What is knowledge - Essay Example

What Is Knowledge Knowledge is neither a data nor information, though it is related to both, and the differences between these terms are often a matter of degree. We start with those familiar terms both because they are more familiar and because we can understand knowledge best with reference to them. Confusion about what data, information, and knowledge are- how they differ, what those words mean- has resulted in enormous expenditures on technology initiatives that rarely deliver what the firms spending the money needed or thought they are getting. often firms don't understand what they need until they invest heavily in a system that fails to provide it. However basic it may sound, then, it is still important to emphasize the data, information, and knowledge are not interchangeable concepts. Organizational success and failure can often depend on knowing which one of them you need, which you have, and what you can and can't do with each. Understanding what those three things are and how u gets from one to another is essential to doing knowledge work successfully. So we believe its best to begin with a brief comparison of the three terms and the factors involved in transforming data into information and information into knowledge. A review of knowledge management literature indicates that the development over the years has created some notable strengths and weaknesses, preoccupations and blind spots. Although providing a best way to view the world, the epistemological and ontological foundations of knowledge management have been cemented. Diverse methodological approaches and various working definitions of knowledge has further created confusions. While knowledge management might yet be able to be claimed to a coherent scientific paradigm, recent publications indicate an increased conceptual and methodological rigor is needed to establish knowledge management as recognized scholarly discipline. The emergence of research and practical information on aspects of managing knowledge indicates that knowledge management is more than the latest management fad. Epistemology, the study of knowledge, has a log honorable tradition in philosophy, starting with early Greek philosophers. Questions such as"what do we know" and "what does it mean to say that someone know something" have been discussed in philosophical literature. The idea of a formal logical analysis of reasoning about knowledge is somewhat more recent, but goes back at least to Von Wright's work in the early 1950's.the first book-length treatment of epistemic logic- the logic of knowledge- is Hintikka's seminal work knowledge and belief, which appeared in 1962. The 1960's saw a flourishing of interest in this area of philosophy community. The major interest was in trying to capture the inherent properties of knowledge. Axioms for knowledge were suggested, attacked, and defended. More recently, researchers in such diverse fields as economics, linguistics, AI (artificial intelligence), and theoretical computer science has become interested in reasoning about knowledge. While, of course, some of the issues that concerned the philosophers have been of interest to these researchers as well, the focus of attention has shifted. For one thing, there are pragmatic concerns about the relationship between knowledge and action. It may seem, what ever the merits of a metaphysical description of the world, that knowledge itself cannot be one of its objects, for knowledge is of the world, or not at least not only in the world. But there is nothing that is not in the world. The supposition that there is, in this case, is largely due to a picturesque conception of the self and a related conception of knowledge which have dominated most of continental philosophy at least since Fichte, although Hume warned against them in 1739.they may be roughly described as the conception o an ego facing the world (something like an astronaut in orbit facing a planet) and of knowledge either the egos stare at the world, or worse, as the egos fall into the world or the world fall into ego. Knowledge Management in an Organization Knowledge management is unique to every organization. Optimizing the vale of knowledge in an organization can only be accomplished if one knows where knowledge assets are and how are they being utilized. Knowledge management could be defined as the ability to locate and bring together people and relevant information to individuals that need it so that they can take affective actions when doing their jobs. The emergence of knowledge management function all started with Peter Drucker's now famous quote in The Post Capitalist Society (1993) "The basic economic resource - the means of production - is no longer capital, nor natural resources, nor labor. It is and will be knowledge". With such an endorsement and the instant legitimization that followed, organization began the process of learning how to 'manage' this new resource. Organizations higher on the information-intensive scale moved quickly. Positions were fashioned, systems were implemented, and metrics were created as titles such as 'knowledge manger' began to dot the organizational panoply. Knowledge management is an emerging management function. The idea of knowledge management has created considerable interest. It has drawn managers, consultants, economists, and business school academics into an unusual interaction. This may be because it leverages managers' earlier interest in core competencies, their communicator and their transfer. There is also awareness of knowledge as an important economic asset, and of the special problems of managing such assets. The major impetus, of course, is the ever expanding impact of information technology on business, government and the global economy. Knowledge management may also help pull together ideas about corporate culture, networking, trust, and social capital. The Tacit and Explicit Nature of Knowledge There are two types of knowledge in an organization: tacit and explicit. Tacit knowledge is the "know-how" possessed by individuals. It's often intuitive and demonstrated more in how someone goes about his or her work in a knowledge-able way, even though this knowledge is not written down anywhere. Of course, one of the goals of knowledge management is to make tacit knowledge more widely available and to the degree possible, capture it in explicit terms. That's what explicit knowledge is: systematically documented know-how that becomes available to everyone in the organization. Tacit knowledge is of particular interest for those who are interested in how to manage knowledge organizations or those involved in intellectual capital. The interactive processes of knowledge conversion, between tacit and explicit knowledge, lies at the heart of knowledge creation. There are four possible modes of knowledge conversion, at the epistemological level: from tacit to tacit (socialization); from tacit to explicit (externalization); from explicit to tacit (internalization); and from explicit to explicit (combination). The ontological dimension considers four different levels of knowledge creation: individual, group, organization and inter-organization. As regards temporal dimension, it concerns two types of movement, respectively along the ontological and the epistemological axes. Along the ontological axis, the movement starts with the individual's tacit knowledge, is amplified through the four modes of knowledge conversion and is finally crystallized at higher ontological levels (organizational or inter organizational). The movements between the modes of knowledge conversion are, in turn, characterized by four processes: dialogue, networking, learning by doing and field building. The four modes and the four processes are intimately related. Externalization is triggered by dialogue or collective reflection. Combination is triggered by networking of newly created or of existing knowledge from different parts of the organization. Action or learning by doing is the key process in the facilitation of the internalization mode. Finally, socialization starts with the building of a field of interaction. A Knowledge Management Culture One cannot institute the effective management of knowledge by fiat. It requires a culture that values and fosters knowledge development, capture, dispersion, and use to the good of the organization and its customers. To build a successful and sustainable culture of knowledge, senior management needs to accomplish two broad tasks. First, leaders need to be acutely sensitive to their environment and acutely aware of the impact that they themselves have on those around them. This sensitivity enables them to offer an important human perspective for the task at hand. This is critical because it is only with this awareness that the leader can begin to bridge the gap between "leader-speak" and real world of organizational culture. The second factor is the ability of the leaders to accept and deal with ambiguity. Knowledge management cannot occur without ambiguity, and organizations and individuals that are not able to tolerate ambiguity in the workplace environment and its relationships will reproduce only routine actions. Learning structures for example, cannot have all attendant problems worked out in advance. Leaders need to build deep appreciation of this fact otherwise there is a simple tendency to create sameness and a culture of blame. Tolerance of ambiguity allows space for risk taking, and exploration of alternative solution spaces that do not always produce results. Leadership traits that exemplify successful knowledge management companies from less successful firms are: 1. Top management commits both financial and emotional support to knowledge management. 2. They promote knowledge sharing through champions and advocates of learning. 3. They promote knowledge sharing and learning by their own personal actions and behaviors. 4. They make realistic and accurate assessments of the benefits of managing knowledge. 5. They understand clearly the barriers to sharing from the employee's point of view, as well as from the organization structure point of view. 6. They ensure that knowledge project gets the necessary support from all levels of the organization. 7. They ensure that structured processes and systems are set in place to aid the process of knowledge capture, learning and dissemination. 8. They manage the formal as well as understand the critical role of the informal in managing for knowledge. 9. They appreciate the dynamics of knowledge management and help it move forwards rather than institute tight control systems. Senior management plays a pivotal role in enhancing or hindering knowledge sharing. If senior management is able to install the above types of practices then they effectively seed a climate conducive to sharing. It is important to note that it is not sufficient to only emphasize one or a few practices. Climates are created by numerous elements coming together to reinforce employee perceptions. Weakness or contradictions even along single dimension can quite easily debilitate efforts. Knowledge management solution should: Be organized around work processes: Dividing organizations programs and operations into defined units or work processes. These work processes involve the repetition of the same patterns and relationships. This enables the same series of defined steps to be mapped through different levels in the organization and refines for awareness, understanding, consistency, and completeness. Maintain knowledge and facilitate communication: Every business unit in an organization is unique and responsible for critical activities and deliverables. The company will require some enterprise coordination and communication to share the same strategy, focus on corporate initiatives, use the same information technology or accounting applications, and complete cross-functional work processes. The task is to define consistency and co-ordinate activities across business units and throughout the organization. The results of this effort would provide the structure required to communicate around share work processes. Focus on the future: Continuously broaden human capital, learning, communication networks, and future goals or plans. The expansion of these efforts in the organization will create shorter product cycles as changing market conditions make it critical to create innovations in work processes and product offerings. Proactive acknowledgement of the future will empower organization to manage intellectual capital. Knowledge management efforts should include some number of defined knowledge documents that are delivered each planning, budgeting and forecasting cycle to plan for the future by capturing the past. Support organizations business objectives: People, information, and content have relative value in terms of the organizations goals and objectives. References: A.Abecker, S.Aitken, F.Schmalhofer, and B.Tschaitschian. KARATEKIT: Tools for the knowledge-creating company. In Proceedings of KAW'98: Eleventh Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling and Management, Voyager Inn, Banff, Alberta, Canada, 18-23Apr. 1998. E.C. Adams and C.Freeman. Communities of practice: Bridging technology and knowledge assessment. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(1):38-44, 2000. M.Addleson. Organizing to know and to learn: Reflections on organization and knowledge management. In Srikantaiah and Koenig [915], pages 137-160. P.K. Ahmed, K.K. Lim, and M.Zairi. Measurement practice for knowledge management. The Journal of Workplace Learning, 11(8):304-311, 1999. M.Alavi and D.Leidner. Knowledge management systems: Emerging views and practices from the field. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, HICSS-32, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 1999. IEEE Computer Society. M.Alavi and D.E. Leidner. Knowledge management systems: Issues, challenges, and benefits. Communications of the AIS, 1(2), Feb. 1999. J.Albert. Is knowledge management really the future for information professionals In Srikantaiah and Koenig [915], pages 63-76. V.Allee. The Knowledge Evolution: Expanding Organizational Intelligence. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, 1997. K.-D. Althoff, F.Bomarius, and C.Tautz. Knowledge management for building learning software organizations. Information Systems Frontiers, 2(3/4):349-367, 2000. J.Ambrosio. Knowledge management mistakes. Computerworld, 34(27):44, 3July 2000. J.Angus. Behavior modification. Knowledge Management Magazine, July 1999 W.Applehans, A.Globe, and G.Laugero. Managing Knowledge: A Practical Web-Based Approach. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1999. Read More