embraced these concepts but have done so with a varied level of success. Some have managed to create huge marketplace advantages whilst others have fared less favorably. The purpose of this research is to establish the level of benchmarking activity and application globally. The information gathered included both the hard and soft issues associated with benchmarking and following analysis, attempted to evaluate the level of benchmarking maturity reached across different industry fields and size of operation. This global survey helps understand what leads to effective benchmarking and development of best practices.
ABSTRACT' Since the middle 19M)s. the "macro" branch of organizational studies has operated
Many ambiguities characterize the new, corporate role of CKO and knowledge management in general.
The only true sustainable measure of value for a knowledge management (KM) solution is business impact – that is, how the solution helps to grow revenue, increase profit, ‘advance the mission’, satisfy customers, or improve business operations. A good KM solution or programme includes a plan for demonstrating business value – a practical measurement plan that recognizes the key solution stakeholders and tells the success story in a way that clearly demonstrates business impact. The goal of this article is to help identify and document these success stories using a practical approach based on real-world experience.
This paper presents a review on Knowledge Management (KM) performance measurement in the past two decades. Various tools and techniques that have been developed are discussed and presented chronologically to show how KM performance measurement has changed during this period. Each tool and technique is evaluated and classified based on the types of measures and approaches used. This paper also proposes six new categories: traditional, advanced, deterministic, stochastic, general result oriented, and specific result oriented, to complement the previous classification schemes. Future research directions for KM performance measurement are identified and presented in a holistic framework to act as a guideline for new researchers who wish to embark on this field.
This study explores the aspect of knowledge management that contribute to the passion expressed by KM thought leaders. further, it looks at the nature of that passion, and the relationship of thought leaders to those aspects. Across four continents, almost all of the 34 KM thought leaders--working in and with industry, academia and government--consider themselves both practitioners and thought leaders. Passion is made up of desires, behaviors, and thoughts that suggest urges with considerable force and is used as a determinant or indicator of what is of higher interest or great.
A framework was developed to consider thought leader responses in terms of their relationship to elements contributing to passion. The tremendous diversity and multidimensionality among the aspects surfaced in the thought leader responses span the entire spectrum of the framework, including external and internal inducers, externally observed and internally felt elements, and correlates to the larger aspects of self. External stimuli include the field itself, the breadth of the field (multidimensionality of experience), the changing nature of the field, the excitement of new thinking, challenges and opportunities, value and results (including transfer and reuse of knowledge), and a sense of knowing. Throughout the responses weave the themes of learning, sharing knowledge, and a shift that is underway.
Thought leaders link their passion to a higher order and consider passion itself a reward. Thought leader values re closely connected with the field, and, in the words of one thought leader, "Somehow I've matched up people's value systems with a process." The field of knowledge management appears to have a magnetic attraction. One interpretation of these intense connections is the resonance of the field with our fundamental nature as human beings, those things identified in the framework that contain the seeds of passion itself.
The interviews also led to new insights into the nature of the Km field itself. For example, the field of KM is self-referential, complex adaptive, has no dominant leader and its nature supports autotelic work.
In this article we argue that the extant representations of the concept of organizational memory are fragmented and underdeveloped. In developing a more coherent theory, we address possible concerns about anthropomorphism; define organizational memory and elaborate on its structure; and discuss the processes of information acquisition, retention, and retrieval. Next, these processes undergird a discussion of how organizational memory can be used, misused, or abused in the management of organizations. Some existing theories are reassessed with explicit attention to memory. The paper closes with an examination of the methodological challenges that await future researchers in this area.
Most of the studies in knowledge management (KM) argue for leadership as a vital success factor for any initiative. Top management leadership enables the effective promotion of knowledge sharing by creating an appropriate organisational culture, and making arrangements for corresponding policies and procedures across the organisation to facilitate management of knowledge resources and practices. There is little empirical research reported that has focussed on capturing the awareness and understanding of KM teams’ constitutions and their responsibilities. This study reports on the survey of top managers with respect to KM strategy development and implementation. It is based on a survey data collected from leading Australian companies, and builds on other empirical case studies, which looked at mechanisms of KM strategy development and implementation. The results provide a better understanding of the roles and responsibilities for successful KM strategy development and implementation, and can assist with designing KM teams in organisations.
This essay critically considers two corporate executive positions: the Chief Knowledge Officer (CKO) and the Chief Learning Officer (CLO). I argue that these positions are key instantiations of noopower, or power over thoughts, perceptions, and memories. Theorized by Deleuze, Arquila and Ronfeldt, and Lazzarato, noopower is an assemblage of older forms of power such as sovereign and disciplinary power into a new form that is prevalent in a time where knowledge, perceptions, and images are the hegemonic forms of value. This essay traces the CKO and CLO literatures' theorization and suggested deployment of this form of power in global corporations.
Organizational culture, organizational leadership, and Chief Knowledge Officers (CKOs) each play important roles in overcoming human barriers associated with knowledge creation, transfer and sharing. This paper examines three key components of organizational culture: cooperative involvement, trust and incentives. In addition, the impact of organizational leadership on knowledge management as well as the roles and qualifications of CKOs are discussed. Through an examination of previous research and existing literature on knowledge management, this paper also shows where gaps in research exist and suggests directions for future organizational research.
The potential of knowledge management (KM) for library and information professionals was investigated by the UK Library and Information Commission (LIC) funded research project: ‘Underpinning Skills for Knowledge Management: training implications’. This aimed to: gain an understanding of KM and the roles, skills and competencies needed in these environments; assess the implications for the library and information profession; assess the routes available to people wishing to develop KM skills; and examine the need for information literacy throughout KM environments. KM practitioners, representatives from KM environments, and KM experts and groups were consulted using: interviews, a questionnaire survey, case studies, workshops and market testing. Organizations implementing KM initiatives in Europe and North America were identified along with the emerging KM related roles, and the skills and backgrounds of people recruited to undertake them. Concludes that knowledge management is becoming commonplace but seldom in the form of large KM programmes. A small number of identifiable and achievable KM activities are usually introduced, those offering the most business opportunities being selected. The cumulative effect contributes to changing behaviour and attitudes but the term ‘knowledge management’ is used with extreme caution and many activities are not labeled as such.
There is current interest in the competitive advantage that knowledge may provide for organizations and in the significance of knowledge workers, organizational competencies and knowledge-intensive firms. Yet the concept of knowledge is complex and its relevance to organization theory has been insufficiently developed. The paper offers a review and critique of current approaches, and outlines an alternative. First, common images of knowledge in the organizational Literature as embodied, embedded, embrained, encultured and encoded are identified and, to summarize popular writings on knowledge work, a typology of organizations and knowledge types is constructed. However, traditional assumptions about knowledge, upon which most current speculation about organizational knowledge is based, offer a compartmentalized and static approach to the subject. Drawing from recent studies of the impact of new technologies and from debates in philosophy, linguistics, social theory and cognitive science, the second part of the paper introduces an alternative. Knowledge (or, more appropriately, knowing) is analyzed as an active process that is mediated, situated, provisional, pragmatic and contested. Rather than documenting the types of knowledge that capitalism currently demands the approach suggests that attention should be focused on the (culturally located) systems through which people achieve their knowing, on the changes that are occurring within such systems, and on the processes through which new knowledge may be generated.
Chief knowledge officers and chief learning officers are gaining strategic positions, making high salaries, and leading large and small organizations in managing and leveraging their knowledge assets-the stuff between people's ears. Many of the people filling the new, highly visible position of CKO come from information systems; those filling the job of CLO come from HR, OD, and sales and marketing, with a strong background in learning strategies and strong orientation to setting business goals. Don't for one minute, however, think that CLOs are just glorified training directors, says Bonner. The article's information comes from case studies of CKOs and CLOs, who describe what activities they do and support. In addition, Bonner traces both the roots and the rationale for the emergence of those positions, which are so new that the roles, responsibilities, and activities are still very much a work in progress. She also reports From the cases on the common characteristics of organizations that foster and support knowledge management, organizational learning, and the formation of CKO and CLO positions. The CKOs and CLOs from the case studies tell what their values are, and a profile comes to light. An interesting offshoot of the phenomenon of knowledge and learning officers is a predicted fusion of the fields of knowledge management and organizational learning: Can't have one without the other. The article includes a sample want ad for a chief knowledge officer and a list of "power verbs" that distill that position.
One of the key challenges for business executives in the knowledge era is to manage intellectual capital. Drawing upon: (1) the author's personal experience as CKO of Knexa.com – the world's first knowledge exchange auction; and (2) the relatively nascent literature on the roles and responsibilities of CKOs, this paper highlights five perspectives that a CKO must embrace to be successful: (1) CKO as Knowledge Sharing Icon; (2) CKO as Trust Steward; (3) CKO as Total Trainer; (4) CKO as Techno Nerd; and (5) CKO as Number-crunching Accountant.
This article describes a collaboratively engineered general-purpose knowledge management (KM) ontology that can be used by practitioners, researchers, and educators. The ontology is formally characterized in terms of nearly one hundred definitions and axioms that evolved from a Delphi-like process involving a diverse panel of over 30 KM practitioners and researchers. The ontology identifies and relates knowledge manipulation activities that an entity (e.g., an organization) can perform to operate on knowledge resources. It introduces a taxonomy for these resources, which indicates classes of knowledge that may be stored, embedded, and/or represented in an entity. It recognizes factors that influence the conduct of KM both within and across KM episodes. The Delphi panelists judge the ontology favorably overall: its ability to unify KM concepts, its comprehensiveness, and utility. Moreover, various implications of the ontology for the KM field are examined as indicators of its utility for practitioners, educators, and researchers.
The ability to manage knowledge has become increasingly important in today’s knowledge economy. Knowledge is considered a valuable commodity, embedded in products and in the tacit knowledge of highly mobile individual employees. Knowledge management (KM) represents a deliberate and systematic approach to cultivating and sharing an organization’s knowledge base. It is a highly multidisciplinary field that encompasses both information technology and intellectual capital. This textbook and professional reference offers a comprehensive overview of the field of KM, providing both a substantive theoretical grounding and a pragmatic approach to applying key concepts. Drawing on ideas, tools, and techniques from such disciplines as sociology, cognitive science, organizational behavior, and information science, the text describes KM theory and practice at the individual, community, and organizational levels. It offers illuminating case studies and vignettes from companies including IBM, Xerox, British Telecommunications, JP Morgan Chase, and Nokia. This second edition has been updated and revised throughout. New material has been added on the information and library science perspectives, taxonomies and knowledge classification, the media richness of the knowledge-sharing channel, e-learning, social networking in KM contexts, strategy tools, results-based outcome assessments, knowledge continuity and organizational learning models, KM job descriptions, copyleft and Creative Commons, and other topics. New case studies and vignettes have been added; and the references and glossary have been updated and expanded.
Executives and strategists have long recognized the value of knowledge as a primary driving source for a firm’s sustainable competitive advantage – hence the creation by many firms of a position called the chief knowledge officer (CKO). However, many people have proposed differing perspectives and models relating to the concept of knowledge management. In this paper differing knowledge management viewpoints are examined, by examining and integrating theories relating to the diffusion of innovations and change agents. The roles of change agents, innovators, and opinion leaders, such as CKOs, are explored in terms of effective knowledge management strategies and techniques. A model and strategies are proposed that can serve as a framework for CKOs and other knowledge management change agents to effectively facilitate the acquisition and use of knowledge in the firm by effectively using an organizational memory system.
This essay examines elements of a theory of organizational knowledge creation. To this end, a model for the management of the dynamic aspects of organizational knowledge is offered, using hands-on research and practical experience of Japanese firms. Two dimensions are examined to assess the importance of knowledge management: tacit and explicit knowledge. Four modes of knowledge creation through the interaction of tacit and explicit knowledge are presented: 1) socialization; 2) externalization; 3) internalization; and 4) combination. The process of organizational knowledge creation is also described in a corporate organizational setting. The model helps to explain how the knowledge of individuals, organizations, and societies can be enriched through the amplification of tacit and explicit knowledge of each. The key to this process is a joint creation of knowledge by both individuals and organizations. Organizations play an important role in mobilizing the tacit knowledge that individuals possess, as well as providing forums for knowledge creation through socialization, combination, externalization, and internalization. The concept of organizational knowledge creation allows for the development of a perspective that reaches beyond straightforward notions of organizational learning. Practical proposals, such as hypertext and middle-up-down management, are offered as modes of implementing more effective knowledge creation. (CBS)