Managing Knowledge in Knowledge-Intensive Organizations - Essay Example

Business Research Methodology Research Proposal in Strategic Management and Leadership Identification of Essential Characteristics of Implementation Support Systems for Managing Knowledge in Knowledge-Intensive Organisations through Case Studies Meteab, November 2009 Table of Contents Research Proposal in Strategic Management and Leadership 1 Identification of Essential Characteristics of Implementation Support Systems for Managing Knowledge in Knowledge-Intensive Organisations through Case Studies 1 Abstract 1 Introduction 2 Significance of the Study 3 Literature Review 4 Planned Research Methodology 8 Conclusions 10 Bibliography 10 Abstract 1 Introduction 2 Significance of the Study 3 Literature Review 4 Proposed Research Methodology 7 Conclusions 9 Bibliography 9 Abstract Knowledge-intensive organisations are heavily engaged with and dependent on knowledge, and they are playing an increasingly important role in society. Implementation support systems are established in such organisations to make knowledge management easier. This study seeks to identify the essential characteristics of the support systems for effectively managing knowledge in two selected organisations including an academic research organisation. This would include but not necessarily be restricted to a study of the organisational structure, leadership strategies, and its cultural and technological aspects. It will be done through conducting case studies involving qualitative structured interviews, content analysis of documents, and research from secondary sources. Introduction Knowledge-intensive organisations are heavily involved with and dependent on knowledge. Starbuck (1992) defined them as having a greater importance for knowledge than other inputs and outputs. In the knowledge-based world we now live in, knowledge is a very important resource (Rooney et al, 2005). Moreover, knowledge-intensive organisations are playing a central role; and are responsible for the radical transformations taking place (Schienstock, 2004) in our knowledge society. This knowledge function of management has therefore completely changed the former bureaucratic concept characterised by managing a standardised organisational structure, planning methods, work processes, and so on (Mintzberg, 1983). Knowledge management policies refer to those methods employed that “support the creation, transfer, storage, retrieval and application of knowledge, and they can include technical as well as human components” (Jemielniak & Kociatkiewicz, 2009:174). This may be in a comprehensive manner or as special localised tools. For the former, implementation support systems may be established that aim to make knowledge management easier. Such systems would deal with not only establishing appropriate structures, and technical systems in place, but also providing effective leadership and organisational culture. Generally, innovation is facilitated by highly flexible structures “because they push people to interact and encourage creativity” (Jemielniak & Kociatkiewicz, 2009:174), and technical systems are based on information and communication technologies. Establishing the right culture would be necessary because it can then allow continuous advantages to be gained. Thus, the essential characteristics of support systems for knowledge management would typical revolve around the following components: Structure (Structural aspects) Leadership (Managerial aspects) Culture (Social aspects) Technology (Technological aspects) The figure below shows a visualisation of the components of a knowledge management system and different processes pertaining to each of them and at each stage from acquisition and organisation to distribution. It includes at its centre, the theoretical core upon which the whole system is founded. Different knowledge management systems are likely to differ on the emphasis placed on various components according to their needs, objectives and overall strategy, and the strengths of their structural framework. Source: Fig. 1 on page xxvii in Schwartz (2006) This study will be concerned with identifying the essential characteristics of the support systems implemented for effectively managing knowledge in the selected organisations. Significance of the Study This will be an important study because it is increasingly becoming the case that the “Success of an organization is more an more dependent on its capability to create an effective environment for knowledge creation and application …” (Maier, 2007:3). Moreover, knowledge management systems have the potential to enhance “functionality through an integrated combination of a substantial portion of … information and communication tools and systems …” (Maier, 2007:7), strategic leadership and organisational culture. Knowledge is central for organisational agility and innovation The typical questions that may arise in implementing support systems for knowledge management in knowledge intensive organisations could be such as the following: 1. Which type of organisational structure will be most suitable for implementing the support systems? 2. What leadership strategies are required to help achieve the organisational objectives with respect to knowledge management? 3. What features of organisational culture are desirable and conducive for sustaining knowledge management in the organisation? 4. Which set of technologies should be used for a certain knowledge management strategy? These questions stated above will also be taken as the research questions to guide the proposed study. Literature Review A sample of recent prior studies in the field of knowledge management is now described that are either directly relevant to or to an extent related with the present proposed study. Some of these also provide the theoretical framework for the same. Several other researchers have also used the case study approach to studying knowledge management. For example, Nunes et al (2006) studied knowledge management issues in two knowledge-intensive SMEs. Both companies were “characterised by the need to process and use knowledge on a daily basis in order to remain competitive” (Nunes et al, 2006). The case studies using interviews and concept mapping enabled understandings, perceptions and the requirement of SMEs with respect to knowledge management to be derived. In this aforementioned study, it was found that while there was acknowledgement that: “ … adequately capturing, storing, sharing and disseminating knowledge can lead to greater innovation and productivity, their managers are not prepared to invest the relatively high effort on long term knowledge management goals for which they have difficulty establishing the added value. Thus, knowledge management activities within SMEs tend to happen in an informal way, rarely supported by purposely designed ICT systems.” (Nunes et al, 2006) These findings are as expected for SMEs because of the expense involved in implementing technological support systems. However, this study was focused only on the technological aspects of knowledge management. It did not examine behavioural, cultural and wider organisational aspects, although the authors did mention the need to consider these in SMEs before considering technical issues. A more recent study (Hutchinson & Quintas, 2008) on knowledge management in SMEs confirmed the existence of informal knowledge processes i.e. without using the concepts and terminology of knowledge management, although some were also found that did engage in knowledge management formally. This could be an indication of changing times and the spread of knowledge management concepts and the implementation of knowledge management systems even on a small scale. The case with larger organisations, as this study will also deal with, is different from that in SMEs because the approach to knowledge management is usually even more important, structured and there is greater use of information and communication technologies. Pathirage et al (2008) for example, used a case study to identify key knowledge variables for facilities organisations by means of the intellectual capital framework. Moffett & Rodney (2009) explored the effects of knowledge management on three organisational sectors in the UK, namely engineering, financial and technology. There was found to be common implementation issues although cultural and technological differences existed. Schroeder & Pauleen (2007) used case research methodology involving interviews with key knowledge management personnel in organisations. They showed that a centralized structure of the knowledge management function was important for creating synergies among different aspects of the system. Moreover, they found that leadership, communication and coordination were important for integrating other functions and promoting knowledge management aspects. Ying-Jung Yeh et al (2006) studied knowledge management systems to identify the ‘enablers’ using case studies of two companies. The purpose was to verify earlier findings in other papers and show the relationship between theory and business; “To analyze the crucial role that enablers play in carrying out knowledge management within the enterprise.” It was found that with respect to strategic leadership, obtaining the support of top management was most important. With respect to organisational culture, the formation of a sharing atmosphere and culture was most important but supplemented by informational technology. With respect to information technology, speedy search functions is becoming increasingly important besides the digitisation of documents, and among people enablers, employee incentive programs was a key factor besides training courses and other learning channels. According to the researchers, these findings validate theory with reality, and provide a reference for academia besides business. Furthermore, that dedicating a unit for implementing knowledge management is in itself a key enabler. “Its role does not just stop at managing knowledge, but instead it plays the role of furthering knowledge management by taking on the duty of assisting and coordinating different departments in their communication.” (Yeh et al, 2006) Of these above-mentioned enablers, King & Marks (2008) examined the importance of a knowledge sharing culture and effects of organisational support and supervisory control on its frequency and individual contributions. This was referred to as a ‘best practices-lessons learned, repository-based’ knowledge management system. It was found that supervisory control not only had a significant impact on frequency but also had a significant influence on effort. After controlling for ease of use and usefulness, the organisational support measure was not found to have much effect on either outcome. According to the researchers, “These results provide greater support for economic-agency-theory motivators of knowledge sharing and lesser support for organizational support motivators than has been previously believed”. Moreover, it was shown that systems variables have an important impact on motivating the use of knowledge management systems. It is notable that this study was based on a government civilian-military organisation. This could explain why the findings were contradictory to the general acceptance of the greater importance of a knowledge-sharing culture. Technology is one of the essential components of a knowledge management system because it has enabled the knowledge revolution in the first place. The table below summarises the role of technology at different stages of the knowledge management process. Tools of information and communication technology systematise some important processes during each of these stages. They make it easier for us to handle and process knowledge in a rapid manner. Generation of knowledge Storage and retrieval systems Knowledge transfer Knowledge application Collaborative learning systems, e.g. e-learning Databases; Data mining and warehousing Communication networks Expert, decision-support and work-flow systems Adapted from Alavi (2003) The concept of knowledge management systems has also been applied in much wider contexts extending beyond the boundaries of single organisations. After all, organisations interact with other organisations in an increasingly interconnected world. Some knowledge intensive organisations may have normal interactive relations with other similar organisations while some may form strategic alliances for greater mutual benefit. For example, a study by Grimshaw & Miozzo (2009) investigated HRM practices underpinning knowledge-intensive business services (KIBS) through examining two global IT firms dependent on outsourcing. Worker relations become a greater issue when firms operate globally. Four key influences on HRM in such firms were found: (i) Inter-organisational relations, which were found to be tight; (ii) Contract performance conditions; (iii) Knowledge flows; and (iv) Economic and institutional context. Following on from the multi-organisational implementations of knowledge management, there is also an emerging concept of a knowledge-based economy in which an entire city or region contains several knowledge intensive organisations functioning in harmony with each other, and is developed specifically for the furtherance of knowledge. This kind of setup itself requires a strategic leadership of place for urban development. It places “a renewed emphasis on the importance of interdisciplinary processes that stimulate the creation and the exploitation of knowledge” (Gibney et al, 2009). These processes include collaborative learning and what is termed ‘associational’ working. This ‘leadership of place’ is beyond the scope of this work, but it does point out the central importance of leadership in knowledge management systems. Lakshman (2006) attempted to generate a theory of the role of leaders in knowledge management by means of a grounded theory approach through analysing 37 in-depth interviews of CEOs. It was found that “leaders are acutely aware of the role of information and knowledge sharing and design knowledge networks that serve to maximise organisational effectiveness”. Furthermore, information technology and knowledge management was used to focus better on both internal and external customers. Thus, a customer-focused knowledge management was seen as the key for organisational effectiveness, and that leadership can have a positive impact on the performance of the organisation. “Externally, the leader’s realization of the importance of customer-focused knowledge management is instrumental in the leader’s establishment of both technological and sociocognitive routes for managing such knowledge” (Lakshman, 2006). The above result had only a theoretical foundation; nevertheless, it did identify important longitudinal leadership processes, and the contribution of this study for leadership is very significant. This is especially so in respect of identifying “the role of leaders in managing information and managing knowledge in organizations, both internally for coordination purposes and externally as it is directed to customers” (ibid). As far as culture is concerned, Tempest (2003) suggests that a learning culture within the organisation can be promoted by gradually de-emphasising hierarchy and status, which brings us to the structural aspects of organisations. Taxonomies of knowledge management systems have been devised for example, by Lytras & Pouloudi (2006) whose integrative framework is based on a learning perspective, and shows how technological issues can enhance current practices. Mudambi et al (2009) presented a typology of community structures based on the works of Crew, Séance and Geru to apply it for knowledge transfer in industrial organisations. This was said to help stimulate strategic thinking and facilitate future explorations of knowledge. Another typology by Li & Holsapple (2008) is based on social network theory, and is designed to facilitate knowledge flows in knowledge based network organisations such as a supply chain network. Other emerging knowledge management based concepts not already mentioned above include knowledge alliance, knowledge infrastructure, knowledge clusters, knowledge capability, knowledge equity, and knowledge society. Suffice it to say, knowledge management is a new field but it has sufficiently developed to have strong theoretical foundations (Baskerville & Dulipovici, 2006). Planned Research Methodology Case studies will be made of two selected organisations that are heavily involved in knowledge management and where it appears that they have implemented support systems to facilitate it. This will include an academic research organisation. A comprehensive definition of the case study method is given by Dul & Hak (2007:4) as follows: “A case study is a study in which (a) one case (single case study) or a small number of cases (comparative case study) in their real life context are selected, and (b) scores obtained from these cases are analysed in a qualitative manner.” Thus, the proposed study will involve a qualitative analysis of the organisations in their real life contexts. However, the purpose rather than being comparative will be to identify characteristics found in a variety of contexts. Therefore, it will be attempted to gain access to two dissimilar organisations, and there will also be the option to study the researcher’s own academic institution if deemed appropriate. An important difference between knowledge creation in industrial and market organisations on one-hand and academic institutions on the other is pointed out by Wierzbicki & Nakamori (2007). In the former, the organisational processes are more group-oriented whereas in the latter they are more individual-oriented. They further describe the latter as a Triple Helix, and prescribe the Nanatsudaki model of knowledge creation that combines both types. The case studies will take the form of qualitative structured interviews and include the gathering of documents and information such as from websites and reports, as well as secondary sources. Particular attention will be given to the organisation’s structure, leadership practices, cultural aspects and technological systems. However, the research will not necessarily be limited to these components if other significant components or features of the knowledge support systems are found. The exception will be not to delve overly on the theoretical underpinnings of the systems, and strategic management and leadership will be given the greatest attention. A study of the managerial aspects will look at the knowledge management systems and strategies in place, and how the knowledge environment is managed overall. A study of the structural aspects will examine how the organisation has been structured to facilitate knowledge management. A study of the cultural aspects will reveal distinct features of the culture that are conducive to the organisation’s knowledge management system. A study of the technological aspects will examine how knowledge generation is assisted, and how it is then represented, organised, stored, retrieved, transferred and applied. The reason for selecting knowledge-intensive organisations for the study is simply because it is in these types of organisations that implementation support systems for managing knowledge are likely to be found. It is also more likely to be structured or organised to a sophisticated degree than in other organisations. This will increase the chances for encountering various characteristics of such systems and identify which are critical or at least essential to the functioning and success of the organisation. For example, they are more likely to have purposely deigned ICT systems Justification for the case study approach shall now be addressed. A study by Anderson et al (2005) investigated why despite substantial quality improvement efforts; little change was evident in health care quality. The reason is due to the research approach and over-reliance on quantitative information. They demonstrated the usefulness of the case study method in complexity theory where the key to understanding the system is “contained in patterns of relationships and interactions among the system’s agents” (Anderson et al, 2005). In other words, the case study method is suited to studying systems “as an integrated whole” (ibid). Management research is not usually life affecting, but the ‘objects’ proposed to be studied are also systems, which therefore require holistic rather than narrow approaches to examine them. Some business researchers have criticised the case study method. For example, Boulding et al. (2005) called it “technically unsophisticated” because the studies that used them were too simple and straightforward although these were in relation to Customer Relationship Management. According to the outcome of 45 in-depth interviews with qualitative researchers by Cassell et al (2006), there is therefore a variety in the quality of qualitative research, and the issues concern mainly its credibility, but this study only highlighted the need for greater training. When used appropriately, the case study approach can yield insight that would not be possible from narrowly focused quantitative studies. As the proposed study will also involve content analysis apart from interviews, it would be necessary to delve briefly on the merits and demerits of content analysis as a research approach as well. The quality of information obtained from content analysis is of course only as good as the source documents; it entails an interpretation on the part of the researcher, and according to Bryman & Bell (2007:321), it also becomes difficult to ascertain answers to ‘why’ questions, and the studies tend to become too theoretical. It is said, “The emphasis in content analysis on measurement can easily and unwittingly result in an accent being placed on what is measurable rather than on what is theoretically significant or important” (ibid). However, these issues again depend on the expertise of the researcher. Besides, content analysis through primary research will only be employed as one tool in the research process in this study. As long as it is used appropriately, it is in fact a very flexible method for examining phenomena. A coding scheme can also be used to systematise the process. Conclusions Knowledge itself is a fundamental concept and the elements involved in knowledge management have long been studies separately in the field of organisational management. For example, organisational culture and organisational learning have been a part of management courses in the previous decades. However, a complete knowledge management system is an entirely new concept that has arisen in line with the demands of the Information Age we now live in and the technological developments that have facilitated all aspects of knowledge. As the literature review showed, knowledge management entails a number of issues for many kinds of organisations; there are ‘enablers’ that enable knowledge management systems to function effectively, which also lead to the identification of certain components of these systems. More recently, as the field of knowledge management has progressed, various ‘structurisations’ have also been attempted. It would be useful to explore characteristics of implementation support systems in real functioning organisations that have been established for managing knowledge so that essential characteristics can be identified. The proposed study is therefore designed with this precise objective in mind. This will thereby further our understanding of knowledge management systems and promote effective knowledge management. Bibliography Alavi, M., Tiwana, A. (2003). Knowledge management: the information technology dimension. In Easterby-Smith, M., Lyles, M.A. (Eds). The Blackwell Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge Management. Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA, pp.104-21. Anderson, Ruth A. et al. 2005. Case Study Research – The View From Complexity Science. Qualitative Health Research. Vol. 15, No. 5, pp. 669-685. Baskerville, Richard and Dulipovici, Alina. 2006. The theoretical foundations of knowledge management. Knowledge Management Research and Practice. Vol. 4, pp. 83-105. Operational Research Society. Palgrave Journals. Boulding, William et al. 2005. A Customer Relationship Management Roadmap: What Is Known, Potential Pitfalls, and Where to Go. Journal of Marketing. Vol. 69, Issue 4, pp. 155-166. Bryman, Alan and Bell, Emma. 2007. Business Research Methods. Second edition. Oxford University Press. Cassell, Catherine et al. 2006. The role and status of qualitative methods in management research: an empirical account. Management Decision. Vol. 44, Issue 2, pp. 290-303. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Dul, Jan and Hak, Tony. 2007. Case Study Methodology in Business Research. Butterworth-Heinemann. Gibney, John; Copeland, Stuart, and Murie, Alan. 2009. Toward a ‘New’ Strategic Leadership of Place for the Knowledge-based Economy. Leadership. Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 5-23. Sage publications. Grimshaw, Damian and Miozzo, Marcela. 2009. New human resource management practices in knowledge-intensive business services firms: The case of outsourcing with staff transfer. Human Relations. Vol. 62, No. 10, pp. 1521-1550. Hutchinson, Vicky and Quintas, Paul. 2008. Do SMEs do Knowledge Management? International Small Business Journal. Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 131-154. Sage Journals. Jemielniak & Kociatkiewicz (2009) Jemielniak, Dariusz and Kociatkiewicz, Jerzy. 2009. Handbook of Research on Knowledge-Intensive Organizations. Information Science Reference. IGI Global. Jennex, Murray E. 2009. Knowledge Management, Organizational Memory, and Transfer Behavior: Global Approaches and Advancements. Information Science Reference. IGI Global. King, William R. and Marks, Peter V. 2008. Motivating knowledge sharing through a knowledge management system. Omega. Vol. 36, Issue 1, pp. 131-146. Elsevier Ltd. Lakshman, C. 2007. Organizational knowledge leadership: a grounded theory approach. Leadership and Organisation Development Journal. Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 51-75. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Li, Xun and Holsapple, Clyde W. 2008. Work Design in Knowledge-Based Network Organizations: Facilitating Supply Chain? Knowledge Flows via Network Entrepreneurship. Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2008). http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/HICSS.2008.503 [Accessed November 27, 2009]. Lytras, Miltiadis D and Pouloudi, Athanasia. 2006. Towards the development of a novel taxonomy of knowledge management systems from a learning perspective: an integrated approach to learning and knowledge infrastructures. Journal of Knowledge Management. Vol. 10, Issue 6, pp. 64-80. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Maier, Ronald. 2007. Knowledge Management Systems: Information and Communication Technologies for Knowledge Management. 3rd edition. Springer. Mintzberg. 1983. In Jemielniak & Kociatkiewicz (2009). Moffett, Sandra and Rodney, McAdam. 2009. Knowledge management: a factor analysis of sector effects. Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 44-59(16). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Mudambi, Susan M.; Oliva, Terence A. and Thomas, Ellen F. 2009. Industrial marketing firms and knowledge transfer: Toward a basic typology of community structures. Industrial Marketing Management. Vol. 38, Issue 2, pp. 181-190. Elsevier Inc. Nunes, Miguel Baptista; Annansingh, Fenio, and Eaglestone, Barry1. 2006. Knowledge management issues in knowledge-intensive SMEs. Journal of Documentation. Vol. 62, Issue 1, pp. 101-119. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Pathirage, Chaminda et al. 2008. Knowledge management practices in facilities organisations: a case study. Journal of Facilities Management. Vol. 6, Issue 1, pp. 5-22. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Rooney et al. 2005. In Jemielniak & Kociatkiewicz (2009). Schienstock 2004. In Jemielniak & Kociatkiewicz (2009). Schroeder, Andreas and Pauleen, David. 2007. KM governance: investigating the case of a knowledge intensive research organization. Journal of Enterprise Information Management. Vol. 20, Issue 4, pp. 414-431. Schwartz, David G. 2006. Encyclopedia of Knowledge Management. Idea Group Reference. Starbuck 1992. In Jemielniak & Kociatkiewicz (2009). Tempest. 2003. In Jennex, 2009, p. 154. Wierzbicki, Andrzej P. and Nakamori, Yoshiteru. 2007. Knowledge sciences: Some new developments. Zeitschrift fur Betriebswirtschaft. Vol. 77, No. 3. Gabler Verlag. Yeh, Ying-Jung; Lai, Sun-Quae, and Ho, Chin-Tsang. 2006. Knowledge management enablers: a case study. Industrial Management and Data Systems. Vol. 106, Issue 6, pp. 793-810. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Read More