Different Perspectives and Approaches to Managing Knowledge

The twelve Knowledge Management Principles are aimed at leading individuals to apply key Army principles to their decisions and incorporate them into the actions that they undertake. Out of these twelve principles, the two that appear to be the most critical would be the first and third principles, which apply to the training of leaders, managers, and champions on knowledge management principles and creating an environment in which collaboration can occur on the basis of knowledge management.

Hislop, D. (2013). Knowledge management in organizations: A critical introduction (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Knowledge management was defined as the turning of information into actionable knowledge which can be accessed by people who can apply it. Robbins (2003) gives a time perspective in his definition of knowledge management. He mentions as part of knowledge management the distribution of the right information to the right people at the right time. Lytras et al (2002) gives a definition of knowledge management which emphasises the purpose of knowledge management. In the definition creation of new capabilities, enablement for superior performance, encouraging innovation and enhancement of customer value were mentioned. For the purpose of this study the researcher summarised knowledge management as the intentional process of coordinating people, technology and systems to optimise creation and sharing of intellectual

In today 's high competitive business world, success is dependent on how efficiently and effectively an organization can develop and utilize its information and knowledge resources(Carlsson etc, 2002). Therefore, there are many dispute on information and knowledge management. The purpose of this essay is to discuss the relationship between Information management(IM) and knowledge management(KM), then argument about whether KM is important for an organization. In order to make sure essay have a clear structure, this essay main divided into four parts (from Part 2 to Part5 ): Part 2 will introduce what is IM and KM, the benefits of IM and KM, the relationships amongst data, information and knowledge, and then this paper will introduce the relationship between IM and KM; Part 3 will analysis case study of good knowledge management in Xerox company; Part 4 will analysis case study of bad knowledge management in NASA; Part 5, this essay will give an argument result to you in conclusion.

Knowledge is described as an essential part of Knowledge Management. Baloh, Desouza, and Paquette (2011) saythat without having knowledge to manage, there would be no knowledge management.

KM is significantly important for organizations in modern economic system, it is also a form of expertise management to administer and incorporate subjective information such as thoughts, insights, ideas and experiences in order to enhance individual knowledge as well as organizational value and corporate culture. (StudyMode, 1999)

It has been argued that within the short space of time between defining knowledge management and it becoming a common phrase, many organisations stated one of their main aims as ‘leveraging organisational knowledge’ (Ruggles, 1998). It is with this in mind that organisations must be aware of their knowledge workers, the information they hold and any potential knowledge based changes that may need to be implemented to help their success, or even, survival.

Knowledge management is critical to organizations. According to Gregory R. Wenig, knowledge management is consists of activities from its own experience and from the experience of others, and on the judicious application of that knowledge to fulfill the mission of the organization. In my point of view, I think that knowledge management is performed by organization to appropriately handle, distribute, and transfer assets of knowledge, experience, and ideas from individual

In order to understand knowledge management, it is important to start by defining what knowledge is. Knowledge is the full utilization of information and data, coupled with the potential of people's skills, competencies, ideas, intuitions, commitments and motivations. In today’s dynamic and complex business environment, the desire for knowledge has increased even more with the scope and content changed dramatically, often spreading outside the organization.

KM is the name given to the set of systematic actions that an organization can take to obtain the greatest value from the knowledge available to it (Davenport and Prusak, 1998). Systematic means that KM projects are intentional actions in an organizational context. Value means that KM projects are measured according to how KM projects contribute to increased organizational ability (Prieto and Gutierrez 2001; Goldkuhl and Braf 2002). KM as an intentional and value-adding action is not easy to accomplish in practice (Scarbrough and Swan 1999). Scarbrough and Swan present several case studies in KM, successful and unsuccessful in their respective KM project. A major point and lessons from the case studies is that prevalent approaches in KM overstate technology and understate how technology is implemented and applied. The scope of KM encompasses individual competence and organization memory, knowledge creation from tacit to explicit knowledge, including the role of organizations in facilitating the creation of knowledge.

It has become explicit that knowledge management is not just another fad which has been hyped up by the management consultants and technology vendors. (Remenyi, 2004).It is not facile to implement knowledge management successfully; in as much as it offers. Knowledge management panaceas depending on technology have not produced convincing results considering that more money has been spent. Remenyi went on to say that knowledge management is far more than a technological issue and thus, what is really entailed is a rethink with a prominence on the people side of knowledge management and such approach is the use of a knowledge café.

Knowledge is often defined as facts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a certain subject. There are many taxonomies that specify different kinds of knowledge but most fundamental contrast is between “tacit” and “explicit” knowledge. Tacit knowledge is referred as knowing more than we can say (Polanyi, 1966). Most knowledge is initially tacit and it has been arduously developed over a long time through the method of trial and error. Explicit knowledge on the other hand exists in the form of words, sentences, documents, organised data, computer programs and in other explicit form, in such a way that they can be directly and completely transferred from one person to another. Knowledge Management is a concept and a term that arose approximately two decades ago, it is said to be a discipline that promotes an integrated approach to identifying, capturing, evaluating, retrieving, and sharing information. KM was initially defined as the process of applying a systematic

This critical analysis will discuss a quantitative study regarding the knowledge process and management’s role. This investigation views knowledge sharing as related to its application. The authors are interested in determining if and how management’s influence effects the knowledge sharing process. This paper will examine the study, providing criticism on the problem statement, academic justification, literature review, research questions, methodological choice, and the findings.

Knowledge management has been in the picture over the last two decades. Over those years it slowly evolved to the status of a discipline and growth. Knowledge management roots from multidisciplinary contributions that come together to support it. To be empowered with knowledge is very important during this time frame where economy can be directly related to knowledge. Knowledge can be broadly classified into two forms, tacit and explicit. “Knowledge typically resides in structured documents, informal discussions that may or may not persist online, and in tacit form.” (Grudin, 2006). Organizations use knowledge as a marketable good or an intellectual asset and are unique when compared with other marketable commodity.

With the rising importance of knowledge in our global economy, knowledge management has gained worldwide attention. Individuals including Sveiby (1997), Stewart (1997), Davenport and Prusak (1998), Allee (1997) and Nonaka (1991) have worked in the area to discover the opportunities, practices and benefits of knowledge management. Companies such as Buckman Laboratories, Dow Chemicals, Skandia, Hewlett-Packard, Celemi, and IBM to name a few, have made use of knowledge management in order to more effectively