The Importance Of Knowledge At A Ladies Only Fitness Centre

Knowledge is considered as one of the most important and competitive resource for sustenance of the organisation (Zack, 1999). It can be compared to the strategic resource that can be used and applied in various frames of the organisation. Experienced managers in the organisations believe that company can receive strategic advantage through knowledge and not the strategies or actions implemented by competitors. Knowledge can be regarded as a strong approach that opens numerous ways of success. It is that weapon that help organisation to evaluate solutions in financial and other professional difficulties.

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

In the recent past information and knowledge revolution have been witnessed in all sectors of production and have had the magnitude of the industrial revolution in the 18th and 19th centuries (Ondari-Okemwa & Smith, 2009). “Knowledge has been increasingly recognised as the most important economic resource surpassing the traditional resources of capital, labour and land” (Drucker, 1993). Tacit Knowledge creation and sharing has been attracting increasing interest, since the process of creating and managing it is relatively complex as compared to explicit knowledge. It is almost impossible to characterize tacit Knowledge without describing Knowledge and Knowledge Management (Mungai,

Tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge can be extremely important in our current workplace. These two are developed over time that help employees become expertise in their fields. Each one can bring value not only to the employee but the company in general. While employees cannot be directly seen, or observed learning, we can tell when people have learned by observing their behaviors. These behaviors are developed through either their experiences or what’s called tacit knowledge or classroom settings which is known as explicit knowledge. These two are not necessarily independent from one another, employees typically need some tacit knowledge to better understand explicit knowledge, while having some tacit knowledge can make learning explicit

Knowledge can refer to a theoretical or practical understanding of a subject. It can be tacit (as with practical skill or expertise) or explicit (as with the theoretical understanding of a subject); it can be more or less formal or systematic. Botha et al (2008) pointed out that tacit and explicit knowledge should be seen as a spectrum rather than as definitive points. Therefore, in practice, all knowledge is a mixture of tacit and explicit elements rather than being one or the other. The most important distinction within KM is between explicit and tacit knowledge. The overload of data is making knowledge management increasingly more important as it facilitates decision-making capabilities; builds learning organizations by making learning routine, and stimulates cultural change and innovation.

managers are forced to contend with the sources and origin of knowledge that workers possess as a means of enhancing companies’ capacities to improve the productivity of the knowledge worker as was done by Taylor during the heyday of manual work. Knowledge work has challenged the society to come to terms with the importance of epistemology in everyday life and to find ways of optimizing it for development. Knowledge management is proposed by Wong and Aspinwall (2004) as a strategy for increasing the productivity of the knowledge worker, but despite this there are still challenges as it relates to those who possess tacit knowledge—the major concern for companies is the loss of productivity advances when the tacit knowledge worker leaves. It has therefore become increasingly important to find out how individuals gain knowledge in the first place, and then attempt to replicate those actions that are engaged in on a daily basis, which optimizes productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness. One cannot solve the epistemological problems of the contemporary workplace without reflecting on earlier conceptions about epistemology as articulated by empiricists, rationalists, pragmatists, and relativists. Empiricism argued that knowledge is derived from human sensual experiences and perceptions (Cooper, 1999, p.

by Jim Ware and Charlie Grantham In our consulting and research work we spend a lot of time exploring how the emergence of knowledge work as the primary driver of economic activity is changing the nature of the workplace and even basic organizational and management practice. Recently one of our clients asked us a very basic question: Just what is a knowledge worker?” As he said, “Everyone uses that term but it certainly doesn’t seem very well defined. And if we’re going to be doing market research and making investments aimed at attracting knowledge workers to our community and local businesses, we sure ought to have some kind of agreement about just

The authors claims of the study of knowledge management is about introducing change within a procedure which in turn is a way to back up the alliances of the projects and provide corporate sustainability. However, the study ended up being somewhat restricted because of

In traditional perceptions of the role of knowledge in business organizations, tacit knowledge is often viewed as the real key to getting things done and creating new value. There are two forms of knowledge that can be found in any organization:

The role of knowledge management is to guarantee that people can access all the knowledge they need, where they need it and when they need it (Boljanovic, 2012), but that does not always occur. Take the example of the customer complaint issue Thomas is currently

We have come across the phrase ?Knowledge is power?. Knowledge management (KM) emphasizes on gaining knowledge and started its journey approximately two decades ago and it is in its early stage and has debatable purposes. KM is the idea of capturing, processing and sharing information and knowledge and managing them for the betterment of an organization. Its application has strong relation to the goals of the particular organization and is expected to give values and outcomes to the organization. KM also includes what knowledge is important for the organization to grow and what knowledge is required for the employees at specific times for short and long term outcomes. It also emphasizes on creation of knowledge for achieving the same. KM has gone through lots of experiments in several organizations related to social services. But the application of the dominant KM strategies in social work were not well adapted resulting in the less attention being attained. Also several organizations have gained values by sharing and managing knowledge and can?t think of better ways without KM. Since the department of labor is concerned with the occupations and employment of the citizens, the strategy prescribed by knowledge management of sharing and managing knowledge available and putting them publicly will be of great benefit to the organization.

In order for public and private organizations to exploit and manage knowledge in their daily processes and integrate knowledge management in their strategic planning, the managers of the organizations must know the actual meaning of knowledge. Right now, the three-knowledge management models being used in organizations are Nonaka and Takeuci’s (knowledge spiral), Firestone and McElroy’s (knowledge life cycle) snowden’s (Cynefin Model) (Heaidari, Khanifar & Moghimi, 2011).

“A knowledge worker is someone who is employed because of his or her knowledge of a subject matter,

However, knowledge management is often inadequate when it comes to knowledge sharing, particularly among academic staff who work in universities. As a result, tacit knowledge of expert academics has not been recorded and documented and eventually lost. Consequently, the inexpert academics are unable to use useful information, as no knowledge has been shared among academic staff. Therefore, it is important to address the barriers that

McAdam, R., & McCreedy, S. (2000). A critique of knowledge management: Using a social constructionist model. New Technology, Work and Employment 15 (2).