Understanding Knowledge Management Concepts

Introduction

This essay provides a critical reflection of concepts relating to KM, including the nature of knowledge, key concepts in KM, and the role and appropriateness of KM and learning within organisations. Knowledge according to Braganza (2004:34) is a three-step process, involving data, information and knowledge. In other terms, knowledge is that which one comes to believe following a set of meaningful practices and accumulating information through experience and the different channels used for communication. These three components have been described as key drivers of an organisations success (Bousa and Venkitachalam, 2013).In relation to Term 1, I was under the perception of thinking that knowledge takes place in a one step process, where one type of learning style is used, in order to pass on the message. However, now it has become much clearer how in depth knowledge can actually be transferred using styles such as explicit and tacit (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). As explained by Hislop, Bosua& Helms (2018), there is very little doubt that knowledge is valuable, but there is much greater discussion around the nature of knowledge, and its role in organisational and individual learning. Zheng, Yang & McLean (2010) contend that knowledge has value, but before it is possible to identify and leverage such value it is first necessary to understand what knowledge is. One of the most influential models in this regard is the theory of knowledge proposed by Nonaka & Takeuchi (1995), Japanese scholars who argued that knowledge comprises a combination of explicit and implicit or tacit understanding of a given situation or set of circumstances. Knowledge is therefore contextual, but has transferable application, for example, recognising processes or patterns in different workplace contexts. The Nonaka & Takeuchi (1995) model is particularly noted for its iterative and spiral approach to acquiring knowledge, rather than a defined linear approach, and this is reflected in the presentation of their model.

“Ba” in their framework loosely translates in English to ‘place’, demonstrating the importance of context and knowledge, and the way in which knowledge evolves through a combination of tacit and explicit interactions, typically conversations and what might be referred to in English as on-the-job learning (Bennett, 2001). The spiral refers to the way in which when first acquiring knowledge, people must typically be instructed on how to undertake a task. As they acquire more knowledge this becomes a transferable concept in similar situations, and they become adept at self-teaching based on previous experience. Over time, such knowledge becomes embedded and unconscious, something identified in entry 3, 4. This model of the Japanese scholars has overtime been adopted by different organizations all across the world in being able to train their employees. Relying on the experience and knowledge already possessed by an employee as a requirement in being employed in the organization, the human resource department then engages individual training of with actual work situations, which the employees overtime learn and adopt, as their respective Job descriptions. McLaughlin (1990) developed a similar model in an educational context regarding the evolution of unconscious incompetence – being unaware of what you do not know - to a state of unconscious unconsciousness - knowledge so deeply ingrained that it becomes impossible for an individual to describe how they acquired the knowledge in the first place or their awareness of having knowledge. This model has greater linearity and begins with a description of the situation of unconscious incompetence - an individual being unaware of the fact that they do not have sufficient knowledge to undertake a task.

This model is often useful in actual organizations to introduce new workers into a field of work. Freshly graduated individuals with full course knowledge about their career requirements often are not aware that they are indeed not conversant with what it actually takes to do the job rather; they think they are completely ready for the job. In the course of working for the organization however and getting to know their duties as they engage in them, their knowledge of what their career entails significantly grows to depths that cannot be expressly taught or highlighted but rather can only be learned overtime through engagement in their work. The type of knowledge gained through this model is commonly referred to as experience. One of the problems with both models however is that they are highly subjective, and often only supported by anecdotal evidence (Gourlay, 2003). Philosophically speaking, the term epistemology refers to the way in which individuals understand the world around them. Both models rely heavily on particular assumptions of epistemology relative to the authors’ lived experience. The practical implications of this in terms of conceptualising knowledge, are that every individual has their own interpretation of the way in which knowledge is formed and then conceptualised.

Key Concepts in Knowledge Management

Working from the assumption that knowledge can be conceptualised, there are several further facets of KM to understand before knowledge can be captured, codified, and then used effectively in an organisational context (Jakubik, 2011). There are good practical reasons for attempting to capture and codify knowledge, for example ensuring that organisations deliver their products or services in exactly the same way and to the same standards of quality every time. Adhering to standards of health and safety is another reason for creating and sharing knowledge - if an organisation does not learn from previous situations and ensure that it applies this knowledge in the future there could be very serious repercussions. Other forms of knowledge relate to creativity and innovation – Edward de Bono (2017) is widely regarded as an expert on creativity, particularly within an organisational context. He illustrates how creativity can be learned, at least to a certain degree, provided that circumstances permit and individuals are willing-discussed in entry 7. He demonstrates the importance of being able to think laterally in relation to problem solving, and this also has practical application in real-world business environments. Frequently businesses are faced with complex or ‘messy’ problems based on incomplete information and dynamic or even volatile circumstances (De Bono, 2010). Collectively, organisations or individuals within them must make decisions based on a combination previous knowledge of similar circumstances and future likely extrapolation of circumstances. This is an example of practical application of creative KM – KM is not therefore just ‘fluff’ - it has real-world application and consequences.

Extending from this principle, creativity is often assumed in popular literature to refer to wildly innovative ideas which serve as the next breakthrough in technology (Yawson, 2015). Such creativity stems from the base principles of iterative learning and also application in practice. Moreover, it is important to be able to distinguish between good ideas and bad ideas, and ideas that may have future merit but are inappropriate at the present time, or which could have different applications. This is an example of being able to think laterally around a problem in a different set of contextual circumstances, which also underpins the interpretation of context being crucial to the conceptualisations of knowledge and its extrapolation in practice.

The Role and Principles of Learning

The idea of organisations being able to collectively learn was first espoused by Senge (1990) when he argued that an organisation which was able to leverage knowledge would find itself at a competitive advantage. This advantage would stem from the fact that the organisation would be agile and responsive, capable of reacting properly to circumstance, and anticipated future outcomes. According to Feilding (2001), there is less empirical evidence which supports Senge’s theory, although it is conceptually attractive. Rowley (2000) suggests that it is not a criticism of the theory itself, more so that organisations for a variety of reasons fail to capture and utilise their knowledge effectively. A small number are able to do so for a relatively short period of time, but even then, they find that they become too large and unwieldy to respond in an agile fashion (Rowley, 2000). There are also criticisms of organisations that adopt the mantra of ‘move fast and break things’ - popularised in the field technology as there is always a risk once technology and/or software is released, it is used in ways which have damaging long-term consequences (Yawson, 2015). There is, however, tension in the theoretical model that he proposes, on the basis that whilst it appears to encourage innovation and creativity, the model is firmly hierarchical, and ultimately senior organisational members have final decision-making authority as to whether to accept or reject such knowledge and innovation. Furthermore, it assumes that such knowledge stemming from individual employees is organisationally owned (Du Chatenier, Verstegen, Biemans, Mulder & Omta, 2009). In the majority of situations this is not especially problematic, as knowledge is contextual and has lesser value outside of its context or specific organisational process. However, for some individuals in possession of highly specific knowledge it can be extremely valuable, and it is important that organisations recognise the inherent tension and acknowledge the risks that individuals may refuse to share knowledge because it becomes a source of power (Haas, 1990). It is also important to recognise that such knowledge hoarding can take place at a relatively low level within an organisation, which has the capacity to inhibit organisational productivity.

The Appropriateness of Knowledge Management and Learning Practices

To address and mitigate the risk of the inherent tension in organisational learning, it is vitally important to consider the appropriateness of KM and learning practices from an individual and an organisational perspective. For employees to be willing to commit to organisational learning and share the knowledge they acquire, there must be congruence between the values and objectives of the learner and the learning process alongside the eventual organisational learning outcomes. As Wyness and& Lang (2016) note, learning has an emotive context - which links back to the original discussions of the critical importance of contextual understanding of knowledge. A simple example might be that a learner has a previous poor experience of their idea being ‘stolen’ - something which can occur with surprising regularity in organisations when line managers take credit for the work of their subordinates. This will understandably have the effect of an individual simply refusing to share their learning or suggestions, mentioned in entry 2. Other examples include a situation where an organisation might invest in external training, and then fail to create the opportunity for an individual to apply their new-found knowledge - empirical research by Tam & Grey (2016) confirms that this unfortunately happens with surprising regularity. This has been outlined in entry 5 where I have spoken about the difficulties of using knowledge effectively and creating the conditions for so doing.

The reasons for this seem to relate to the procedural nature of many organisations, and also in some instances fear around the potential for the application of new knowledge which could be high risk or disruptive (Du Chatenier et al., 2009). This also ties back to the idea of the learning organisation and the capability for an organisation to acquire and utilise new knowledge in a way which sets it apart from its competitors. This is an uncomfortable situation, and one which many organisations can be reluctant to embrace, even though individuals within the organisation might be proactive. This is yet another example of the potential for tension and the inappropriate application of learning frameworks.

Conlcusion

Certainly, there is no simple answer to the best approach to learning practices; they must be tailored to the specific circumstances of the individual and the organisation, and also the objectives of the organisation in the longer term. This being said, an organisation which implements practices to support learning and knowledge generation, and also mechanisms for capturing and sharing such knowledge ought, in theory, to find itself differentiated in its competitive environment. To achieve this consistently requires an organisational culture which embraces the inherent tension of learning, allows opportunities for spontaneous and informal knowledge creation alongside formalised KM, and which also recognises that knowledge is contextual and specific to an individual. Most importantly of all, organisations must make employees feel that their knowledge is valuable and that the employees themselves are valuable - because a failure to do so is perhaps the greatest threat to effective KM.

Appendices:

Entry 1:

Knowledge is a concept which we all use in our general day to day lives, whether that be linked to work related organisations or transferring knowledge from one base to another. I chose this module, because i wanted to increase my understanding on how organisations tackle different barriers in regards to knowledge transformation and how different activities involved within the organisation impact employees individually, through their mindset, skills etc. I particularly enjoyed session 4, which focused on KM activites touching upon the tangible and intangible values of measuring information and relating it to Hislop (2009) work. We had to define possible best solutions for how the organisation can best increase the knowledge, through its high senior roles and assess long term short terms goals for the organisation in terms of durability etc. I am looking to learn so much from this module within the future and hope to embed these changes within the way i think and my personal life.

Entry 2:

I found session 5 thoroughly informative and engaging at the same time, as I could relate to the contents of information that were being discussed on knowledge sharing and the different methods used to transfer tacit knowledge in key roles. Discussing about the common barriers and relating them to the hoarding dilemma, made me think just how complex it is to share knowledge and measure success with performance in working organisations. During my first year at university, i undertook a module focusing on behavioural approaches to work and society, therefore I was able to relate theory to some of the discussions that were taking place, looking at how individual, organisational and technological factors play a key role in employees achieving targets, through sharing information and motivating one another. Looking at the case study, I found the micro organisation being in a right twist and actually understood where Bejan was trying to get with this, through making us tackle the issue. There were many barriers and problems which occurred within the case study, reflecting on how hard it really is to manage organisations and keep up with the different business strategies. For the overall improvements of the task, I outlined my ideas of improvement with my colleague Zahid, focusing on creating a formal environment where all employees can relate to one another without having to feel under pressure and judged. I raised awareness on the issue of alcohol and pointed out how this makes the business look unprofessional and outlook the purpose. Furthermore, i said how Thursday would personally be a good idea to start the review meetings for the company.

I found the task really beneficial as it allowed me to analyse a real life business example and examine how different changed can be made for the betterment of the company and employees. Lastly knowledge sharing in organisation still remains a grey area for development, as employees feel less valued for their work in most casses and have many conflicts when it comes to job progression etc.

Entry 3:

Knowledge management is extremely difficult to manage and introduce within a competitive environment organisation. This is because there are many barriers which can arise in certain moments with an organisation or the individual life, in which they might find themselves struggling to get to grips with the information that is being transferred. The two main types of groups which I enjoyed learning about in week 2, were the characteristics of formal and informal groups and how social interactions and independent working can have an impact on the success of that particular objective. Tuckman’s model (1965) address the stages of how a team is formed through; forming, norming, storming and performing. I personally never through that these theories would come in handy when forming groups, but however especially being in a university environment, I have learnt a lot as to how I can learn new knowledge and then pass it on in a group format through using Tuckman’s stages. In regards to knowledge management and how it links with Tuckman’s stages, is the process of firstly identifying, secondly, building power and relations amongst peers and lastly coordinating different information across different levels. The case study I enjoyed as it was highly beneficial in terms of the key components which we covered within the session. I answered the questions which were outlined on the case study and below have a summary of what I made of the case study. Enablers: participants felt comfortable and trusted within doing such activities within the interview stage. There is the sense of identify and independence between certain clients when sharing ideas and information. What I particularly picked out from this case study was the use of intrinsic motivation and participation, in order to reach the required goal. Disablers: included showing off, embarrassment, competitiveness There is not enough knowledge creation being implied within the interview design of the programme, therefore it wasn’t ideally designed in the best suited manner to share information. It could have all been set up again, through taking into account certain knowledge management practises which can be displayed by these attendees, in order to see how well they will fit in with the new business environment.

Entry 4;

Reflective practice is experiential learning. Within the introduction of term 2, the session focused on various of techniques and models which can be used by both organisations and individuals as employees, to self-reflect on their performance and identify areas of improvement. Before my current knowledge on self-reflection was that purely it is a waste of time, as organisations do not fully grasp these elements of development and just use such strategies to show how professional they are. However, through looking at the different types of reflective models, it became clear to me, how important it is to self-reflect honestly, as one can improve on their weaknesses and attain support from other people. The quote expressed by Beard and Wilson, 2006; “Experiential learning is the sense-making process of active engagement between the inner world of the person and the outer world of the environment. This statement goes on to show how a person can learn from past experiences and use different thinking process to come up with a good solution. I completed the activity by having a go at the Gibbs (1988) model and below is my example of how I demonstrated a critical self-reflection of my previous events that have occurred.

I focused on the skill of leadership and addressed certain areas throughout the reflection to show how I developed through each stage. The first stage was when we had to get into group of 5 members and had a presentation to prepare for as part of our new module. Here we had to carefully select the right question which we was to focus on and decide as a group who would do what part, however at this moment in time, we had all never met before. I decided to lead the way and become the leader of the group, through liaising and explaining information to other members. During the discussion at times I would feel really annoyed and anxious at the same time, due to not getting enough cooperation from my fellow members. The good points about the discussion was that we were sorted out in terms of allocating roles for each group member, however to be honest I did not really like the group and had to pull through for assignment sake. To some extent it is the case of, however generally does a lot of the talking takes in charge, so automatically students were eyeing my as the leader, in which I was happy to take the role. Instead of putting a lot of pressure on my team members for the discussion, I could have at least made sure that everyone understands what they have to do for each section of theirs and if they have any questions. Sometimes people do not want to speak out if they are unclear, maybe because they believe others might think negative of them etc. furthermore, in terms of the future, I would defiantly want to improve my leadership skills through seeking advice from firms such as the CMI and talking to general managers of retail and other industries. This is because there are a lot of group meetings organised by these managers for their employees, in order to go through the overall running of the store etc., I can get advice on to how to engage accordingly with certain members and look for ways of development myself.

Entry 5;

Within this entry, i will aim to tackle the question of how useful is managing behavior in a working organisation? Is it possible? From the content of information delivered by Bejan, especially taking into account the 4 Quadrants as well as the physiological factors which can influence ones behavior, it is clear that to understand such processors is not easy. The principles of learning outlined by Shipton&DeFillippi, 2011:6, raise awareness on the different attributes involved in learning as well as personal personalities. Each section gives its own perspective of how learning can be defined. Personally, i think organisations are not doing enough to expand employees learning and introduce certain practices to increase levels of productivity, aims and objectives etc. Employees as learners need to be encouraged to engage in reflective action, as s individuals learn more effective actions, their learning “spills over” to the organisation. However, it can be argued that different employees learn in different ways as expressed by the grid. Individuals and groups have different levels of control and influence. In relation to this, the case study, which was completed during the second session, was also helpful and informative, as we worked in groups to learn how learning can be expressed through different stages. Attached are my answers, which we completed as a group. I felt as if most of our answers were just specific to the question and we wasn't really looking at it from the bigger picture, as there were many things which could have been done to transfer knowledge across different levels.

Entry 6:

The session focused on organisational learning and unlearning, as well as outlining key frameworks and models as to how organisations can improve learning and who the learning needs to take place for. What we fundamentally need to understand is the principle that everyone learns in a different way, therefore organisations need to be aware of policies and behavior, as to how areas of development can be improved as well as identifying new areas of learning for employees. With this in mind, you see that people do not agree on what is important therefore having to do things which they disagree with. Within the 21st century, there are businesses that are an example of this where most employees leave the organisation due to feeling unappreciated for their contribution and their values not being met. Through Bejan speaking about the 4 eyes model, i found this really interesting and informative, due to the fact that it explained to me ways in which knowledge which is transferred to knowledge management groups and then back to the organisation. This is seen as an effective way of keeping knowledge secure within the business, as everyone is focusing on the fact of improving job performance and traditional learning can take place.

Entry 7:

In relation to Creativity, Innovation and Knowledge creation, i found the session informative and useful in terms of how knowledge is created within organisations and how all employees are creative within their own ways. Creativity can be defined as not being a talent, as peoples idea generation varies depending on their life experiences and skills gained. We were given two activities which were based upon a word, in which we had the task of being creative and thinking of how the particular word links in with the assignment. We had the word violet, which i enjoyed taking apart and putting my creativity skills to the test. I worked with Zahid for this activity and we generated the following ideas; 1. Violet- mixture of blue and purple color, links with the assignment in terms of the different ideas developed within the assignment linking the relevant points back to certain themes. 2. Also violet is a flower, that is structured with different petals and a stem, which suggests that the assignment has a specific layout which needs to be followed in terms of the different points which need to be discussed as well as the themes attached.

I found this activity really beneficial as the theory elements which were being discussed were actually being related within the activity for example the quote expressed by Edward de Bono, 2007 clearly identifies how our brains are non creative, working with stable patterns and form habits in which one learns new experiences. Moving on to innovation, Blundel and Locket, 2011 outline that without creativity, there is no innovation, which shows that they both interlink and have a comparison feature of exploiting ideas.

References

Bennett, R. (2001). “Ba” as a determinant of salesforce effectiveness: an empirical assessment of the applicability of the Nonaka-Takeuchi model to the management of the selling function. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 19(3), 188-199.

Braganza, A. (2004). Rethinking the data–information–knowledge hierarchy: towards a case-based model. International Journal of Information Management, 24(4), 347-356.

Bosua, R. and Venkitachalam, K. (2013). Aligning strategies and processes in knowledge management: a framework. Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(3), 331-346

Du Chatenier, E., Verstegen, J. A., Biemans, H. J., Mulder, M., &Omta, O. (2009). The challenges of collaborative knowledge creation in open innovation teams. Human Resource Development Review, 8(3), 350-381.

Fielding, M. (2001). Learning organisation or learning community? A critique of Senge. Philosophy of Management, 1(2), 17-29.

Haas, E. B. (1990). When knowledge is power: Three models of change in international organizations. California: Univ of California Press.

Hislop, D. (2009). Organizational Culture and Knowledge Management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hislop, D., Bosua, R., & Helms, R. (2018). Knowledge management in organizations: A critical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jakubik, M. (2011). Becoming to know. Shifting the knowledge creation paradigm. Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(3), 374-402.

Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford: Oxford university press.

Rowley, J. (2000). From learning organisation to knowledge entrepreneur. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(1), 7-15.

Senge, P. (1990) The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday.

Tam, S., &Gray, D. E. (2016). Organisational learning and the organisational life cycle: the differential aspects of an integrated relationship in SMEs. European Journal of Training and Development, 40(1), 2-20.

Wyness, M., & Lang, P. (2016). The social and emotional dimensions of schooling: A case study in challenging the ‘barriers to learning’. British Educational Research Journal, 42(6), 1041-1055.

Zheng, W., Yang, B., & McLean, G. N. (2010). Linking organizational culture, structure, strategy, and organizational effectiveness: Mediating role of knowledge management. Journal of Business Research, 63(7), 763-771.