Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Is KM Dead?
Anonymous. (2008). Is collaboration a multi-billion-dollar distraction? Knowledge
Management Review 11(1), 6. Retrieved 26 September 2009 from
ABI/INFORM Global.
In this anonymous article, the writer asks whether sharing
knowledge can result in multi-billion-dollar losses in corporate
productivity. He believes that furthering knowledge via email,
instant messages and blogs is highly collaborative. However, this
interaction has significant drawbacks. Both volume and digital
content overwhelm knowledge workers to the point of distraction.
This, in turn, results in loss of time, attention and productivity. To
help workers reduce distraction and become more productive, the
author advises them to be discerning in choosing the most
appropriate communication medium at the most appropriate time.
Chua, A. (2007, April 28). Business Insight (A Special Report); The curse of
success: Knowledge-management projects often look good in the
beginning; But then problems arise. Wall Street Journal (Eastern
Edition), p. R.8. Retrieved September 27, 2009, from ABI/INFORM
Global. (Document ID: 1261787511).
This very interesting article takes a look at some of the curses of
successful KM projects. Three case studies are presented in which
a KM system attained a high level of success before exhibiting one
or more dysfunctional outcomes. Lessons learned are provided with
each case study.
The first case study looks at a bank in Hong Kong that designed
a fully integrated database to assist agents at its customer-service
call center. After initial success, disaster occurred when the
database was extended to five other bank departments.
The second case study looks at a European
telecommunications company that supplied engineers at its support
centers with a "digital repository" of solutions for technical
problems. Unfortunately, the engineers became reliant on these
solutions. They became more adept at searching for solutions at
hand, and less so at actual problem-solving.
The third case study follows a college in Malaysia that built an
online forum to facilitate broad faculty participation in developing e-
learning programs. While membership on the forum soared, it
became evident that a core group were promoting their own ideas
and practices as well as alienating others with opposing views.
Davenport, T., Prusak, L., & Strong, B. (2008, March 10). Business Insight (A
Special Report): Organization; Putting ideas to work: Knowledge
management can make a difference -- but it needs to be more
pragmatic. Wall Street Journal (Eastern Edition), p. R.11. Retrieved
September 27, 2009, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document
ID: 1442818651).
KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT (KM) SUSTAINABILITY 3
Management woke up and realized that all the text it had been
accumulating on spreadsheets and in documents needed to be
managed
Consultants were out of work and had overused the term
organizational learning. KM provided a new umbrella for them to
work under.
Departments of information management are often low on the
totem pole at universities, so they seized KM in order to climb
up the pole
Wong, KY & Espinwall, E. (2004). Characterizing knowledge management in the
small business environment. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(3), 44-
62 Retrieved 26 September, 2009 from ABI/ INFORM Global.
In this article, the authors Wong and Espinwall shed the light on
the implementation of KM in small businesses, bearing in mind that
SMEs have unique features. The authors delve deeply into small
businesses characteristics, advantages and disadvantages, their
strengths and weaknesses, and their key problems and issues, all
in relation to KM implementation. Understanding these aspects is
crucial to a successful KM implementation.
Wong and Espinwall highlight that small businesses generally
lack a clear understanding of KM and are slow in adopting formal
and systematic KM practices. SMEs are characterized by their
ownership and management, structure, culture and behavior,
systems, processes and procedures, human resources, and
customers and market. Each one of these features can be viewed
advantageously or disadvantageously in the process of KM
implementation. The difference in viewpoint lies in one’s awareness
of KM. Each feature can either be the great facilitator or the
stumbling block.
With the advent of globalization and with knowledge as its main
asset, SMEs need to employ knowledge as an essential element of
survival. However, they have not been able to successfully
implement KM for different reasons. Awareness of, understanding
of and sensitivity to their situation are crucial if KM is to be
implemented in their environment. SMEs are in a good position to
apply KM, but they are also faced with a serious limitation—scarcity
of resources. Generally speaking, SMEs have a dire shortage of
time, financial and human resources, knowledge and expertise,
which creates unique impediments to successful adoption.
Zuckerman, A., & Buell, H. (1998). Is the world ready for knowledge
management? Quality Progress, 31(6), 81-84. Retrieved
September 23, 2009, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document
ID: 30008695).
Practicing KM may be beyond the ability of many
managers and employees because it requires the ability to
analyze and effectively target the right knowledge assets
KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT (KM) SUSTAINABILITY 6
Defining KM
Ekionea, J., & Swain, D. (2008, January). Developing and Aligning a
Knowledge Management Strategy: Towards a Taxonomy and a
Framework. International Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(1),
29-45. Retrieved September 23, 2009, from Library, Information
Science & Technology Abstracts with Full Text database.
In this article, the authors present a conceptual
framework for KM (in business enterprises) that aligns with
business strategies, the results of which include improved
financial growth, cost reductions and customer satisfaction.
An important aspect of the methodology is for businesses to
identify their strategic character to support appropriate
knowledge-related interactions.
In a second, related article (see Swain & Ekionea below),
the authors again argue that KM must align with business
strategies to be successful, and they propose a taxonomy for
use.
Hsieh, P. (2009, May). A knowledge navigator model (KNMR) to navigate
the knowledge management implementation journey. Proceedings
of World Academy of Science: Engineering & Technology, 41,
1202-1221. Retrieved September 25, 2009, from Academic Search
Complete database.
This comprehensive article-cum-guidebook says
attention should be paid to the implementation stage of an
enterprise’s KM initiative in order to help staff adjust to and
evaluate the new solution, resetting courses as needed. The
author defines the KM maturity level in greater detail than
has previously been done (e.g., American Productivity &
Quality Center has get started; develop strategy; design and
launch initiative; expand and support; institutionalize KM) in
these five stages (p. 1208):
1. Knowledge chaotic – No formal KM processes exist, nor
is organizational knowledge used effectively
2. Knowledge conscientious – Several isolated, grassroots
knowledge-enabling activities have developed and are
KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT (KM) SUSTAINABILITY 7
KM and Technology
Edwards, J., Shaw, D., & Collier, P. (2005). Knowledge management systems:
Finding a way with technology. Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(1),
113-125.
This article discusses a study of 10 organizations and 78
participants. Its purpose was to differentiate between KM and
information systems; determine the role of information systems,
specifically, and technology, generally, in improving KM; and help
the 10 organizations develop action plans to better manage their
knowledge. The authors identified four tensions that affected the
decision-making process with regard to using technology in KM:
Amount of knowledge versus the quality of knowledge gathered
Centralized knowledge storage versus decentralized
Credibility and reliability of those responsible for sorting and
storing knowledge
Imposing knowledge on employees versus encouraging
employees to use knowledge
Though the writers identified these four tensions, they did not
discuss the steps necessary to address the tensions. On the other
hand, these four problems are neither exhaustive nor general.
Rather, they are the specific byproduct of discussions with the 10
organizations participating in the study. The authors mentioned that
they offered organizational action plans, depending on the type of
problem faced, yet the action plans and feedback were not
discussed.
Jermol, M., Lavrac, N., & Urbancic, T. (2003, June). Managing business
intelligence in a virtual enterprise: A case study and knowledge
management lessons learned. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy
Systems, 14(3), 121-136. Retrieved September 25, 2009, from
Academic Search Complete database.
The authors propose a virtual enterprise (VE) model that
is based on data mining (to discover previously undetected
patterns and relationships in data for business intelligence)
and decision support (to support people who are faced with
difficult decisions with decision modeling techniques and
decision support databases), wherein academic and
business partners can connect long after a project ends.
They also note that KM “is usually described with four main
processesknowledge generation, knowledge transfer, knowledge
KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT (KM) SUSTAINABILITY 13
KM and People
Davenport, R. (2005). Why does knowledge management still matter? Training
and Development 59(2), 18-25. Retrieved September 26, 2009 from
ABI/INFORM Global.
Davenport interviews academics and professionals, bringing
focus to KM as an indispensable tool for organizational survival.
However, managing knowledge is no easy task, especially because
management processes are deeply embedded in human
KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT (KM) SUSTAINABILITY 15