Demerests Knowledge Management Model and Others - Research Paper Example

Knowledge Management (a) Introduction McAdam and McCreedy in their 1999 paper, 'A critical review of knowledge management models,' have critiqued three management models. The three models are: knowledge category models, intellectual capital models and socially constructed models. The Three Models According to Mohammad Nazir Ahmad Sharif, et al. in their article, 'Preliminary Study: Knowledge Management (KM) Practices In The Small Medium Software Companies,' in the Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, August 2005, knowledge management is something by which a company can leverage the tacit and explicit knowledge of its employees, trading partners, and outside experts for the benefit of the company. The Knowledge Category Model categorises knowledge into discrete elements. The most renowned of these models is the model by Nonaka and Takeuchi, The Knowledge Spiral Model. In this model there are some assumptions that have been made. The first assumption is that tacit knowledge can be transferred to others and become their tacit knowledge through the process of socialisation. The second assumption is that through externalisation, tacit knowledge can become explicit knowledge. The third assumption is that through internalisation, explicit knowledge can be converted to tacit knowledge. The fourth and the last assumption is that combination helps in making our explicit knowledge the explicit knowledge of others. Another model is this category is that of Boisot, 1998. There are four characteristics of this model, when knowledge is codified and un-diffused than it is propriety knowledge, it is basically on a need to know basis. The second characteristic is that when knowledge is un-codified and un-diffused it is personal knowledge. The third type of knowledge according to this model is public knowledge and this is codified and diffused. The last type of knowledge is common sense. The second category of Knowledge Management is Intellectual Capital Models. This term is relatively new but knowledge has been linked to capital for a long time. It is usually that knowledge is though of as a form of capital. The terms Knowledge Management and Intellectual Capital has been used interchangeably. There are intangible elements in knowledge which we can not account for but help benefit the company. The model assumes that intellectual capital can be broken down into two categories: human capital and organisational or structural capital. The third category of Knowledge Management is Socially Constructed Models. In this model knowledge is linked with social and learning process of the organisation. Demerest's, 1997 Knowledge Management model of Socially Constructed Models, is developed from the work of Clark and Staunton, 1989 and Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995. This model does not assume any particular definition of knowledge but has a broader and holistic view of the construction of knowledge. The model works in stages, it firstly constructs knowledge within the organisation, then there is embodiment of this knowledge, this knowledge is then spread across the organisation. Finally, this knowledge is put to use by using it to gain economic value. Conclusion McAdam and McCreedy, 1998, have developed a modified version of this model. It is called the Modified Version of Demerest's Knowledge Management Model. The focus of the model is not on the social but also the scientific view of knowledge construction, capture and interpretation. (b) Introduction There are three basic models of Knowledge Management: knowledge category models, intellectual capital models and socially constructed models. Within each model there are further models. Knowledge Category Models This category has three models within it; the Knowledge Spiral Model, by Nonaka & Takeuchi, the Knowledge Management Model by Hedlund & Nonaka and the Knowledge Category Model by Boisot. The first of these the Knowledge Spiral Model, by Nonaka & Takeuchi, describes knowledge as a combination of tacit and explicit. From this they have come up with four processes: socialisation, externalisation, internalisation and combination. The Knowledge Board on their website in the article 'Knowledge Management; An Overview,' by R. Suresh have critiqued this model by saying that the transfer of knowledge is talked about in very simple terms. There is a mechanised way of transforming knowledge. When we bring this model into real life situations, it does not work the same way. The model is too simple, while the transformation of knowledge in organisations is very technical in today's world. The next model is the Knowledge Management Model by Hedlund & Nonaka. According to this model there are four different carriers of knowledge: individual, group, organisation and inter-organisational domain. Although this model is a step ahead of the last model but they have made a big assumption that the carriers of knowledge can be segregated. This is not the case in real life situations. The carriers of knowledge are over lapping. The individual is part of the organisation and the group thus the knowledge will be the same. The last model in this category is the Knowledge Category Model by Boisot. In this model knowledge has been classified into four categories and on the basis of any two a group is formed. The four categories are codified, un-codified, diffused and un-diffused. They form four types of knowledge, public, propriety, personal knowledge and common sense. On the Knowledge Board website, in the article 'Knowledge Management; An Overview,' by R. Suresh, critiques have criticised this model by saying that the categories are distinct and discrete. Diffused knowledge is general and ambiguous. There is no clarity as to the spreading and incorporation of knowledge within the organisation. Intellectual Capital Models In the Intellectual Capital Models category there is only one model, IC Model of KM by Chase. This model basically connects intellectual capital with knowledge management and divides them according to the following categories: human, customer, innovative and process elements under human capital and organisation capital headings. Structural capital can be further subdivided into customer capital and organisational capital. Customer capital consists of customer base, customer relations and customer potential while organisational capital consists of innovation capital and process capital. The criticism of this model is that it treats knowledge as an asset and tries to give it a value. In reality knowledge is intangible and there is no fixed value that can be given to it. The political and social aspects of knowledge management have been ignored in this model. These models are again mechanistic like the first model of knowledge category models. Socially Constructed Models The third category of knowledge management models is Socially Constructed Models. Within this category there are two models; Knowledge Management Model by Demerest and the Modified Version of Demerest's Knowledge Management Model by McAdam and McCreedy. The first model Knowledge Management Model by Demerest is more concerned with the construction of knowledge within the organisation. When knowledge is being constructed there are social and scientific aspects involved. To make sure that knowledge spreads throughout the organisation it first needs to be embedded within the organisation. This is possible through explicit programs and social interchange. The process used in this model is the generic process of collection, dissemination and use. This model has been criticised for being very discrete in its path of flow of knowledge. Knowledge can not spread throughout and effectively if it is discrete. In real life situations a different trend has been noticed. Conclusion All these models help us understand the process of knowledge management further. From these we can see how organisations have been able to adopt practices for diffusing knowledge and how they have been able to make it work for themselves. Each and every model may work in a particular situation. These models can only be adopted if the environment of the organisation matches the organisation. References Andrew Kok, Intellectual Capital Management as Part of Knowledge Management Initiatives at Institutions of Higher Learning, http://www.ejkm.com/volume-5/v5-i2/Kok.pdf Knowledge Management Models, http://www.infm.ulst.ac.uk/sandra/Com620/Knowledge%20Management%20Models.doc. Mohammad Nazir Ahmad Sharif et al. August 2005, Preliminary Study: Knowledge Management (KM) Practices in the Small Medium Software Companies, Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, http://www.tlainc.com/articl92.htm R Suresh, Knowledge management - An Overview, Knowledge Board, http://www.knowledgeboard.com/library/km_an_overview.pdf Read More