Knowledge Management is not Achievable in Large Complex Organizations - Essay Example

Knowledge Management is not achievable in large complex organizations Introduction Knowledge Management (KM) is a multi-disciplined approach towards achieving organizational objectives by making use of knowledge in the best possible manner. It focuses on creating, acquiring and sharing of knowledge as well as technical and cultural foundations that are supportive of the process. Organizations are increasingly realizing that intellectual capital is an asset that can be managed effectively for improvement in performance. Knowledge management can prove valuable to a company as this helps to foster innovation, improve customer service and decision making (Choy and Suk, 2005). KM facilitates quick procurement of the products and services, thereby boosting company’s revenue and retaining employees. This is why the process can run efficiently and smoothly. There exists considerable confusion regarding whether the process can be systematically managed or not and matters pertaining to suitable and effective organizational and technological mechanisms for facilitating knowledge management remain unresolved. Hence, effective implementation of KM in a large complex organization requires adequate efforts (Choy and Suk, 2005). Literature Review It has been stated by certain researchers that though KM is an important issue for international management, yet there is a considerable confusion as to what constitutes organizational knowledge, whether it can be systematically managed and how. Matters related to incorporation of an organizational and technological mechanism so as to facilitate knowledge management in complex organizations need to be resolved. Experts are also of the opinion that Knowledge Management does not belong to one particular area (Liew, 2007). People from different disciplines are working on it. A number of people have realized the value of measuring intellectual assets, thereby recognizing the importance of knowledge management as a competitive asset (Liew, 2007). As a result, many companies have considerably invested in knowledge projects, which range from setting up an intranet using team oriented software, mentoring, chalking out personal development plans to information sharing. Some researchers has claimed that at times, the problems for implementation of knowledge management lies in ways in which the processes and systems for knowledge creation are being developed separately without considering the organization’s social systems. Rather than being a process problem, communication and learning issues are more likely due to poor knowledge creation from a new system. It has been pointed out by authors that the value of knowledge management is estimated as 60% of the market share of an organisation and it has become an essential aspect to look for in the present market (Chandran and Raman, 2009). It has also been claimed that intellectual capital and knowledge management are not two separate aspects, but are interrelated. In some organisations, even though the need of knowledge management is realized, yet they are unable to act and implement the same because of presence of age old bureaucratic practices, which leads to delay in decision making and loss of efficiency. Whereas companies who are performing relatively better in business, often fail to identify and address the gaps where knowledge management process has to be aligned (Chandran and Raman, 2009). These companies generally lack in strategic visioning and fail to understand the value of knowledge management in the organisation. In order to overcome challenges faced by the companies in implementing knowledge management, researches has recommended that these entities must consider management of market knowledge, which can support collection of relevant market information from the customers. This in turn enable companies to tailor make the services and products for the target group, followed by management of technology management, which is again important for firms employing high technology. The process helps in circulating valuable information as firms participate in collaborative projects. Furthermore, in case of management of rational knowledge, KM works as a tool facilitating the collaboration among different participants. The adoption of this tool would be important in protecting intellectual assets and cultural barriers (Amalia and Nugroho, 2009). Critical Analysis Globalization has made it mandatory for all companies to venture beyond the boundaries, instead of limiting themselves within the national boundary. Naturally, contemporary companies face political, social and cultural differences while operating overseas, thereby increasing complexities. The field of knowledge management has developed over recent years. In order to implement a fully functional KM programme in an organisation, the steps to be taken are Knowledge Creation, Knowledge Storage, Knowledge Distribution and Knowledge Application. This would help in organizing and also leveraging useful information from different sources, which the company requires, in order to function efficiently, keeping pace with changes in the environment; yet, there exists certain barriers in organizations, which makes achieving KM in organizations very difficult. The barriers are: Barriers in Technology: This emerges as the giant constraint in achieving KM in an organization as technology implementation requires a huge budget. Although there are some countries that are more familiar in using special technology, certain firms may fall into technological trap by age old decision of adopting special software. For example: In Africa, most people use more of mobile phones compared to computers (Herrmann, 2011). Barriers in Content: It is very hard to gather content for knowledge inventory. It requires special skills and creativity to transform implicit knowledge into explicit information. Communications and information sharing can be entitled to complex rules in some places. Ways adopted in one country may go against the laws of another country. Barriers in Routines and Procedures: Some routines and procedures can only claim to exist, but never are they abided by the employees. These procedures only represent ideal situation and has no relevance in reality (Herrmann, 2011). This barrier is created by the culture of “last minute” crisis management. Thus, routine work is prioritized less over variable and ad-hoc processes. Barriers in Organization: In some organizations, hierarchical differences are present. Employees in the higher levels show indifference towards subordinates, which further influences lower level employees to have the similar kind of attitude towards those positioned further lower in the hierarchy. This leads to prevalence of a discord environment. This is why incorporation of a new system in an organization is complex. This attitude results in a deadlock when it is required by personnel to contribute ideas into planning and decision making. Barriers in Personnel: This is another critical barrier that increases complexity involved in implementing KM in an organization. The personnel may not have any understanding of KM and its ways to facilitate efficient functioning of the organization. These personnel can be negatively motivated in terms of sharing information. All they understand is giving out information would weaken their position. So, it is required to educate the personnel so as to make them aware of the surplus, which is derived by cooperating in knowledge management (Herrmann, 2011). Barriers in desire and motivation: The desire and motivation of the personnel working with an organization is very essential for implementation of KM. Sometimes, if there is no vision for sharing of information in the organization, it may prove to be a herculean task to implement KM. Another problem can arise if the company is rigid towards changes. Many examples have shown that personnel who have challenged the orthodox practices by initiating knowledge share have lost their jobs. Two types of knowledge are dealt with in KM; Tacit Knowledge and Explicit Knowledge. Tacit knowledge cannot be easily shared with another person by any means (Frost, 2014). These are knowledge possessed only by one individual, which is difficult to transfer to other person. The key to acquiring this knowledge is experience. The difficulties that exist in sharing of tacit knowledge are perception and language because people are mostly unaware about their capabilities and there is no language in which the knowledge is held. Another critical issue arising from sharing of tacit knowledge is time as in order to inherit this knowledge, one has to spend a great deal of time (Mahroeian and Forozia, 2012). Explicit knowledge, on the contrary, is easily transferable to other person. They are articulated and codified, unlike tacit knowledge. Hence, one needs to be well-versed in the language in which explicit knowledge is articulated (Mahroeian and Forozia, 2012). Fig.1. Characteristics of tacit and explicit knowledge (Source: Amalia and Nugroho, 2009) This knowledge can be converted in four modes. Socialisation: Refers to transfer of knowledge in between personnel of an organisation through training, thereby sharing required tacit knowledge. Combination: Refers to using of social media for combining with existing explicit knowledge. Externalisation: This addresses the act of transforming tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge by using different metaphors. Internalisation: This refers to converting explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge, through a process of learning. Fig. 2 Four modes of knowledge conversion (Source: Amalia and Nugroho, 2009) Conclusion On virtue of the analysis, we can conclude that knowledge management is not successfully achieved in complex organisations. This is because of different barriers that exist in path of implementing KM in these organisations (Rouse, 2013). The lack of common definition of KM is also considered as a challenge as various scholars have presented dissimilar viewpoints and definitions. As KM is quite a new concept and many big companies are still apprehensive regarding the value that is promised, further studies and dialogues on KM is necessary (Innola and Tuomisto, 2004). This is the only way in which the field can flourish by itself and attain the goal of providing relevant contents and expertise, which are required to undertake diverse projects, address different problems as well as to analyze the relationship in between people, content, activity and topics, thereby producing a knowledge map report (Abbas and Baktash, 2011). Reference List Abbas, A. and Baktash, R., 2011. Analysis of knowledge management within five key areas. Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology, 6(1), pp. 1-45. Amalia, M and Nugroho, Y., 2009. Rethinking strategy and implementation of knowledge management from innovation perspective: A lesson learned from a multinational subsidiary in Indonesia. [pdf] MBS. Available at: < https://research.mbs.ac.uk/innovation/Portals/0/docs/KM-WP_MA-YN_v61.finalpdf.pdf > [Accessed 18June 2014]. Chandran, D. and Raman, K., 2009. Awareness and problems in implementing knowledge management systems in medium sized business organizations in Malaysia. [pdf] Krepublishers. Available at: [Accessed 18 June 2014]. Choy, C. and Suk, Cho, 2005. Critical factors in the successful implementation of knowledge management. [pdf] Journal of Knowledge Management Practice. Available at: [Accessed 18 June 2014]. Frost, A., 2014. A synthesis of knowledge management failure factors. [pdf] WorldPress. Available at: [Accessed 18 June 2014]. Herrmann, N., 2011. Barriers for an efficient management of knowledge. [online] Available at: [Accessed 18 June 2014]. Innola, E and Tuomisto, A., 2004. Knowledge transfer and initiation process: About new employee becoming old reliable. [pdf] WBS. Available at: [Accessed 18 June 2014]. Liew, A., 2007. Understanding data, information, knowledge and their inter-relationships, Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, 8(2), pp. 1-22. Mahroeian, H. and Forozia, A., 2012. Challenges in managing tacit knowledge: a study on difficulties in diffusion of tacit knowledge in organizations. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(19), pp. 1-35. Rouse, M., 2013. Knowledge management (KM). [online] Available at: [Accessed 18 June 2014]. Read More