Application and Development of Relevant Business Management Knowledge - Essay Example

Business Management Knowledge and Competitiveness: A Qualitative Case Study of Coca Cola By Contents Abstract 2 Contents 3 Chapter One/Introduction and Problem Development 5 Introduction 5 Problem Development 8 Research Questions 9 Aim and Objectives 10 Organization of the Study 10 Chapter Two/A Review of Literature 11 Introduction 11 Chapter One/Introduction and Problem Development Introduction In the 1990s, knowledge management emerged as among the most effective methods of improving the competitiveness of firms (DeTienne & Jackson). Knowledge management is believed to be the single most important asset for firms as a result of technological developments and a continuously changing business environment. Knowledge and more importantly, business intelligence, helps firms to make the necessary adjustments to developing technology and the changes in the business environment (Barnes; Cody, Kreulen, Krishna, & Spangler). Knowledge management consist of creating, validating, presenting, sharing and applying knowledge (Bhatt). Moreover, in order to make the best use of knowledge, a firm is required to have a system for regulating and organising knowledge management processes and this invariably involves changing organizational culture, technological processes and methodologies (Bhatt). In other words, effective knowledge management manages people, technologies and methodologies and does not focus on one or the other. Gold, Malhortra and Segars argue that successful organizations have the ability to realize economic goals via stockpiling knowledge and distributing it throughout the organization. However, Argote and Ingram caution that while it is important to create and distribute knowledge within the firm, managing knowledge, particularly business knowledge is very important to safeguard against the risk of internally created knowledge is not leaked to competitors. Regardless, Wig maintains that organization managers are persistently looking for ways to enhance the firms outcomes and performance. As a result, managers are consistently attempting to understand “underlying, but complex mechanisms such as knowledge” which influence the firm’s effectiveness and efficiency (Wig, 6). According Wig: Knowledge management, far from being a management “fad”, is broad, multi-dimensional and covers most aspects of the enterprise’s activities (6). Knowledge is said to be divided among a number of categories. For example, knowledge can be “tacit” and “explicit” (Stenmark, 36). Tacit knowledge is that which possessed by individuals and is observed by their activities and behaviour. Explicit knowledge is that which is easier to express and is often contained in manuals, regulations, procedures and can be distributed. Knowledge can also be cultural, encoded, “encultured” and embedded (Stenmark, 36). Although business knowledge narrows the field, it is also complex. The Fraunhofer CCKM construct of business knowledge management is demonstrative of the complexities involved in the creation, application and distribution of business knowledge. According to the Fraunhofer CCKM business process knowledge management framework, there are six assumptions (Heisig). First, individuals involved in business use their knowledge and the talent of their “colleagues, suppliers, competitors and other resources” each day for finding solutions to problems and for getting their “work done” (Heisig, 15). Secondly, time constraints are one of the most common obstacles to the management of business knowledge in firms. As a result, business knowledge management must be “combined with daily work tasks and integrated into the daily business process” (Heisig, 15). In other words, business knowledge management is required to be a part of daily business activities. Thirdly, business knowledge is created, harvested, distributed and applied differently, depending on the business involved. In short, the particular business requirements should be combined with knowledge management approaches (Heisig). Fourthly, the firm’s business process facilitates contextual knowledge and drives focus and constructs of knowledge to be used and generated. Fifthly, organizational culture is said to be the most common factor driving successful knowledge management. Since organizational culture brings together a number of diverse vocational cultures and organizational conventions and values, organizational culture is not homogenous. However: The business process has the potential to provide a neutral and linking element for the different perceptions. The definition of knowledge related behaviour leads to a more rational discussion about relevant changes than a discussion on the right values (Heisig, 16). Finally, business knowledge management facilitates employee participation and aids in the achievement of loyalty and commitment (Heisig). There is no doubt then that knowledge management and in particular business knowledge management is an important feature of business success. However, as Mertins, Heisig and Vorbeck explain, knowledge has definitional problems and without an understanding of what knowledge is, business knowledge management and knowledge management as whole will be flawed. Fahey and Prusak also argue that knowledge management is often confused with managing information and data which are different constructs of knowledge. This research study will therefore explore and seek to shed light on what business management knowledge is and how business knowledge is managed in practice. In order to explore and shed light on business management knowledge and how business knowledge is managed, a qualitative case study is conducted on Coca Cola. Coca Cola is chosen as the subject of the qualitative case study because it is among a handful of companies that have a well-established knowledge management programme and an appointed Chief Knowledge Officer (Jones, Herschel, & Moesel). Moreover, according to Staten, few companies have the innovative and competitive advantages that Coca-Cola has had. Coca-Cola began as a single product developed in a pharmacy in the South, US 127 years ago and has since diversified its products and have gained international markets and recognition (Staten). Coca-Cola, among other successful businesses like Shell and General Electric, claim that their success is a result of knowledge management (Clegg, Kornberger, & Pitsis). Since Coca-Cola has claimed that knowledge management is the key to its success, this qualitative case study will attempt to discover what knowledge and business knowledge management is from the perspective of Coca-Cola. An understanding of what business knowledge and business knowledge management is from the perspective of a highly competitive and successful company like Coca-Cola can help other companies define and manage knowledge and in particular, business knowledge more effectively. Problem Development Knowledge is a broad and complex concept. As an important asset for firms, it is necessary for researchers and academics alike to define knowledge more concisely so that firms can transfer, apply, develop and manage knowledge efficiently (Alavi & Leidner). As Quintas, Lefrere, and Jones argue, given the broad definition of knowledge, a number of questions arise as to what knowledge management entails, particularly in relation to competitiveness. Less clear is the link between knowledge sharing as a construct of knowledge management and organizational performance (Wijnhoven). According to Gold, et al., there is competition in the new economy for firms to become “knowledge-based” (185). However, management have encountered difficulties transforming “their firms through programs of knowledge management” (Gold, et al., 185). The main obstacle for business knowledge management is a lack of understanding of what knowledge is. Most of the research emphasises how important business knowledge and knowledge management in general is for a firm’s competitive success, but fail to provide a clear understanding of what business knowledge and what knowledge is. Without a clear understanding of what business knowledge is, it is difficult to devise effective business knowledge management programmes. This research will therefore close a gap in the literature by providing evidence of what business knowledge and business knowledge management is, from a qualitative case study of a successful company with a business knowledge management programme. This research will use a grounded theory approach. A grounded theory approach does not formulate or test a hypothesis, but rather explores an issue and permits the results of the study “suggest the theories on which the analysis built” (Stenmark, 42). This study takes the interpretative research philosophy which assumes that all knowledge is subjective and there is no single objective truth. According to the interpretative theory, knowledge is generated from the shared and subjective meanings of others and we can at least obtain an approximation of reality (Belk). This this qualitative case study will gain an approximation of the reality of what business knowledge management is and what business knowledge is from the perspective of a firm that has experienced and is experiencing business knowledge and business knowledge management. Research Questions The primary research question is: How is business management knowledge linked to competitiveness? The secondary research questions are: What is business knowledge? How is business knowledge managed? What are benefits of business knowledge management for competitiveness? What are the obstacles to successful business management knowledge? Aim and Objectives The aim of this research is to discover the link between business management knowledge and competitiveness at the Coca-Cola Company. The objectives of this research are: To define knowledge. To define business knowledge. To define knowledge management. To define business management knowledge. To shed light on what effective business management knowledge is. To demonstrate how effective business management knowledge is conducted in practice. To demonstrate the results of effective business management knowledge. Organization of the Study This study is organized and presented as follows: Chapter One: Introduction and Development of the Problem. Chapter Two: A Review of Literature. Chapter Three: Research Design. Chapter Four: Results and Analysis. Chapter Five: Discussion and Conclusion. Chapter Two/A Review of Literature Introduction Bibliography Alavi, M. and Leidner, D.E. “Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues.” MIS Quarterly, Vol. 25(1) (2001): 107-136. Argote, Linda and Ingram, Paul. “Knowledge Transfer: A Basis for Competitive Advantage in Firms”. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 82(1) (May 2000): 150-169. Barnes, S. J. Knowledge Management Systems: Theory and Practice. London: Thomson Learning, 2002. Belk, Russell, W. Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods in Marketing. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2006. Bhatt, Ganesh, D. “Knowledge Management in Organizations: Examining the Interaction Between Technologies, Techniques, and People.” Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 5(1) (2001): 68-75. Clegg, Steward, R.; Kornberger, Martin and Pitsis, Tyrone. Managing and Organizations: An Introduction to Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2011. Cody, W.F.; Kreulen, J.T.; Krishna, V. and Spangler, W.S. “The Integration of Business Intelligence and Knowledge Management.” IBM Systems Journal, Vol. 41(4) (2002): 697-713. DeTienne, K.B. and Jackson, L.A. “Knowledge Management: Understanding Theory and Developing Strategy.” Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal Incorporating Journal of Global Competitiveness, Vol. 11(1) (2001): 1-11. Fahey, Liam and Prusak, Laurence. “The Eleven Deadliest Sins of Knowledge Management.” California Management Review, Vo. 40(3) (Spring 1998): 265-276. Gold, Andrew, H.; Malhotra, Arvind and Segars, Albert, H. “Knowledge Management: An Organizational Capabilities Perspective.” Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 18(1) (Summer 2002): 185-214. Heisig, Peter. “Business Process Oriented Knowledge Management.” In Mertins, Kai; Heisig and Vorbeck, Jens (Eds.) Knowledge Management: Concepts and Best Practices. Berlin: Springer, 2003. Jones, Nory, B.; Herschel, Richard, T. and Moesel, Douglas, D. “Using ‘Knowledge Champions’ to Facilitate Knowledge Management.’ Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 7(1) (2003): 49-63. Mertins, Kai; Heisig and Vorbeck, Jens. Knowledge Management: Concepts and Best Practices. Berlin: Springer, 2003. Quintas, Paul; LeFrere, Paul and Jones, Geoff. “Knowledge Management: A Strategic Agenda.” Long Range Planning, Vol. 30(3) (June 1997): 385-391. Staten, Richard, C. “Harnessing Globalization: The Case of Innovation at the Coca-Cola Company.” In Liebowitz, Jay. (Ed.) Beyond Knowledge Management: What Every Leader Should Know. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis Group, 2012. Stenmark, Dick. “Sharing Tacit Knowledge: A Case Study at Volvo.” In Barnes, Stuart (Ed.) Knowledge Management Systems: Theory and Practice. London: Thomson Learning, 2002. Wig, Karl, M. “Knowledge Management: An Introduction and Perspective.” Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 1(1)(1997): 6-14. Wijnohoven, Fons. “Knowledge Logistics in Business Contexts: Analysing and Diagnosing Knowledge Sharing by Logistics Concepts.” Knowledge and Process Management, Vol. 5(3) (September 1998): 143-157. Read More