Book•
Knowledge Management
29 Nov 2005-
About: The article was published on 2005-11-29 and is currently open access. It has received 2161 citations till now.
Citations
More filters
Book•
30 Jun 2005
TL;DR: This second edition of this textbook and professional reference offers a comprehensive overview of the field of KM, providing both a substantive theoretical grounding and a pragmatic approach to applying key concepts.
Abstract: The ability to manage knowledge has become increasingly important in today's knowledge economy. Knowledge is considered a valuable commodity, embedded in products and in the tacit knowledge of highly mobile individual employees. Knowledge management (KM) represents a deliberate and systematic approach to cultivating and sharing an organization's knowledge base. It is a highly multidisciplinary field that encompasses both information technology and intellectual capital. This textbook and professional reference offers a comprehensive overview of the field of KM, providing both a substantive theoretical grounding and a pragmatic approach to applying key concepts. Drawing on ideas, tools, and techniques from such disciplines as sociology, cognitive science, organizational behavior, and information science, the text describes KM theory and practice at the individual, community, and organizational levels. It offers illuminating case studies and vignettes from companies including IBM, Xerox, British Telecommunications, JP Morgan Chase, and Nokia. This second edition has been updated and revised throughout. New material has been added on the information and library science perspectives, taxonomies and knowledge classification, the media richness of the knowledge-sharing channel, e-learning, social networking in KM contexts, strategy tools, results-based outcome assessments, knowledge continuity and organizational learning models, KM job descriptions, copyleft and Creative Commons, and other topics. New case studies and vignettes have been added; and the references and glossary have been updated and expanded.
1,468 citations
TL;DR: This paper revisits the data-information-knowledge-wisdom (DIKW) hierarchy by examining the articulation of the hierarchy in a number of widely read textbooks, and analysing their statements about the nature of data, information, knowledge, and wisdom.
Abstract: This paper revisits the data-information-knowledge-wisdom (DIKW) hierarchy by examining the articulation of the hierarchy in a number of widely read textbooks, and analysing their statements about the nature of data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. The hierarchy referred to variously as the 'Knowledge Hierarchy', the 'Information Hierarchy' and the 'Knowledge Pyramid' is one of the fundamental, widely recognized and 'taken-for-granted' models in the information and knowledge literatures. It is often quoted, or used implicitly, in definitions of data, information and knowledge in the information management, information systems and knowledge management literatures, but there has been limited direct discussion of the hierarchy. After revisiting Ackoff's original articulation of the hierarchy, definitions of data, information, knowledge and wisdom as articulated in recent textbooks in information systems and knowledge management are reviewed and assessed, in pursuit of a consensus on definitions and transformation processes. This process brings to the surface the extent of agreement and dissent in relation to these definitions, and provides a basis for a discussion as to whether these articulations present an adequate distinction between data, information, and knowledge. Typically information is defined in terms of data, knowledge in terms of information, and wisdom in terms of knowledge, but there is less consensus in the description of the processes that transform elements lower in the hierarchy into those above them, leading to a lack of definitional clarity. In addition, there is limited reference to wisdom in these texts.
1,401 citations
TL;DR: A detailed review of current KM and related literatures on a large number of possible knowledge-sharing barriers, bringing together a large range of knowledgesharing barriers in an attempt to indicate the complexity of knowledge sharing as a value-creating organisational activity.
Abstract: Purpose – Knowledge sharing is the corner-stone of many organisations’ knowledge-management (KM) strategy. Despite the growing significance of knowledge sharing’s practices for organisations’ competitiveness and market performance, several barriers make it difficult for KM to achieve the goals and deliver a positive return on investment. This paper provides a detailed review of current KM and related literatures on a large number of possible knowledge-sharing barriers with the purpose of offering a more comprehensive and structured starting-point for senior managers when auditing their organisation’s current knowledge base and knowledge-sharing requirements. Design/methodology/approach – This article reviews and discusses over three dozen potential knowledge-sharing barriers, categorising them into three main domains of recently published works: individual/personal, organisational, and technological barriers. Findings – The extensive list of knowledge sharing barriers provides a helpful starting point and guideline for senior managers auditing their existing practices with a view to identifying any bottle-necks and improving on the overall effectiveness of knowledge-sharing activities. Practical implications – Managers need to realise, however, that a particular knowledge sharing strategy or specific managerial actions will not suit all companies and that there are differences to be expected between MNCs and SMEs, private, public sector, and not-for-profit organisations. As such, the implementation of knowledge-sharing goals and strategies into an organisation’s strategic planning and thinking will vary greatly. Originality/value – The main discussion of this paper brings together a large range of knowledgesharing barriers in an attempt to indicate the complexity of knowledge sharing as a value-creating organisational activity.
1,394 citations
TL;DR: The authors examines the changing landscape of literacy teaching and learning, revisiting the case for a "pedagogy of multiliteracies" first put by the New London Group in 1996, and develops a language with which to talk about representation and communication in educational contexts.
Abstract: This paper examines the changing landscape of literacy teaching and learning, revisiting the case for a “pedagogy of multiliteracies” first put by the New London Group in 1996. It describes the dramatically changing social and technological contexts of communication and learning, develops a language with which to talk about representation and communication in educational contexts, and addresses the question of what constitutes appropriate literacy pedagogy for our times.
989 citations
TL;DR: This study investigates the quantitative relationship between knowledge sharing, innovation and performance and develops a research model positing that knowledge sharing not only have positive relationship with performance directly but also influence innovation which in turn contributes to firm performance.
Abstract: Highlights?Exploring the effect Knowledge sharing (KS) have on innovation and firm performance. ?Confirming the mediating role of innovation between KS and performance. ?finding that explicit KS impacts innovation speed more than financial performance. ?finding that tacit KS impacts innovation quality more than operational performance. This study investigates the quantitative relationship between knowledge sharing, innovation and performance. Based on the literature review, we develop a research model positing that knowledge sharing not only have positive relationship with performance directly but also influence innovation which in turn contributes to firm performance. This model is empirically tested using data collected from 89 high technology firms in Jiangsu Province of China. It is found that both explicit and tacit knowledge sharing practices facilitate innovation and performance. Explicit knowledge sharing has more significant effects on innovation speed and financial performance while tacit knowledge sharing has more significant effects on innovation quality and operational performance.
812 citations
References
More filters
Book•
30 Jun 2005
TL;DR: This second edition of this textbook and professional reference offers a comprehensive overview of the field of KM, providing both a substantive theoretical grounding and a pragmatic approach to applying key concepts.
Abstract: The ability to manage knowledge has become increasingly important in today's knowledge economy. Knowledge is considered a valuable commodity, embedded in products and in the tacit knowledge of highly mobile individual employees. Knowledge management (KM) represents a deliberate and systematic approach to cultivating and sharing an organization's knowledge base. It is a highly multidisciplinary field that encompasses both information technology and intellectual capital. This textbook and professional reference offers a comprehensive overview of the field of KM, providing both a substantive theoretical grounding and a pragmatic approach to applying key concepts. Drawing on ideas, tools, and techniques from such disciplines as sociology, cognitive science, organizational behavior, and information science, the text describes KM theory and practice at the individual, community, and organizational levels. It offers illuminating case studies and vignettes from companies including IBM, Xerox, British Telecommunications, JP Morgan Chase, and Nokia. This second edition has been updated and revised throughout. New material has been added on the information and library science perspectives, taxonomies and knowledge classification, the media richness of the knowledge-sharing channel, e-learning, social networking in KM contexts, strategy tools, results-based outcome assessments, knowledge continuity and organizational learning models, KM job descriptions, copyleft and Creative Commons, and other topics. New case studies and vignettes have been added; and the references and glossary have been updated and expanded.
1,468 citations
TL;DR: This paper revisits the data-information-knowledge-wisdom (DIKW) hierarchy by examining the articulation of the hierarchy in a number of widely read textbooks, and analysing their statements about the nature of data, information, knowledge, and wisdom.
Abstract: This paper revisits the data-information-knowledge-wisdom (DIKW) hierarchy by examining the articulation of the hierarchy in a number of widely read textbooks, and analysing their statements about the nature of data, information, knowledge, and wisdom. The hierarchy referred to variously as the 'Knowledge Hierarchy', the 'Information Hierarchy' and the 'Knowledge Pyramid' is one of the fundamental, widely recognized and 'taken-for-granted' models in the information and knowledge literatures. It is often quoted, or used implicitly, in definitions of data, information and knowledge in the information management, information systems and knowledge management literatures, but there has been limited direct discussion of the hierarchy. After revisiting Ackoff's original articulation of the hierarchy, definitions of data, information, knowledge and wisdom as articulated in recent textbooks in information systems and knowledge management are reviewed and assessed, in pursuit of a consensus on definitions and transformation processes. This process brings to the surface the extent of agreement and dissent in relation to these definitions, and provides a basis for a discussion as to whether these articulations present an adequate distinction between data, information, and knowledge. Typically information is defined in terms of data, knowledge in terms of information, and wisdom in terms of knowledge, but there is less consensus in the description of the processes that transform elements lower in the hierarchy into those above them, leading to a lack of definitional clarity. In addition, there is limited reference to wisdom in these texts.
1,401 citations
TL;DR: A detailed review of current KM and related literatures on a large number of possible knowledge-sharing barriers, bringing together a large range of knowledgesharing barriers in an attempt to indicate the complexity of knowledge sharing as a value-creating organisational activity.
Abstract: Purpose – Knowledge sharing is the corner-stone of many organisations’ knowledge-management (KM) strategy. Despite the growing significance of knowledge sharing’s practices for organisations’ competitiveness and market performance, several barriers make it difficult for KM to achieve the goals and deliver a positive return on investment. This paper provides a detailed review of current KM and related literatures on a large number of possible knowledge-sharing barriers with the purpose of offering a more comprehensive and structured starting-point for senior managers when auditing their organisation’s current knowledge base and knowledge-sharing requirements. Design/methodology/approach – This article reviews and discusses over three dozen potential knowledge-sharing barriers, categorising them into three main domains of recently published works: individual/personal, organisational, and technological barriers. Findings – The extensive list of knowledge sharing barriers provides a helpful starting point and guideline for senior managers auditing their existing practices with a view to identifying any bottle-necks and improving on the overall effectiveness of knowledge-sharing activities. Practical implications – Managers need to realise, however, that a particular knowledge sharing strategy or specific managerial actions will not suit all companies and that there are differences to be expected between MNCs and SMEs, private, public sector, and not-for-profit organisations. As such, the implementation of knowledge-sharing goals and strategies into an organisation’s strategic planning and thinking will vary greatly. Originality/value – The main discussion of this paper brings together a large range of knowledgesharing barriers in an attempt to indicate the complexity of knowledge sharing as a value-creating organisational activity.
1,394 citations
TL;DR: The authors examines the changing landscape of literacy teaching and learning, revisiting the case for a "pedagogy of multiliteracies" first put by the New London Group in 1996, and develops a language with which to talk about representation and communication in educational contexts.
Abstract: This paper examines the changing landscape of literacy teaching and learning, revisiting the case for a “pedagogy of multiliteracies” first put by the New London Group in 1996. It describes the dramatically changing social and technological contexts of communication and learning, develops a language with which to talk about representation and communication in educational contexts, and addresses the question of what constitutes appropriate literacy pedagogy for our times.
989 citations
TL;DR: This study investigates the quantitative relationship between knowledge sharing, innovation and performance and develops a research model positing that knowledge sharing not only have positive relationship with performance directly but also influence innovation which in turn contributes to firm performance.
Abstract: Highlights?Exploring the effect Knowledge sharing (KS) have on innovation and firm performance. ?Confirming the mediating role of innovation between KS and performance. ?finding that explicit KS impacts innovation speed more than financial performance. ?finding that tacit KS impacts innovation quality more than operational performance. This study investigates the quantitative relationship between knowledge sharing, innovation and performance. Based on the literature review, we develop a research model positing that knowledge sharing not only have positive relationship with performance directly but also influence innovation which in turn contributes to firm performance. This model is empirically tested using data collected from 89 high technology firms in Jiangsu Province of China. It is found that both explicit and tacit knowledge sharing practices facilitate innovation and performance. Explicit knowledge sharing has more significant effects on innovation speed and financial performance while tacit knowledge sharing has more significant effects on innovation quality and operational performance.
812 citations