General Perspectives on Knowledge Management - School of ...

0 downloads 176 Views 5MB Size Report
information technology, knowledge management practice and research, and ..... business advantage requires change in many
General Perspectives on Knowledge Management: Fostering a Research Agenda VARUN GROVER AND THOMAS H. DAVENPORT For biographical information on VARUN GROVER and THOMAS H . Guest Editors' Introduction.

DAVENPORT see

the

We trace in pragmatic terms some of what we know about knowledge, information technology, knowledge management practice and research, and provide two complementary frameworks that highlight potential opportunities for building a research agenda in this area. The papers in this special issue are then discussed. ABSTRACT:

KEY WORDS AND PHRASES: information technology, knowledge, knowledge management, knowledge market, knowledge process

IT WAS ONLY A FEW YEARS AGO that knowledge management was relegated to the domain of organizations whose primary business was lo sell knowledge-based products. Now, ii is rapidly becoming an integral business function for many organizations as they realize that competitiveness hinges on effective management of intellectual resources. In a relatively quiet and rapid way, the concept has penetrated into many different functions and processes of business. This is perhaps the best possible set of outcomes for knowledge management. Rather than becoming a stand-alone business fad, the management of knowledge is best accomplished by becoming embedded in other aspects of business. Ironically, the best future for knowledge management would he for it to become so pervasive and common that it seems invisible.

Knowledge and the Role of Information Technology As WE TRACE THE EVOLUTION OF coMPUnNG TECHNOLOGIES in business, we can observe their changing level of organizational impact. The first level of impact was clearly at the point work got done and transactions (e.g., orders, deposits, reservations) took place. The inflexible, centralized mainframe of the 1960s allowed for little more than massive number crunching, commonly known as electronic data processing. Organizations became data heavy at the bottom and data management systems were used to keep the data in check. Also, the management information system of the 1970s was used to aggregate these data into useful information reports, often Journal of Management Infonwilion Sy.w ledge numagenKnl (hoi Ftfleetdirfcrcm Fcci un Elemonu frnmework.

Organ izai Professes

\.

•Att)ui»iiii)n/t'reinlon •Cnf I fic Dt iun/DiKu inc niBtiun

Niduinolu, AkJrich. und Subranuni dcmnnctrnic ihiii knowledge m initiatives niny fail Jue «i thr nsalitics and cotulrsinis nf (he aiUiuteil weh tii Ihe rcul culliirc pceunl in tia) ID lia^ icTivitiei.

^

(juld, Mjlhotr link tirganlzalionni i:iiltural capabilities, and orgonijalionnl KM pmtessc u-'ith UFgani/.iilEOnal effeciivencss.

Becerra-Fernandez and al focui on i involving (rniisfcf ofcjplicilanJ implicil knnwivilgc among groups and their tn dilTercnl losk conn (IS.

duuti^ tvlieve ihal iheir knowledge Ii o^'nod by the orgunizuLion and Taclcn thul mighl an'ecl I hit hciicf.

Figure 2. Mapping ofthe Papers in This Special Issue

empirical data gathered from eight subunits of a knowledge-intensive organization, the Ketitiedy Space Center, they provide evidence for their cotitingeticy framework. The results suggest that in developing (deliberate) knowledge management processes, task domain and orientation should be considered. The next article by Markus synthesizes literature from various sources to develop an initial theory of knowledge reusability (documentation and transfer). Four types of knowledge reuse situations are identified, based on the knowledge distance between knowledge producers and reusers. The study provides interventions for managers, such as the use of human and technical intermediaries that might lead to more successful reuse in organizations. The third article by Swap, Leonard, Shields, and Abrams focuses on mentoring and storytelling as techniques for effectively transferring tacit knowledge in work settings. Drawing on research in cognitive psychology and extensive field studies, the authors frame an essay on principles for effective knowledge transfer through ihese mechanisms. They also argue that sophisticated managers can recognize and nurture these types of informal learning processes. The fourth article, by Nidumolu. Aldrich, and Subramani, provides an interpretive examination of knowledge. Using a rich investigation of a single company, the authors demonstrate the underlying tension between the deliberate initiative and the emergent practices of the participants. The authors use metaphors and symbols to describe why the cultural climate at the company inhibited the knowledge initiative

GENERAL PERSPECTIVES ON KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

19

from being successful. The study alerts managers to recognize the reality of the situated knowledge web before undertaking knowledge management initiatives. The next article, by Jarvenpaa and Staples, examines the interesting issue of organizational ownership rights to individual information and knowledge. By using vignettes and a questionnaire, individuals in two organizations were asked to assess their propensity to share within and outside the organization a variety of contextual variables. These were hypothesized to be associated with individual beliefs about organizational ownership. The results provide preliminary guidelines on the environment that needs to be cultivated where individuals attach high levels of organizational ownership to their information and knowledge. The sixth article, by Gold, Malhotra, and Segars, provides an organizational perspective of knowledge management. The authors define a number of additive components of (deliberate) knowledge process capability and knowledge infrastructure capahility. They then survey over 300 senior executives. Using rich multi-item scales, they hypothesize and test a structural model of organizational effectiveness. The results suggest that managers should focus on multiple dimensions of knowledge management, rather than optimize on any one. Finally, Earl draws on case studies and interviews to inductively develop taxonomy of seven "schools" of knowledge management. These schools are differentiated hy their focus, aim, success factor, role of IT, and central philosophy. The study provides a useful way to make sense of the many corporate initiatives undertaken iti recent years. The author provides guidelines for firms that wish to use the taxonomy to begin formulation of a knowledge management strategy. Tlie seven articles can also he examined in light of the market framework. BecerraFemandez and Sabherwal demonstrate that flow of knowledge has greater friction if the appropriate task conditions are not matched. Markus emphasizes the importance of bridging knowledge distance (asymmetry) between supplier and buyer in order to have successful outcomes. Swap et al. focus on how managers can use the hidden currency of soft mechanisms to effectively sell tacit knowledge. Nidumolu et al. demonstrate how cultural impediments can inhibit both market efficiency and effectiveness. Jarvenpaa and Staples study factors influencing the (perceived) convergence between market effectiveness for the organization and efficiency for the buyer. Finally, Gold et al. describe capability sets that encourage efficient and effective knowledge markets, while Earl describes dimensions that frame the context in which knowledge markets occur.

Conclusion KNOWLEDGE AND ITS MANAGEMENT involve effort on many fronts to be successful. Whether framed in terms of a process and itscontext or in terms of market efficiency and effectiveness, knowledge management offers fertile avetiues for research. This Special Issue provides one smalt step in this regard. It is important to note however that the research agenda should be closely tied to practical issues in kno-. ledge management. A healthy tension between knowledge and action is the key to organizational success.

20

GROVER AND DAVENPORT

REFERENCES 1. Appleyard, M.M. How does knowledge flow? Imerfirm patterns in the semiconductor industry. Strategic Management Journal. 17 (1996). 137-154. 2. Barney, J.B. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, /7 (1991). 99-120. 3. Bohme. B.. and Wjeland, R. Knowledge representation in expert systems for process control. Decision Support Sy.KiL'ms. 6. 4 (1990). 307-314. 4. Brown, J.S., and Duguid, P. Organizational learning and communities of practice: toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovalion. Organization Science. 2. 1 (1991). 40-57. 5. Carlson, J.R.. and Zmud, R.W. Channel expansion theory and the experiential nature of media richness perceptions. Academy of Management Journal. 42. 2 (1999), 153-170. 6. Conner, K.R.. and Prahalad, C.K. A resource-based theory of the firm: knowledge versus opportunism. Organizalion Science, 7. 5 (1996). 477-501. 7. Davenport. T.H., and Prusak. L. Workin.^ Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know. Boston; Harvard Business School Press. 1998. 8. Davenport. T.H.; De Long. D.W.; and Beers. M.C. Successful knowledge management projects. Sloan Management Review. 39. 2 (1998). 43-57. 9. Earl. M.J.. and Scott, I.A. Opinion: what is a chief knowledge officer? Sloan Management Review. 40(1999). 29-38. 10. Galunic, D.C, and Rodan, S. Resource recombinations in the firm: knowledge structures and the potential forSchumpeterian innovaiion. Strategic Management Journal. 19. 12 (1998), 1193-1201. 11. Grant. R.M. Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: organizational capability as knowledge integration. Organization Science. 7. 4 (1996). 375-387. 12. Gram. R.M.: Baden-Fuller. C ; Ghoshal. S.; and Moran. P A know ledge-based theory of inter-firm collaboration. Bad for practice: a critique of the transaction cost theory. Academy of Management Best Papers Proceedings (1995). 17-21. 13. Gupta. A.K,. and Govindarajan. V. Knowledge flows and the structure of control within multinational corporations. Academy of Management Review. 16. 4 (1991). 768-792. 14. Hansen. M.: Nohria. N.; and Ticrney. T. What's your su-ategy for managing knowledge?" Harx'anl Business Review. 77. 2(1999). I()fr-ll6. 15. Hedlutid. G. A model of knowledge management and the N-form corporation. Strategic Management Journal. 15. Special Issue (1994), 73-90. 16. Inkpen. A.C., and Dinur, A. Knowledge management processes and international joint ventures. Organization Science. 9. 4 (1998). 454-468. 17. Kogut. B.. and Zander. U. Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Busine.ss Studies. 24, 4 (1993), 625-645. 18. Latiison, R.; Bengtsson. L.; Henriksson. K.; and Sparks, J. The interorganizational learning dilemma: collective knowledge development in strategic alliances. Organization Science. 9. 3 (1998), 285-305. 19. Liebeskind, J,P Knowledge, strategy, and the theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal. 17. 1 (1996). 93-107. 20. Murrell, S., and Plant, R.T. A survey of tools for the validation and verification of knowledge-based systems: 1985-1995. Decision Support Sy.stems. 2J. 4 (1997), 307-323. 21. Nonaka. I. The knowledge-creating company. Han'ard Business Review, 79. 6 (1991), 96-104. 22. Nonaka. I., and Takeuchi, H. The Knowledge-Creating Company—How Japanese Companies Create the Dynatnics of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. 23. Olson, J.R., and Reuter, H.H. Extracting expertise from experts: methods lor knowledge acquisition. Etpcjv Sv.v/fHi.v, 4, 3(1987), 152-168. 24. Schultze. U. A confessional account of an ethnography about knowledge work. MIS Quarterly. 24. I (2000). 3-42. 25. Simonin, B.L. Ambiguity and the process of knowledge transfer in strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 20. 7 (1999), 595-623.

GENERAL PERSPECTIVES ON KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

21

26. Straub. D., and Karahanna. E. Knowledge worker communicalions and recipient availability: tuwarda task closure explanation of media choice. Oraanizaiion Science. 9. 2(1998). 160-175. 27. Sveiby, K.E. The New Organizational Wealth: Managing and Measuring KnowledgeBased Assets. San Fraticisco: Berrett-Koehler. 1997. 28. Raghunathan. S.; Krishnan. R.; and May. J.H. MODFORM: a knowledge-based tool lo support Ihe modeling process. Information Sy.stems Reseanh. 4, 4 (1993), 331-358. 29. Williamson. O.E. The Economic tnstituiions of Capitalism: Firms. Markets. Relational Contravtinfi. London: The Free Press, 1985. 30. Zander, U., and Kogut, B. Knowledge and the .speed of the transfer and imilation of organizaiional capabilities; an empirical lest. Organization Science. 6. 1 (1995). 76-92.