Een gegeven, ook wel datum, is een constructieve bijzonderheid: het is de vastgelegde uitdrukking van een feit. De woorden worden praktisch altijd in het meervoud geschreven; gegevens en data. Gegevens zijn de objectief.Knowledge Management Explained. Knowledge Management, (KM) is a concept and a term that arose approximately two decades ago, roughly in 1. Quite simply one might say that it means organizing an organization's information and knowledge holistically, but that sounds a bit wooly, and surprisingly enough, even though it sounds overbroad, it is not the whole picture. Mediating role of knowledge management. Knowledge management serves not only as an antecedent to organizational effectiveness, but also a medium between organizational factors and effectiveness. Knowledge resources are an. Best practices in knowledge sharing have been gaining increased attention amongst researchers and business managers in recent years. That is, because the commercial success and competitive advantage of companies seems to lay. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management Volume 7, 2012 Barriers to the Effective Deployment of Information Assets: An Executive Management Perspective Nina Evans University of South Australia. Knowledge Management, (KM) is a concept and a term that arose approximately two decades ago, roughly in 1990. Quite simply one might say that it means organizing an organization's information and knowledge holistically, but. Very early on in the KM movement, Davenport (1. These assets may include databases, documents, policies, procedures, and previously un- captured expertise and experience in individual workers. KM, historically at least, is primarily about managing the knowledge of and in organizations. The operational origin of KM, as the term is understood today, arose within the consulting community and from there the principles of KM were rather rapidly spread by the consulting organizations to other disciplines. The consulting firms quickly realized the potential of the Intranet flavor of the Internet for linking together their own geographically dispersed and knowledge- based organizations. Once having gained expertise in how to take advantage of intranets to connect across their organizations and to share and manage information and knowledge, they then understood that the expertise they had gained was a product that could be sold to other organizations. A new product of course needed a name, and the name chosen, or at least arrived at, was Knowledge Management.
The timing was propitious, as the enthusiasm for intellectual capital in the 1. Perhaps the most central thrust in KM is to capture and make available, so it can be used by others in the organization, the information and knowledge that is in people's heads as it were, and that has never been explicitly set down. What is still probably the best graphic to try to set forth what KM is constituted of, is the graphic developed by IBM for the use of their KM consultants, based on the distinction between collecting stuff (content) and connecting people, presented here with minor modifications (the marvelous C, E, and H mnemonics are entirely IBM's): COLLECTING (STUFF) & CODIFICATIONCONNECTING (PEOPLE) & PERSONALIZATIONDIRECTED INFORMATION & KNOWLEDGE SEARCHEXPLOITDatabases, external & internal. Content Architecture. Information Service Support (training required)data mining best practices / lessons learned/after action analysis(HARVEST)community & learningdirectories, . It is almost trite now to observe that we are in the post- industrial information age and that an increasingly large proportion of the working population consists of information workers. The role of the researcher, considered the quintessential information worker, has been studied in depth with a focus on identifying environmental aspects that lead to successful research (Koenig, 1. It is quite logical then to attempt to apply those same successful environmental aspects to knowledge workers at large, and that is what in fact KM attempts to do. Explicit, Implicit and Tacit Knowledge. In the KM literature, knowledge is most commonly categorized as either explicit or tacit (that which is in people's heads). This characterization is however rather too simple, but a more important point, and a criticism, is that it is misleading. MANAGING KNOWLEDGE ASSETS FOR BUSINESS PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT Daniela Carluccia Giovanni Schiumab aLIEG/DAPIT, University of Basilicata, Italy carlucci @unibas.it bLIEG/DAPIT, University of Basilicata, Italy & CBP, Cranfield. KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PROJECT/ CASE STUDY/ NOTEBOOK Students will undertake an individual project or a group project in the area of KM. The project will serve as a practical learning experience in understanding various issues. Over the past 15 years, knowledge management (KM) has progressed from an emergent concept to an increasingly common function in business organizations. As evidence of its maturity as an area of academic study, an increasing. A much more nuanced and useful characterization is to describe knowledge as explicit, implicit, and tacit. Explicit: information or knowledge that is set out in tangible form. Implicit: information or knowledge that is not set out in tangible form but could be made explicit. Tacit: information or knowledge that one would have extreme difficulty operationally setting out in tangible form. The classic example in the KM literature of true ? What operationally constitutes KM? So what is involved in KM? The most obvious point is the making of the organization's data and information available to the members of the organization through portals and with the use of content management systems. Content Management, sometimes known as Enterprise Content Management, is the most immediate and obvious part of KM. For a wonderful graphic snapshot of the content management domain go to realstorygroup. Content Technology Vendor Map. In addition to the obvious, however, there are three undertakings that are quintessentially KM, and those are the bases for most of what is described as KM.(1) Lessons Learned Databases. Lessons Learned databases are databases that attempt to capture and to make accessible knowledge that has been operationally obtained and typically would not have been captured in a fixed medium (to use copyright terminology). In the KM context, the emphasis is typically upon capturing knowledge embedded in persons and making it explicit. Early in the KM movement, the phrase typically used was . What might be a best practice in North American culture might well not be a best practice in another culture. The major international consulting firms were very aware of this and led the movement to substitute the new term. One such possible antecedent was the World War II debriefing of pilots after a mission. Navy Submarine Service, after an embarrassingly lengthy fiasco of torpedoes that failed to detonate properly and an even more embarrassing failure to follow up on sub captains' consistent torpedo failure reports, instituted a system of widely disseminated . The Captain's Patrol Reports were very clearly designed to encourage analytical reporting, with reasoned analyses of the reasons for failure and success. It was emphasized that a key purpose of the report was to make recommendations about strategy for senior officers to mull over and about tactics for other skippers to take advantage of (Mc. Inerney and Koenig, 2. The military has become an avid proponent of the lessons learned concept. The phrase the military uses is . There will almost always be too many things immediately demanding that person's attention after an action. There should be a system whereby someone, typically someone in KM, is assigned the responsibility to debrief, separate the wheat from the chaff, create the report, and then ensure that the lessons learned are captured and disseminated. The concept is by no means limited to the military. Larry Prusak (2. 00. KM implementation failure is that so often the project team is disbanded and the team members reassigned before there is any debriefing or after- action report assembled. Organizations operating in a project team milieu need to pay very close attention to this issue and to set up an after- action procedure with clearly delineated responsibility for its implementation. A wonderfully instructive example of a . The story derives from his experience in the KM department at Wyeth Pharmaceuticals. Wyeth had recently introduced a new pharmaceutical agent primarily for pediatric use. They expected it to be a substantial success because, unlike its predecessors, it needed to be administered only once a day, which would make it much easier for the caregiver to ensure that the child followed the drug regimen. Sales of the drug started well, but soon turned disappointing. One sales rep (what the pharmaceutical industry used to call detail men), however, discovered, by chatting with her customers, the reason for the disappointing sales and discovered the solution. The problem was that kids objected strenuously to the taste of the drug, and caregivers were reporting to prescribing physicians that they couldn't get their kid to continue taking the drug. The solution was orange juice. A swig of orange juice quite effectively masked the offensive taste. If the sales rep illuminated the physician that the therapy should be conveyed to the caregiver as the pill and a glass of orange juice taken simultaneously first thing in the morning, then there was no dissatisfaction and sales were fine. The implementation of a lessons learned system is complex both politically and operationally. Many of the questions surrounding such a system are difficult to answer. Who is to decide what constitutes a worthwhile lesson learned? Are employees free to submit to the system un- vetted? Most successful lessons learned implementations have concluded that such a system needs to be monitored and that there needs to be a vetting and approval mechanism before items are mounted as lessons learned. How long do items stay in the system? Who decides when an item is no longer salient and timely? Most successful lessons learned systems have an active weeding or stratification process. Without a clearly designed process for weeding, the proportion of new and crisp items inevitably declines, the system begins to look stale and usage and utility falls. Deletion, of course, is not necessarily loss and destruction. Using stratification principles, items removed from the foreground can be archived and moved to the background but still made available. All these questions need to be carefully thought out and resolved, and the mechanisms designed and put in place before a lessons- learned system is launched. Inattention can easily lead to failure and the tarring of subsequent efforts(2) Expertise Location. If knowledge resides in people, then one of the best ways to learn what an expert knows is to talk with that expert. Locating the right expert with the knowledge you need, though, can be a problem. The basic function of an expertise locator system is straightforward: it is to identify and locate those persons within an organization who have expertise in a particular area. Such systems were commonly known as . In recent years, the term expertise locator or expertise location has replaced yellow pages as being rather more precise. There are now three areas which typically supply data for an expertise locator system, employee resumes, employee self identification of areas of expertise, typically by being requested to fill out a form online, or by algorithmic analysis of electronic communications from and to the employee.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
December 2016
Categories |