Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
DE GRUYTER
Introduction
A personal network refers to a set of known contacts with
whom an individual would expect to interact in order to
support a given set of activities. These are mutually beneficial beyond the immediate peer group and help develop
knowledge networks. Various tools and technologies are
available to support the building and maintaining of per-
Theoretical Context
The term knowledge worker refers to those employees
who hold graduate degrees and perform professional work
in the areas of their specializations. Knowledge workers
generally perform duties that produce information and
knowledge as a by-product of their regular work. Davenport (2005) suggests that knowledge workers have high
degrees of expertise, education, or experience, and the
primary purpose of their jobs involves the creation, distribution, or application of knowledge. Similarly, knowledge
management refers to the creation, sharing, and use of
knowledge in a wider context.
Knowledge management (KM) encompasses creating, sharing, and applying knowledge for organizational
effectiveness and efficiency. Koenig (2012) states that KM
promotes an integrated approach to identifying, capturing, evaluating, retrieving, and sharing all the informa-
342
DE GRUYTER
tion assets of an enterprise. Personal knowledge management (PKM) refers to a focus on individual employees in
the context of their work. Jarche (2012) defines PKM as a
set of processes, individually constructed, that help individuals to make sense of their world and work more effectively. Miller (2005) notes that PKM is a difficult concept
to nail down because it involves several different types of
information, approaches, and methodologies. For Wright
(2005), PKM involves a combination of cognitive, information, social, learning, and development competencies that
individuals draw on in order to function effectively in the
work place. According to Higgison (2004), core PKM issues
include the accessibility and meaningfulness of information and knowledge, the maintenance of social networks,
and the effective management of personal capital. In this
paper, PKM refers to all these important componentsespecially functions that focus on personal networks.
Efimova (2005) proposed a PKM framework that focuses on knowledge worker activities (e.g., developing
and maintaining a personal network) that are often invisible. This framework highlighted that knowledge work
had components that were beyond organizational control.
This study implied that knowledge worker productivity
was a shared responsibility between the individuals and
the organization. Employees brought their expertise in
and made good use of it; they took responsibility for their
learning and developed personal knowledge and skills.
A powerful way to promote connectivity in an organization is to work through the personal networks of employees (Cross 2005). People tend to be successful in very
diverse entrepreneurial networks. Providing employees
with a means of planning their personal network development is an effective way to promote connectivity. Boh
(2007) suggested that an open and warm climate has a
positive influence on individuals preference with regard
to using personal networks. They tend to have a positive
opinion of the usefulness of institutionalized routines,
such as meetings and dialogues. Christakis and Fowler
(2008) highlight that interactions strengthened by peoples comments on our own blogs or revisions we have
made to wikis. Following people and re-tweeting their
tweets on Twitter and browsing their tags on Delicious allow individuals to reflect. It is important that we pay attention to their links, to topics that they find interesting,
and to people they enjoy reading or following. We should
know about our colleagues areas of expertisetheir hot
buttons and styles. When a number of people tweet or retweet the same news or things, it strengthens the bonding
of the community around a shared meme.
Edwards (2009) highlighted that it is people and their
relationships that give a company the competitive edge.
DE GRUYTER
343
Research Methodology
This study focused on the PKM practices of officers working in various departments of a ministry in Kuwait. The
name of the ministry is not given for the purpose of anonymity. At the time of the study, there were 156 officers
who were considered knowledge workers in accordance
with the criteria of holding a graduate degree and performing professional duties. All knowledge workers were
invited to participate in the study through a letter from the
ministrys administrative department.
A survey was used to conduct the study and a quantitative approach was used for initial data collection. Several KM studies have applied such an approach because
of the various benefits of this method: these studies have
indicated that a quantitative approach was more appropriate to reach a consensus on the most frequently adopted practices and tools (Lopez-Nicolas and Merono-Cerdan
2011; Raula, Vuki, and temberger 2012; Zaied 2012).
Interviews with selected participants were also conducted
to provide qualitative data and to triangulate the quantitative results. Data were collected using an online questionnaire. Initially, only 45 knowledge workers filled out the
questionnaire, so reminders were sent to those who did
not fill it out. Printed copies of the questionnaire were also
distributed to encourage participation, whichalong with
the remindersresulted in the number of responses rising
to 74, yielding a response rate of 47.43%.
The questionnaire sought information on identifying
contacts, social networking, building personal networks,
and performing activities on blogs and wikis. Participants
were also asked about the methods used to build and
strengthen personal networks and their preferences regarding the activities they performed to exploit personal
networks in order to strengthen PKM.
The participants were requested to indicate their
willingness to participate in a follow-up face-to-face discussion and email interviews. Only a small number of respondents showed a willingness to be interviewed (about
18%). However, interviews with this group provided an opportunity to gather valuable insights about the questionnaires findings. Interviews also helped provided researchers the opportunity to seek clarification and elaboration
regarding questionnaire responses. A guide containing a
list of questions was helpful in conducting interviews. In
addition to a general framework, the guide also contained
specific questions to ask respondents that helped clarify
the responses. The interviewees also provided input about
KM-related things in the ministry in general.
Of the 74 officers who provided information, 97% held
bachelor degrees, 77% had up to five years of work experi-
344
DE GRUYTER
Percentage
Responses
66.2
49
37.8
28
33.8
25
27.0
20
awareness about these features and the support they provide for building personal networks through easily identifying relevant contacts. It appears that the participants
have not effectively exploited the capabilities of the email
system for personal contact management. Professional
literature has highlighted the need to take advantage of
email systems features and capabilities in order to support KM and has suggested that organizations consider
developing guidelines on organizing contacts for network
success. However, further investigations are needed to enhance scholars understanding of the reasons for not exploiting email for contact identification.
Identifying relevant contacts allows knowledge workers to obtain information from trusted sources (Jarche
2012). Various email clients provide excellent features to
capture information about contacts and turn them into
personal networks. For example, Google Contacts is a way
to store and organize contact information about the people
with whom you communicate. This Gmail feature helps
capture basic information and allows users to add extended information. This feature also helps the email application integrate with other applications, such as documents
and calendars, through its auto-complete function. Users
can even synchronize contacts between GoogleApps and
a mobile device in order to see their contacts outside of a
browser. Similar capabilities are available in email clients
used by different enterprises, such as Outlook, Exchange,
and Lotus. It was interesting to note that almost all officers at the ministry used smart phones, which have excellent features for integrating email with other applications
and for providing assistance in identifying contacts and
converting these into personal networks. While these are
in wide use for personal purposes, there does not appear
to be much enthusiasm to exploit smart phones and their
features in an organizational context.
DE GRUYTER
345
Method
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Mean
Score
Responses
4.1
6.8
21.9
30.1
37.0
3.89
66
2.8
18.8
30.0
30.0
18.6
3.46
67
1.4
2.8
20.0
14.1
34.3
39.4
25.7
31.0
18.6
12.7
3.40
3.37
70
71
11.8
14.7
27.9
26.5
19.1
3.26
68
14.9
7.6
16.4
19.7
20.9
24.4
28.4
25.8
19.4
4.5
3.21
3.00
67
66
4.5
32.8
38.8
19.4
4.5
2.87
67
management systems will be helpful for contact information spread across multiple devices, files, sticky notes,
and drawers. This has become particularly important with
social networking sites such as LinkedIn, Facebook, and
Twitter. These online social networks allow users to maintain contacts and converse within that network. By using
third-party tools, knowledge workers can have the flexibility to manage communications from a variety of sources.
The participants indicated preferences for methods to
build and strengthen their personal networks. The questionnaire provided eight statements to choose from and
included others for participants to add if they had used
other methods not included in the questionnaire. The participants indicated preferences on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being
the least preferred and 5 being the most preferred). Their
responses are summarized in Table 2.
As shown in Table 2, a majority of officers (with a
highest mean score of 3.89) reported that they tried to stay
in touch on a regular basis with the contacts that they
had identified. They preferred to use email and the telephone to keep in touch with their contacts. 37% of the 66
respondents reported that telephone and email were the
most preferred means of communication with their personal contacts.
The officers were selective in maintaining their contacts. They reported that they give priority to proximity with the identified contacts and that they preferred to
communicate with people from the same unit, team, organization, and area of specialization. As shown in Table
2, approximately 40% of the officers appeared to be neutral in maintaining regular lists for communication. Only
19% considered it important to record the physical location of their contacts. This might reflect that face-to-face
interaction with contacts may not be a priority for these officers. Similarly, the positions and ranks of contacts do not
seem to correlate with the frequency of selection or selection methods, as only 19% listed it as a preferred criterion.
It is somewhat odd that there was a lower preference
for follow-up activities, such as keeping notes about the
areas of interest, hot buttons, and styles of relevant contacts. The participants also did not seem to find it important to keep track of attendance at conferences to explore
future collaboration, which might have been helpful in
exploring the possibility of future networking. These two
means of communication and follow-up methods yielded
the lowest mean scores among the eight parameters.
Discussions with the officers during the interviews
indicated that a culture existed in the ministry that prioritized smart phones as a way to communicate with colleagues within and outside the ministry. For matters that
require formal communication, there is still a preference
for formal printed letters and communication through fax.
Email has not gained popularity as a means of communication in professional and official matters.
The need for and importance of personal networks to
increase knowledge has been emphasized in the professional literature. Cliff and Rhine (2002) suggested turning
conversations into a rich source by using the untapped
knowledge of employees and developing this into an effective knowledge network through peer-to-peer interactive communities. Brogan (2010) advised keeping abreast
of contacts news through Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twit-
346
DE GRUYTER
13.7
21.6
17.6
27.8
32.9
19.2
37.8
39.7
41.9
12.9
34.2
23.0
19.1
16.7
4.3
5
26.0
6.8
7.5
6.9
1.4
Mean
Responses
3.59
2.93
2.84
2.69
1.77
73
74
68
72
70
of 5, whereas the majority of participants reported a lower frequency of use for Facebook (only 6.8% indicated a
frequency level of 5). It is also interesting to note that a
majority of the respondents (48.6%) reported the use of
LinkedIn at a frequency level of 1.
Overall, the use of social networking sites (e.g., Twitter and Facebook) and social software (e.g., wikis and
blogs) appears to be quite frequent. In the post-survey
interviews, the researcher tried to obtain information on
how respondents used these tools, sites, and services, but
the respondents did not provide much information. Further investigation will be helpful in order to see the real
value of using social networks and tools.
Professional literature suggests that PKM is not just
about using Twitter, Facebook, or other tools. Deep immersion in social media is necessary to realize their real
potential (Pisani 2009; Hart 2012). In our opinion, knowledge workers in the future will need more social and selfmanaged approaches to learning within their organization. Mack (2009) has highlighted three key benefits of
using Twitter: it lowers resistance to sharing information,
makes it easy to tap into a global mind-set, and provides
quick recognition and feedback for what one thinks and
knows. We feel that with the widespread popularity of
Twitter, it can become one of the most powerful knowledge sharing and relationship building tools in public sector organizations.
DE GRUYTER
347
Activities
Mean
Score
Communicate regularly with contacts in the network that have the expertise you seek.
Follow those people whose work you admire on networks.
Try to gain access to your contacts networks.
Follow people that your contacts enjoy reading or following.
Follow and re-tweet contacts on Twitter and browse their tags on Delicious.
Share information on social network sites such as LinkedIn and Facebook.
Respond to comments on blogs or wiki edits of contacts and experts in your networks.
Subscribe to and comment on the blogs of selected contacts.
tors in the networks. The time and effort put into network
participation is a sort of investment in the knowledge networks. The frequency of use for these tools and services
reflects an integration of these activities into regular work.
The officers indicated the perceived importance of
eight areas of activities for the exploitation of personal
contacts and networks. They were also asked to indicate
how often they perform these activities on a scale of 1 to
5 (1 being infrequently and 5 being most frequently). Table 4 shows a summary of the responses. Mean scores are
based on the reported frequencies. The responses show
the number of respondents who provided an answer for
the listed activity.
As shown in Table 4, the officers gave the highest priority to regular communication with contacts that have
expertise in their area of responsibility, as this activity
received the highest mean score; more than 50% of the
participants rated it at 4 or 5. Similarly, a large number of
respondents indicated that they considered it very important to follow up with contacts whose work they admired,
as this activity also yielded a mean score of 3.42. The importance attached to activities 3 and 4 (following the networks of their contacts) shows that officers at the ministry
appreciated these activities. As the mean scores indicate,
activities focusing on contacts networks were considered
very important for strengthening PKM.
Activities and frequency indicated by officers at the
ministry are in line with the trends reported in existing
literature. For example, Christakis and Fowler (2008) observed that professionals were tied to the behaviours and
sources of knowledge of those with whom they interacted.
These interactions include subscribing to and commenting
on others blogs and information on social network sites
such as LinkedIn and Facebook. In these areas, the officers were not very active and they did not indicate these as
priority areas.
Two activities on the list presented to the participants
relate to the use of social bookmarks. As reported in the
3.42
3.42
3.24
3.15
3.07
2.71
2.68
2.32
Responses
69
69
71
71
73
69
71
68
Conclusion
The professional literature has highlighted that knowledge in modern work environments is greater within
networks, and access to knowledge networks is forged
348
DE GRUYTER
References
Anklam, P. 2010. Leveraging Context, Knowledge, and Networks.
Personal Network Management KM Forum. Boston, MA.
Accessed October 26, 2014. http://www.byeday.net/weblog/
networkblog.html.
Boh, W. 2007. Knowledge Sharing via Repositories, Personal
Networks, Versus Institutionalized Routines. Pittsburgh,
PA: Carnegie Mellon University, Human-Computer Interaction
Institute. Accessed October 21, 2014. http://www.hcii.cmu.
edu/news/seminar/knowledge-sharing-repositories-personalnetworks-versus-institutionalized-routines.
Brogan, C. 2010. Deepen Your Networks. Chris Brogan Blog,
January 11. Accessed October 21, 2014. http://www.
chrisbrogan.com/deepen-your-networks/.
Chatti, M. A. 2012. Knowledge Management: A Personal Knowledge
Network Perspective. Journal of Knowledge Management 16
(5): 829844.
Christakis, N., and J. Fowler. 2009. Connected: The Surprising
Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape our Lives.
New York: Little Brown. Accessed October 26, 2014. http://
connectedthebook.com/pdf/excerpt.pdf.
Cliff, F. and N. Rhine. 2002. Building the Knowledge Management
Network: Best Practices, Tools, and Techniques for Putting
Conversation to Work. New York: John Wiley.
Cross, R. 2005. Social Networks: Personal Networks and
Leadership Development. LeaderValues. Accessed
October 21, 2014. http://www.leader-values.com/article.
php?aid=633.
Davenport, T. H. 2005. Thinking for a Living: How to Get Better
Performance and Results from Knowledge Workers. Boston,
MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Edwards, P. 2009. Role of Social Software and Networks in
Knowledge Management. Headshift Blog. Accessed
on October 26, 2014. http://www.headshift.com/ourblog/2009/09/14/role-of-social-software-and-net/.
Efimova, L. 2005. Understanding Personal Knowledge
Management: A Weblog Case. Enschede, The Netherlands:
Telematica Instituut. Accessed October 21, 2014. http://
www.edi-info.ir/files/Understanding-personal-knowledgemanagement-A-weblog-case.pdf.
Hart, J. 2012. From Learning Management to Personal Knowledge
Management. Learning in the Social Workplace [blog].
Accessed October 21, 2014. http://www.c4lpt.co.uk/
blog/2012/08/11/from-learning-management-to-personalknowledge-management/.
Higgison, S. 2004. Your Say: Personal Knowledge Management.
Inside Knowledge 7 (7).
Ismail, S., and M. Ahmad. 2012. Emergence of Personal Knowledge
Networks in Agent-Mediated PKM Processes: A Qualitative
Analysis in Malaysian Context. In Proceedings of (ICCIS)
2012: International Conference on Computer & Information
Science, 1214 June, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Volume 1, 7278.
Accessed October 21, 2014. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/
login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6297215&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieee
xplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Ftp%3D%26arnumb
er%3D6297215.
Jarche, H. 2012. Principles of Networked Un-management. Harold
Jarche: Guiding Workplace Transformation [blog]. Accessed
DE GRUYTER
349
Copyright of Libri: International Journal of Libraries & Information Services is the property
of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a
listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.