Ravi Research

What is Health Knowledge Management?

2012-02-08T13:18:00.000Z

“Using KM to bridge the gap between Knowledge & Practice”

Health KM could be described as the way in which multi-disciplinary teams, working in healthcare, harvest the personal expertise that is essential to patient safety, learn from it, adapt it to local situations and individual patients and distribute it via reliable networks to the people caring for the patients, so that they can use it to improve the quality of care delivered.

rsk

CFD Exhibitions held at Middlesex University

2012-01-18T17:19:00.000Z

CFD Exhibition 2012 held at Middlesex University, Hendon Campus on 18th January 2012

I thought I add these too:

CFD Exhibition 2009 held at Middlesex University, Hendon Campus on 7th December 2009

CFD Presentations 2009 held at Middlesex University, Hendon Campus on 16th March 2009

rsk

Our ECKM 2011 Presentation & Poster

2011-11-02T14:27:00.000Z

Shockwave Flash Plugin is required to view this Presentation.

The Presentation will take a few seconds or short duration to load from clicking the Play Button.

Please note, the Presentation may hang time to time due high usage.

For Best Viewing:

Play the Presentation Story in Linear Mode
- Click on the Play Button to Move Forward and the Back Button to go Back
View the Presentation in Non-Linear Mode
- You can Select Certain Areas to View (for example: Results, Summary, etc.)
Full Screen to Maximise View
Auto-Play Mode (4 seconds per section)
Home Button (on the right) to Return to Home Screen Any Time
Zoom In or Out (on the right) where Required

Enjoy.

rsk

What happened at ECKM…?

2011-09-05T11:53:00.000+01:00

The 12th European Conference on Knowledge Management (ECKM) 2011
University of Passau, Passau, Germany.
1-2 September 2011

Excellent Result… We Won the Best Poster Award.

We have greatly benefited immensely from the orientation structured yet flexible conference, each unique in its range of topic as well as the outlook it provides in the history. We found especially the availability of broad knowledge from both alike practitioners and academics allowing us to integrate experience and learning. This helped us to consolidate in-depth understanding of our research field and prepare us for the rigours of elevating and exposure of different lens of our international clients.

rsk

Our ECKM 2011 Adventure…

2011-08-16T20:52:00.000+01:00

The 12th European Conference on Knowledge Management (ECKM) 2011
University of Passau, Passau, Germany.
1-2 September 2011

We are to Present Our Paper & Poster… wish us luck?

What’s your Strategy for Measuring IT & Non-IT for Knowledge Management in an Organisation?

Ravinder Singh Kahlon & Man-Chie Tse
{RK350, MT631}@live.mdx.ac.uk

Middlesex University, School of Engineering and Information Sciences
The Burroughs, London, NW4 4BT, United Kingdom

Abstract: This paper presents and describes a new pragmatism orientation technique for identifying and measuring knowledge management to grow an organisation. The technique brings together Dilip Bhatt KM components. The empirical study presents results, a Kiviat diagram, highlights the principal significance for comparison alignment between two KM models (Non-IT and IT connections) using Composite Features Diagramming methodology.

This method illustrates an abundance characteristics component results in visual qualitative technique that also enables conducted quantitative evaluation to fundamentally analyse, measure and transform an organisation success level retrospectively. It studies these links in a Healthcare organisation context, where KM is a strategic concern. Finally, further recommendation is subsequently addressed for future exploration works.

Keywords:

Knowledge Management (KM),
Composite Features Diagramming (CFD),
Knowledge Management Systems (KMS),
Knowledge Management Models (KMM),
Information Technology (IT),
Models Metrics,
Kiviat.

Full Paper & Poster Available on: Academic Bookshop Website

Reference (or cite) Paper & Poster

Kahlon, R. S. & Tse, MC. (2011). What’s Your Strategy for Measuring IT and Non-IT for Knowledge Management in an Organisation?, In: Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Knowledge Management 1-2 September 2011, Passau University, Germany, Volume 2, Pp.1141 - 1146.

rsk

Tom Gilb & Kai Gilb Course 2: Real REQUIREMENTS

2011-06-30T22:12:00.000+01:00

Project and System Level REQUIREMENTS Specification

Main Outline:

How to communicate your organisation’s ‘real’ requirements, and your customer’s most critical improvement requirements, in an unambiguous, clear, measurable, and testable way.

No other existing course can really tell you how to do this so measurably!

a complete method for tackling all possible requirements for a project, at all levels of consideration, both for IT Projects and other types of projects (industrial, organisational).

Course Contents:

pr
BuzzNet Tags:
actical examples of Planguage for requirements
the various requirements concepts defined deeply and exemplified
requirements templates (to make standards practical)
design constraint templates (a type of required design or architecture)
how to quantify any qualitative requirement (like intuitiveness or adaptability or security) – this is the key ability that most all other ‘requirements’ courses do not teach!
advanced scale of measure specification methods (a ‘scale’ is more than units)
how to measure a requirement level numerically (meters and tests for quality)
standards for requirements (rules, processes, templates, glossary)
principles for requirements (help you to tackle new problems better)
quality control of requirements: measuring requirement conformance to standards (reviews, inspections, agile reviews)
estimating the quantified impact of a design on requirements
evolutionary project management and how it integrates with requirements
training requirements writers
changing requirements culture
expected results from requirements culture improvement
a policy for improved requirements
instructor-led workshop: participant input requirement problems solved by Gilb
how to give information that determines priorities of requirements (example Wish/Goal/Fail and Qualifiers)
how to include requirement information about risks and uncertainties
how to include requirement information about traceability (up and down)

Collaboration Tools Used on the Course:

Twitter: @imtomgilb @kaigilb
- #RealRQ
- #Requirements #Stakeholders #Planguage #Measure #Value #Business #Estimation #Impact
LinkedIn Group: Lean QA and Requirements

rsk

Tom Gilb & Kai Gilb Course 1: LeanQA

2011-06-20T15:02:00.000+01:00

Lean QA: Much more Cost-Effective Quality Assurance methods, than Testing.

About the Instructors:

Kai Gilb: has practiced and innovated these advanced software engineering methods for 2 decades, internationally and in Norway. Some of his clients are Rolls Royce, HP, Siemens Healthcare, Citigroup, Credit Suisse, JP Morgan, Philips Medical Systems, Confirmit (Norway), NTNU IT (Norway), Bring (Norway Post Office), Schlumberger.

Tom Gilb: joined IBM Norway in 1958, and formed his consultancy 1960. He is the author of 9 books. He was senior author of Software Inspection (1993, in 14th printing), and published Competitive Engineering (2005, 3rd printing)

Both Gilbs invent methods as necessary, and try them out at real clients over a long period, measurably. They do not copy other peoples vague and unproven ideas. They are very specific, and deeply knowledgeable – which is why they have proven documented practice and success, at the worlds most advanced technology companies.
More at: www.Gilb.com/about

What was Learnt During the Course:

STAKEHOLDER QUALITY: Stakeholder quality analysis and specification.

QUALITY QUANTIFICATION: All quality requirements need to be quantified, to reflect all critical quality dimensions.

QUALITY BY DESIGN: Design Quality In! Don’t try to test it in. How to find and evaluate designs that give us needed quality levels. How to estimate impact of designs and architectures on requirement levels, as the basis for ‘assuring’ that we have later reached planned quality levels. Smart architecture for quality.

QUALITY DECISION TABLES: a practical tool for managing multiple qualities, multiple costs, and multiple architecture and strategy options - quantitatively and objectively.

AGILE QC: Establish ‘agile quality control’, a quantified simple review process. This includes measuring the quality of requirements, designs, code, test plans. It will give people strong motivation to follow best standards practices.

QUANTIFIED QUALITY PROCESS GATES: Quantified Process Entry and Exit Control, to drive learning, and practice, of your standards.

QUALITY BY FEEDBACK: Evolutionary Product Quality Development: one step above conventional ‘agile’ in dealing with quality. The Unity (111111) method for decomposing architecture into high quality increments.

Collaboration Tools Used on the Course:

Twitter: @imtomgilb @kaigilb
- #LeanQA
- #Requirements #Stakeholders #Software #Projects #Business #Value #Quantified #Planguage #Quality #Assurance #Engineering #Design #TSG #RealQA #Evo #Evolutionary #Agile
LinkedIn Group: Lean QA and Requirements

rsk

Tom Gilb & Kai Gilb Guest Lecture at MDX 2009

2010-02-19T11:14:00.000Z

A Master Class by Tom Gilb & Kai Gilb at Middlesex University – March 2009
organised by Elli Georgiadou (Principal Lecturer in Information Systems Quality Management)

Tom Gilb has developed important and innovative work in Systems and Software Engineering

The subject was on:

"Quantifying Quality: How to Tackle Quantification of the Critical Quality aspects for Projects for Both Requirements and Designs"

Quality describes ‘how well’ a function is done.
Quality describes the partial effectiveness of a function (as do all other performance attributes).
Quality is valued to some degree by some stakeholders of the system.
More Quality is generally valued by Stakeholders; especially if the increase is free, or lower cost, than the value of the increase.
Quality attributes can be articulated independently of the particular means (designs) used for reaching a specific quality level - even though all Quality levels depend on the particular designs used to achieve them.
A particular Quality can be a described in terms of a Complex concept, consisting of multiple elementary Quality concepts.
Quality is Variable (along a definable scale of measure: as are all scalar attributes).
Quality levels are capable of being specified Quantitatively (as are all scalar attributes).
Quality levels can be Measured in practice.
Quality levels can be traded off to some degree; with other system attributes valued more by stakeholders.
Quality can never be perfect (100%), in the real world.
There are some levels of a particular quality that may be outside the state of the art; at a defined time and circumstance.
When Quality levels increase towards perfection, the resources needed to support those levels tend towards infinity.

More at: www.Gilb.com

rsk

How to Reference (or cite) this Blog!

2010-02-18T11:50:00.000Z

Ravi S. K. (2009). Ravi's Knowledge Management Blog [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], 19/02/2010-last update [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/ [yyyy, dd/mm/yyyy].

Dubai CTIT 2009 Conference

2009-12-31T21:03:00.000Z

The 2009 International Conference on Current Trends in Information Technology
Dubai Women's College, Duabi, UAE.
15-16 December 2009

The Impact of Digitalisation in Higher Education Libraries

Ravinder Singh Kahlon & Man-Chie Tse
{RK350, MT631}@live.mdx.ac.uk

Middlesex University, School of Engineering and Information Sciences
The Burroughs, London, NW4 4BT, United Kingdom

Abstract

Digitalisation technology is powerfully changing the way how stakeholders can utilise library resources today. Traditional libraries were vigorously time consuming with customisation service approach whereas digitalisation offers extensive materials accessible at any time. Based on stakeholder mapping, there is recognition of competitive force which impacts in higher academic libraries.

Finally, a set of information system activities have been derived which sets out as a key platform to the success for Higher Education Library (HEL). However, the success is dependent on a series of factors to sustain the current market condition but also meeting the needs. These can be superseded through alignment of competitive strategies and determining the critical success factors which will equip HEL for viable global services.

Full Paper Available on IEEE Xplore Website

Reference (or cite) Paper

Kahlon, R. S. & Tse, MC. (2009). The Impact of Digitalisation in Higher Education Libaries, In: Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on the Current Trends in Information Technology 15-16 December 2009, Dubai Womans College, Dubai, U.A.E., Pp.184-189.

Outstanding Result… We Won the Best Student Paper Award.

rsk

Journal of Knowledge Management (JKM)

2009-10-12T13:30:00.000+01:00

Since the late 90’s Knowledge Management (KM) has become a dominant force for increasing enterprise performance and sustainable competitive advantage in the face of our increasingly complex and ambiguous global business environments.

The Journal of Knowledge Management (JKM) was the first journal in 1997 to bring together theory and case studies in this vital topic to provide progressive researchers, practitioners and organisations with holistic understanding and practical insight.

For further information visit the website: Journal of Knowledge Management (JKM)

Been Away…

2009-10-01T12:04:00.001+01:00

I've been lost in time for the past few months...

Find Me On...

2009-07-30T20:16:00.000+01:00

Week 11 – End of the KMS Module..?

2009-04-06T16:48:00.004+01:00

Even though it is the end of the KMS Module… it is just the start.

Week 10 - Second Life & Knowledge Management…!

2009-03-31T14:53:00.004+01:00

1. INTRODUCTION

Many organisations are encounter difficulties to implement Knowledge Management (KM) with capturing and maximising the knowledge that is important to the organisation. In my earlier article Organisational Knowledge Management Systems (KMS) (RSK, 2009d) I looked at how organisations could develop KMS to deliver KM.

An initiative for organisations to enable KM with the use of Collaborative Virtual Environment (CVE) is an effective KMS for organisations to provide knowledge sharing and learning. The article explores this in detail.

2. BACKGROUND READING

2.1. Collaborative Virtual Environments

CVE are systems that are spanning from text-based environments to simple 2D to 3D environments with graphical representations to systems based on Virtual Reality (Tomek, 2001).

2.2. 3D CVE

According to Tomek (2001) 3D CVE is a software environment that emulates some of the features of the real world, for example: massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) (Chen, et al., (2005) or Second Life (SL) for socialisation, business or education intentions (Second Life, 2009).

2.3. Using 3D CVE for KM

Schmeil & Eppler (2005) says “3D CVE provide ways to experience and view information that is dynamic and interactive”. 3D CVE will allow individuals to have more accurate approximation of physical reality, which will provide an ease in accessing and using the system (Stanney, 2002). Thus KM could world work in the sense where people can go into the CVE and have improved usability to allow knowledge sharing with real life “feeling of immersion, a perceptual and psychological sense of being in the digital environment” (Stanney, 2002).

Also the feeling of presence is enhanced, by the sense of orientation and position in space. People can be organised in a more natural way in 3D that will allow people to feel comfortable to share, discuss and work (Schmeil & Eppler, 2005).

Tomek (2001) suggests a weakness of 3D CVE is the models are more difficult to use over 2D data or text and could thus distract a user from communicating, hence hinder KM.

2.4. What is Second Life?

SL is an online Multi-User Virtual Environment (MUVE) that is a special type of CVE (Second Life, 2009). It works by installing a software application that allows user to access virtual world, from anywhere, at any time, hence employees have access 24-7. The technical and usage of SL is outside the scope of this article (see Second Life, 2009).

2.5. Impact of Second Life to an Organisation

SL could provide a platform for increased efficiency of not travelling, which results in reducing cost. Learning could be key factor for employees to be involved in interactive training sessions and seminars (Holm, et al., (2007). The reducing cost and wider networking could provide opportunities to organisations to use SL to gain competitive advantage and learn from Communities of Practices (CoP) that exist.

2.6. Second Life & Organisation Knowledge

Organisations could use SL to facilitating knowledge sharing and integration within their KM Strategy to a KMS (RSK, 2009c). Krange, et al., (2003) investigated collaboration patterns for learning in SL and say knowledge construction and the analysis of the interrelations between actors, especially vocal interaction can improve collaboration.

2.7. Social & Business Networks & CoP

Social and business networks are critical to an organisations retaining and enhancing their key knowledge (RSK, 2009). Organisations could network wider markets to learn and discover new innovations. Also the CoP of linking with other groups of people anywhere in the CVE to share practices (RSK, 2009b).

3. MY PERSONAL STAND POINT

The CVE of SL has shown that organisations and people have now got alternative way to do education, business and to socialise over the internet. Compared to what I wrote in my earlier article on Web 2.0 (RSK, 2009e), where interaction by means of text, images and multimedia that make up Web 2.0 technologies can be 2D and not enough for KM to really maximise organisation collaboration.

The position I see is that organisations will use SL as a KMS (RSK, 2009d) in building a presence in a public environment to network and at the same time having a private environment for internal uses for employees to learn, discover, create and discuss (Individual and organisation learning). Therefore provide knowledge sharing collaboration, which will result in significant competitive advantage from reduced travel costs and improved teamwork.

4. THEORY IN PRACTICE

4.1. Universities in Second Life

One possible use of SL is to deliver education. Middleton (2009) says "Universities can not only hold lectures and seminars in-world, they can create fully interactive, immersive environments where students can communicate with tutors and professors and explore virtual learning tools". As this is supported by the research of Saleeb (2009) who assess the impact of education environments through SL.

Universities could use SL to set up a virtual base where potential students can view prospective course and study through the virtual environment. Employees at the university and people that come to the base could use it as social network to meet people, socialise and important share ideas (learn). Also business network could happen where university could team up with another university to exchange business information, ideas and support. For example: Middlesex University and an American University, could share local knowledge and ideas of reaching wider markets.

Students can be taught through SL as there might be no need to attend physical classrooms as it will all be done through the CVE. Also academics or trainers could have CoP to discuss best practices in there respected fields. Thus create knowledge environment of discussion and increase productivity and innovation.

4.2. IBM in Second Life

According to O'Driscoll (2008) the most effective way that IBM uses SL is to host virtual meetings (formal and informal) as regular as a 2 or 3 times a week, where people can meet and talk and create a better spatial presence. IBM sees the potential for organising training in the form of simulations, rehearsals, conference streaming, doing research and other business related activities.

4.3. NASA in Second Life

NASA developed a Space Exploration Policy, of developing a space program that inspire people to study maths, science and engineering (Holm, et al., (2007). Therefore NASA uses SL to create a live action learning environment that gives people the chance to “experiment with orbital mechanics, the principles of spaceflight and other space-related subjects” (Holm, et al., 2007), which provides learning devices for people of all ages. Peoples with shared goals and ideas will learn and discover new (best) practices that involve simulation (knowledge creation). It also gives NASA the opportunity to find new people with talents to work for them in the future. NASA also uses SL for marketing, sponsoring, research and development and importantly for collaboration and linking with global engineering teams (CoP) to share best practices, for example NASA with European Space Agency to discuss future space projects.

References

Chen, Y.C., Chen, P., Hwang, J.J., Korba, L., Song, R. & Yee, G. (2005). An analysis of online gaming crime characteristics, Internet Research, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 246-261.

Holm, J., White, C. & Soderstrom, T. (2007). 25/10/2007-last update Sharing Knowledge in Second Life [Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology], [Online]. Available: http://www.ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OKMDS/2007-10.../Sharing-Knowledge-in-SL--JeanneHolm-CharlesWhite-TomSoderstrom_20071025.ppt [2009, 03/08].

RSK (2009a). 31/03/2009-last update Week 10 - Second Life & Knowledge Management…! [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/03/week-11-second-life-knowledge.html [2009, 03/31].

RSK (2009b). 26/01/2009-last update Week 2 – Data <—> Information <—> Knowledge [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/01/week-1-orgnetcop.html [2009, 03/09].

RSK (2009c). 01/02/2009-last update Week 3 - Knowledge Management...? [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/02/week-2-what-is-knowledge-management_01.html [2009, 03/09].

RSK (2009d). 12/03/2009-last update Week 8 - Knowledge Management Systems… [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/03/week-11-second-life-knowledge.html [2009, 03/20].

RSK (2009e). 14/03/2009-last update Week 9 – Web 2.0 [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/03/week-9-web-20.html [2009, 03/21].

Krange, I., Larsen, A., Fjuk, A. & Ludvigsen, S. (2002). 01/07/2002-last update Describing Construction of Knowledge through Identification of Collaboration Patterns in 3D Learning Environments [InterMedia, University of Oslo], [Online]. Available: http://www.citeseerx.ist.psu.edu [2009, 03/04].

Middleton, C. (2009). 22/01/2009-last update Mark Kingdon, CEO of Second Life: The Advantages of a Second Life of a Second Life [ComputerWeekly], [Online]. Available: http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2009/01/22/234340/mark-kingdon-ceo-of-second-life-the-advantages-of-a-second.htm [2009, 03/19].

O'Driscoll, T. (2008). 04/04/2008-last update Learning Matters! [Blog at WordPress.com], [Online]. Available: http://wadatripp.wordpress.com/2008/04/04/the-i-web-singularity-redux/ [2009, 03/17].

Pasteur, E. (2007). 24/11/2007-last update NHS Plans Future in Second Life [Massively Weblogs, Inc. Network], [Online]. Available: http://www.massively.com/2007/11/24/nhs-plans-future-in-second-life/ [2009, 03/10].

Saleeb , N. (2009). 02/01/2009-last update Second Life Researchers Forum [Nabble], [Online]. Available: http://n2.nabble.com/(no-subject)-td2101031.html [2009, 03/30].

Schmeil, A. & Eppler, M.J. (2008). Collaboration Patterns for Knowledge Sharing and Integration in Second Life: A Classification of Virtual 3D Group Interaction Scripts [University of Lugano, Switzerland], [Online]. Available: http://www.knowledge-communication.org/pdf/Schmeil_Eppler_IKNOW08.pdf [2009, 03/03].

Second Life (2009). What is Second Life? [Linden Research, Inc], [Online]. Available: http://www.secondlife.com/ [2009, 03/19].

Stanney, K.M. (2002) Handbook of Virtual Environments : Design, Implementation, and Applications, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, N.J. ; London.

Tomek, I. (2001). Knowledge Management and Collaborative Virtual Environments, j-jucs, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 458-471.

Week 9 – Web 2.0

2009-03-14T08:33:00.001Z

THIS ARTICLE IS STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION

Week 8 - Knowledge Management Systems…

2009-03-12T18:02:00.004Z

1. INTRODUCTION

From my earlier articles I explained the definitions of Knowledge Management (KM) (RSK, 2009a), developing a KM strategy (RSK, 2009b) and then I investigated if knowledge can be managed within organisations (RSK, 2009c). The next step is look at a systemic solution for organisations to manage their knowledge with Knowledge Management System (KMS).

2. “MY PASSING THOUGHTS”

The ideal KMS for an organisation would be a system that would follow every employee day and night, monitor their work, communication and even there thoughts, eventually store all into a database.

Although this is not yet possible, the fact that much of the work process now relies on the use of IT can make this achievable. It is imaginable, that one could create a system that integrates all the tools that an employee uses - from work tools through Web browsers and e-mail clients - and captures, possibly pre-processes, and stores all relevant information.

3. BACKGROUND READING

3.1. Knowledge Management System

According to Jashapara (2004) KMS provide three features: information capture, storage, organisation and access. In organisation context KMS is long-term continued usage of KMS by employees in an organisation

Properly designed and implemented KMS have the potential to positively impact performance and afford a competitive advantage to an organisation (Robles-Flores & Kulkarni, 2006). However the current reality is that many KMS have failed to deliver on these expectations due to their strong IT orientation and little regard to links with business strategy and the end customer (Jashapara, 2004)

3.2. KMS in Organisation Context

The underlying premise of KMS is that they will meet expectations of senior management for return on investments or increased effectiveness (Jashapara, 2004; RSK, 2009c). As a result, many organisations have invested substantially in projects involving KMS assuming they will contribute to improved performance (Robles-Flores & Kulkarni, 2006).

3.3. Organisation KM Strategy & KMS

KMS should help the organisation to achieve their KM Strategy in delivering KM (RSK, 2009b), for example: KMS could be used to provide training to employees and share practices. Therefore management and the employees of the organisation should support the KM strategy with KMS.

3.4. The Role of IT to support KMS

In order to manage knowledge efficiently and effectively, Dierkes, et al., (2001) suggests strategic managers are looking at IT to deliver KMS. Wei He & Wei (2006) say KMS are a class of “IT based systems applied to managing organizational knowledge”. However this attitude by strategic managers of organisations is that IT will create and store knowledge (RSK, 2009c). IT is a tool to deliver efficiency in combining and disseminating existing information and explicit knowledge. The use of It can only support a KMS, there are factors are required to make KMS work, for example: personalization strategy for KM to have KMS of storytelling, workshops, face-to-face, etc (RSK, 2009b).

Dierkes, et al., (2001) suggests to much emphasis on IT is not good as it does not offer “integrated and holistic way” of dealing with tacit knowledge in the context of the organisation knowledge capturing. In addition what is needed is KMS using IT to support knowledge sharing-creation.

3.5. Closed vs. Open KMS

Groff & Jones (2003) suggest KMS can be closed and open. Closed KMS are totally independent and considered to be somewhat isolated from environmental influences. Open KMS have external sources of energy, information, or materials are more agile (Groff & Jones, 2003). KMS can not be completely closed, they need information from outside to achieve their purpose and produce information outputs that are useful to humans.

4. MY PERSONAL STAND POINT

The position I see KMS as an implementation of KM strategy of implementing KM within an organisation. This can be IT or non-IT, for example: Hansen, et al., (1999) discusses the codification and personalisation strategy that organisation should take in developing KMS.

KMS would provide organisations with a sharing of valuable organisational knowledge. This will result in the organisation in not re-inventing the wheel, thus reduce the mundane work of repeating and lessen training time for new employees, for example: training manuals.

Organisations could also safeguard Intellectual Property (2008) after the employee leaves and knowledge can be codified. As some times ideas that leave the organisation costs in innovation and creativity.

5. THEORY IN PRACTICE

5.1. European Commission

The European Commission created a knowledge center (KMS) that is IT-Based Community of Practice (CoP) with seven different countries where the domain topic is to discuss road, rail and transportation. The community involvement here is conducted by "five research teams". Thus KMS that are IT-Based can bridge the gap between the locality of the CoP and provide individuals and organisations with vital knowledge when required (RSK, 2009c; TRKC, n.d). In addition this is open system that allows knowledge sharing to come from all angles and grow compare to closed system.

5.2. European Rail Network

An annual report in 2002 by European Rail Network attempts to capture knowledge through progression onto programs and also introducing "mechanisms to encourage employees to update their knowledge and skills" through the KMS (Rail Infrastructure Corporation, 2002).

European Rail Network have a "Rail Knowledge Library" as part of the KMS which is used to "preserver and to improve the integrated knowledge on the rail system". As part of CoP, the organisation can connect with university postgraduate students as mentioned "virtual rail university" which not only helps students to develop but also to enhance the resources further. The impact these causes can lead to greater precision of services for the stakeholders and also the end users who are the customers for a reliable service (Eurax, n.d).

The insight this gives provides a greater understanding by incorporating external "research from other sectors" in specific "the communications and information technology" - reflecting this as a bigger scale of CoP to enhance a topic area (Department For Transport, 2008).

5.3. London Transport & HK MTR

Railway Technology (2009) reported that London Transport is looking to improve the services to the customers to deliver a more relaxed environment rather than travelling in hot conditions. This could be done by introducing a cooling system which similarly reflected the HK MTR transport because of the "air conditioning system stored" (MTR Corporation, 2003).

Therefore for UK to be able to implement this successful for the London Underground, there is a need to understand how this was pursued in Hong Kong. Reflecting here is a CoP because of the need to "gain in knowledge of the whole technology". Thus being the domain area being "cooling system" in the field of public transport for the public (Railway Technology, 2009).

References

Department For Transport (2008). Rail Industry Research Strategy. [Online]. Available: http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/researchtech/research/railstrategyresearch?page=4 [2009, 03/03/2009].

Dierkes, M., Berthoin Antal, A., Child, J. & Nonaka, I. (2001) Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Eurnex (n.d). Eurnex Association - A Legal Entity [Online]. Available: http://www.eurnex.net/ [2009, 03/03/2009].

Groff, T.R. & Jones, T.P. (2003) Introduction to Knowledge Management : KM in Business, Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, Mass. ; London.

Hansen, M.T., Nohria, N. & Tierney, T. (1999). What's Your Strategy for Managing Knowledge? [Vol. 77 No.2, pp.106-16, Harvard Business Review], [Online]. Available: http://www.itu.dk/~kristianskriver/b9/Whats%20your%20strategy%20for%20managing%20knowledge.pdf [2009, 03/03/2009].

Intellectual Property Office (2008). Welcome to the Intellectual Property Office [Intellectual Property Office], [Online]. Available: http://www.ipo.gov.uk/ [2008, 10/12/2008].

Jashapara, A. (2004) Knowledge Management : An Integrated Approach, Financial Times Prentice Hall, Harlow.

RSK (2009a). 01/02/2009-last update Week 3 - Knowledge Management...? [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/02/week-2-what-is-knowledge-management_01.html [2009, 03/09].

RSK (2009b). 04/02/2009-last update Week 4 - Developing a KM Strategy? [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/02/week-2-what-is-knowledge-management_04.html [2009, 03/03].

RSK (2009c). 12/03/2009-last update Week 8 - Knowledge Management Systems… [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/03/week-8-knowledge-management-systems.html [2009, 03/14].

MTR Corporation (2003). Platform screen Doors Programme of MTR Corporation Better Environment For Less Energy. [Online]. Available: http://www.cedb.gov.hk/citb/psdas/content/doc/Day2_Presentation_KWTong.pdf [2009, 03/03/2009].

Rail Infrastructure Corporation (2002). Annual Report 2002, Building A World Class Rail Network. [Online]. Available: http://www.ric.nsw.gov.au/ric/resources/reports/RIC_Annual_Report_2001-2002.pdf [2009, 03/03/2009].

Railway Technology (2009). London Underground Enters The Ice Age. [Online]. Available: http://www.railway-technology.com/features/feature44472/ [2009, 03/03/2009].

Robles-Flores, J.A. & Kulkarni, U. (2006). 23/01/2006-last update Knowledge Management Systems: A Business Value Model [Arizona State University], [Online]. Available: www.public.asu.edu/~jrobles1/docs/262.pdf [2009, 03/03].

Salisbury, M.W. (2003). Putting theory into practice to build knowledge management systems, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 128-141.

Snowden, D. (2005). Strategy in the context of uncertainty, Handbook of Business Strategy, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 47-54.

TRKC (n.d). Projects & Analysis - NETLIPSE [Online]. Available: http://www.transport-research.info/web/projects/project_details.cfm?id=11069 [2009, 03/03/2009].

Wei He, J. & Wei, K. (2006). 26/07/2006-last update Knowledge Management Systems (KMS) Continuance in Organizations: A Social Relational Perspective [City University of Hong Kong], [Online]. Available: http://www.springerlink.com/content/j42h68j0340071u2/fulltext.pdf?page=1 [2009, 03/20].

Week 6 - Organisational Knowledge, why bother…?

2009-02-28T13:48:00.004Z

1. INTRODUCTION

Today many organisations have become aware that managing knowledge is crucial for their success. With the increasing level of hype around the words Knowledge Management (KM), many organisations want to know if knowledge can really be managed. This article will investigate!

2. “MY PASSING THOUGHTS”

In my article Data <—> Information<—> Knowledge (RSK, 2009a), knowledge is the “understanding of the facts (information) and applying experience or skills to make decision upon it”. Therefore knowledge is an asset to an individual and exploiting this knowledge within an organisation makes it valuable to both.

The question is can organisational knowledge be captured and managed? If only systems are in place to maximise the knowledge that is important to the organisation (Snowden, 2005).

3. BACKGROUND READING

3.1. Purpose of KM within an Organisation

There are many obstacles on the path to managing knowledge within organisations in order to obtain competitive advantage (Dierkes et al., 2001). The first step that the organisation should take is to understand the purpose of having KM.

Having KM within organisation is not just sharing the knowledge; what would that mean in a business context? It must have a return on investment to the organisation of having KM, which can be difficult to measure (Ichijō & Nonaka, 2007). Therefore in a business context what determines that something was known by someone quicker with KM in place? (Mullins 1999). If you can determine that, how can you measure the productivity gained. In addition it can lead to management uneasiness with the costs of implementing KM (Davenport & Volpel, 2001).

3.2. Structure of the Organisation

The impact of organisational structure influences the way power and responsibilities are carried within the organisation as suggested by Debowski (2006). In addition it can have implications in the way knowledge can be disseminated and adopted by others (Davenport & Volpel, 2001). As this can restrict people from sharing and focusing only on their own objectives rather than the organisations. This is also a barrier to KM, hence the continuation of dispute between management and employees creates a volatile environment consequently “sticky knowledge” remains within the organisation because of the structure (Debowski, 2006).

3.3. Organisation Culture / Social Factors

According to Mullins (1999) the first impediment to knowledge success is dealing with the people who have the knowledge. Thus Cook (1999) suggests people feel they give up knowledge, they give up power, which results in people feeling dispensable.

More progressive organisations share information and knowledge more freely (Dalkir, 2005). This attitude needs to permeate the organisations for KM to succeed.

Organisation culture must change to develop KM; however the reality is that knowledge is power in many organisations. Thus knowledge sharing is not working because the fear and self interest of individuals working alone and not as whole for the organisation (Debowski, 2006; Lin, 2007). The ideas of incentives and rewards could make employees motivated to share knowledge (Chaffy, 2005). On the other hand teams within organisations can work more collaborative and see more reasons to share knowledge.

The major obstacle is organisation requires KM, but the support is little, for example: the problem is the lack of time to capture the knowledge that does exist. Reflecting to world wide angle knowledge is difficult to source in the open environment because of the transparency (Debowski, 2006). There are some countries which do and do not “understand the importance of fiscal mobilisation”. Subsequently, if knowledge was shared this would make all countries become better.

3.4. Can Knowledge be Managed

Some critics for example: Streatfield & Wilson (1999) argue that knowledge cannot be managed because it is invisible and intangible. Davenport & Volpel (2001) say “management to mean any concerted attempt to improve how knowledge is created, distributed, or used” then KM is not unachievable. Thus management has previously involved the manipulation of other invisible and intangible issues like motivation, inspiration and creativity. (Davenport & Volpel, 2001)

For example: the European Commission created a knowledge centre where the domain topic area addresses the concern of "road, rail and transportation", the community involvement here is conducted by five research teams from seven different countries. This reflects the idea that organisation knowledge cannot be managed hence the need for organisations to seek others to work together to enable a feasible project delivery TRKC (n.d).

4. MY PERSONAL STAND POINT

Knowledge exists in people, not technology. To share it will require a massive human effort. Technology can help to capture information, but can not create knowledge.

The business strategy of the organisation must acknowledge the requirement(s) to capture knowledge and actively promote the effort, which requires investment to really be flourishing (RSK, 2009b). These investments could include useful technologies for example: search engines, intelligent agents, database management systems, document management systems and repositories (Snowden, 2005).

Organisation knowledge can not be managed and will require the help of others in other prominent fields. For example: Transport for London is working with "education schools across London" as part of improvement service towards "safety and citizenship" Parliamentary (2009). Therefore sharing knowledge externally helps the organisation to provide better service and understanding to its stakeholders.

For organisations, there is no one solution where you can just buy off the shelf, plug in and have KM. However working out strategies to reuse knowledge throughout an organisation is definitely a good idea.

5. THEORY IN PRACTICE

5.1 Organisations Working Together

Organisations appear to have difficulty using internal knowledge, likewise some have exploited externally to seek and share knowledge. Zydns (2006) gives a good example of where he discusses about "hybrid effort" of four car manufacturers (Toyota GM, Chrysler and BMW) worked together as partners to create a hybrid model. The impact here was to achieve "economies of scale" but also saving towards heavy cost globally such as "purchasing, product development and new technology".

5.2 Compucorp Organisation

A good example to demonstrate is shown in Woerner (2001) where Compucorp organisation lacked "marketing knowledge or sales", as a result of this, they decided to "sell calculator designs instead of manufacturing calculators". The impact here is because of the knowledge in the marketing and sales area. Thus Compucorp failed to proceed; this could impact the organisation itself through large investment loss and time taken for initial design features.

References

Aso, T. (2009) Aso Lays Bare G20 Split, Financial Times, Wednesday 1^st April 2009, p.1

Chaffey, D. & Wood, S. (2005) Business Information Management : Improving Performance using Information Systems, Financial Times Prentice Hall, Harlow.

Cook, P. (1999). I heard it through the grapevine: making knowledge management work by learning to share knowledge, skills and experience, Industrial and Commercial Training, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 101-105.

Dalkir, K. (2005) Knowledge Management in Theory and Practice, Elsevier/Butterworth Heinemann, Amsterdam ; London.

Davenport, T.H. & Volpel, S.C. (2001). The rise of knowledge towards attention management, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 212 - 222-1367-3270.

Debowski, S. (2006) Knowledge Management, Wiley, Milton, Qld.

Dierkes, M., Berthoin Antal, A., Child, J. & Nonaka, I. (2001) Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Ichijō, K. & Nonaka, I. (2007) Knowledge Creation and Management : New Challenges for Managers, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

RSK (2009a). 26/01/2009-last update Week 2 – Data <—> Information <—> Knowledge [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/01/week-1-orgnetcop.html [2009, 03/09].

RSK (2009b). 04/02/2009-last update Week 4 - Developing a KM Strategy? [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/02/week-2-what-is-knowledge-management_04.html [2009, 03/03].

RSK (2009c). 12/03/2009-last update Week 8 - Knowledge Management Systems… [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/03/week-11-second-life-knowledge.html [2009, 03/20].

Lin, C. (2007). To share or not to share: modeling knowledge sharing using exchange ideology as a moderator, Personnel Review, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 457-475.

Mullins, C.S. (1999). 01/03/1999-last update What is Knowledge and can it be Managed [Quality Content for Data Management Professionals], [Online]. Available: http://www.tdan.com/view-articles/5108/ [2009, 03/03].

Parliamentary (2009). School Travel - Transport Committee. [Online]. Available: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmtran/351/351we31.htm [2009, 03/03/2009].

Rikowski, R. (2007) Knowledge Management : Social, Cultural and Theoretical Perspectives, Chandos, Oxford.

Snowden, D. (2005). Strategy in the context of uncertainty, Handbook of Business Strategy, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 47-54.

Streatfield, D. & Wilson, T.D. (1999). Deconstructing ‘knowledge Management’ [Emerald Group Publishing Limited], [Online]. Available: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewContentItem.do;jsessionid=A3BE09371FE2B4DB0C8CDCBA3DE9C926?contentType=Article&hdAction=lnkhtml&contentId=863829&dType=SUB&history=false [2009, 03/07].

Zydns (2006) Hybrid Effort - Trio Takes On Toyota GM, Chrysler and BMW Have Gotten Together To Save Money And Combine Gaselectric Knowledge [Online]. Available: http://www.zydns.net/Hybrid-effort.html [2009, 03/03/2009].

TRKC (n.d). Projects & Analysis - NETLIPSE [Online]. Available: http://www.transport-research.info/web/projects/project_details.cfm?id=11069 [2009, 03/03/2009].

Woerner, J. (2001). Featured Companies: Compucorp [Online]. Available: http://www.datamath.org/Featured_Companies.htm [2009, 03/03/2009].

Week 5 – The Meaning of Knowledge Sharing…!

2009-02-22T21:01:00.001Z

What I have learnt so far is that one that shares knowledge makes a positive contribution to other people and also adds value to their own understanding from feedback...

People that do not share knowledge can hinder the progress of other individuals or organisations... and this will cause further harm in the longer term....

I have personally been guilty of this and my views are now starting to change... because of KM...

To be continued...

Week 4 - KM Models in Action

2009-02-09T10:03:00.001Z

Men at Work…!

Week 4 - Developing a KM Strategy?

2009-02-04T19:57:00.001Z

1. INTRODUCTION

Knowledge Management (KM) can be used in developing a strategy for an organisation. Meroño-Cerdan et al, (2007) describes Knowledge Management Strategy (KMS) as the “overall approach an organisation intends to take to align its knowledge resources and capabilities to the intellectual requirements of its strategy”, therefore the organisation must shrink the knowledge gap, which exists between what the organisation knows and what it does not know.

2. BACKGROUND READING

2.1. Understanding KMS

The knowledge process must be managed, therefore the organisation require a strategy to guide them, for example: KM - Guide to Good Practice (Kelleher & Dominic, 2001, Chaffey & Wood, 2005) outline some suggestions for KMS plans:

KM Mission & Vision
KM Objectives
KM Budget
KM Metrics
KM Priorities
KM Training
KM technical infrastructure
KM Communities of Practice
Knowledge sharing incentives
Integrating KM with organisation strategy

Beckett et al (2000) states that it is “important principle: the mission itself defines the information that constitutes knowledge for the organisation”. In addition the knowledge is any information that contributes to the overall mission of the organisation and thus the business strategy it pursues.

2.2. Devising a KMS

When devising a KM strategy it is very important that the evidence gathered and analysed in the initial evaluation stages of KM strategy development be used to understand how organisational knowledge meets business objectives and future needs and opportunities (Bahra, 2001).

KPMG (2003) European Knowledge Management Survey highlights that strategic KM objectives can only be achieved when they are internally linked to clearly defined business processes.

From my earlier work ‘What is Strategy?’ (RSK - Strategy, 2009), I outlined definitions of strategy and what elements can be derived, for example: future direction, competitive advantage, etc. I also mentioned strategy within organisations, listing methods of how to develop strategy at strategic management level, for example: analysis, choice and implementation.

Using these strategic management methods of developing traditional strategies for example: business, human resources, marketing, etc, it can also be applied to KMS (Robson, 1996). Example of traditional method tool is SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) can be used to analysis knowledge within the organisation, for example:

S – What areas of the organisation benefits from knowledge
W – What area of the organisation lacks knowledge
O – What are the opportunities to exploit knowledge
T – What are the threats of losing knowledge

2.3. Type to KMS

Searching literature for KMS, the most supported and citied article was of Hansen et al. (1999) also agreed by Meroño-Cerdan et al, (2007).

Hansen et al. (1999) have identified two types of KMS:

Codification Strategy – Explicit Knowledge organised and stored in database

The re-using of knowledge asset can be shared within the organisation
Incentives for individuals for contributing knowledge
IT investment is high
Workforce must be IT Literate

Personalization Strategy – Knowledge within an individual who develops and shares it

The knowledge is tailored to the solution
IT investment is less
Incentives for individuals for sharing knowledge

Meroño-Cerdan et al, (2007) research looks at the codification and personalization strategies and presents the idea that “technological instruments and soft or human initiatives for managing knowledge”, which they class as KM instruments. Their research intends to be the first attempt in literature to provide a scale or map for diagnosing and measuring codification and personalization KM strategies. This is shown in Table 1:

The selection of one of these strategies will depend on the organisation, Meroño-Cerdan et al, (2007) suggests that the organisation “should use one KM strategy primarily and use the second to support the first” and Hansen et al. (1999) a mix should be of 80-20 per cent either-way and the organisation will measure this by their requirements.

Hansen et al. (1999) state “knowledge management strategy should reflect its competitive strategy”

how it creates value for customers,
how that value supports an economic model
how the company's people deliver on the value and the economics

This is illustrated in Table 2:

2.4. KMS - Story and Narrative (Personalization Approach)

Steven Denning (2004) gives a concise definition:

“A story or narrative in its broadest sense is anything told or recounted; more narrowly, and more usually, something told or recounted in the form of a causally-linked set of events; account; tale,: the telling of a happening or connected series of happenings, whether true or fictitious”

Stories and narratives are good way to sharing knowledge and experience with other people that want to know. From reading KM literature and attending a Knowledge Café, it seems to be a popular way of sharing the knowledge within organisations.

According to David Snowden (2009) storytelling makes it possible for sharing and transfer of knowledge using “power of the medium to offer perspectives on topics” that could otherwise be overlooked by using formal procedures to turn tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge.

The most valuable tacit knowledge is “context-dependant” that we intend to use it when we need it. For example: this knowledge may not be obvious by just writing it down about what they know about. However by asking someone to recount an event as a story may draw out different knowledge perspectives and leaning (Snowden, 2009).

3. MY PERSONAL STAND POINT

I think KMS is important for KM to thrive. If an organisation decides it will develop a KMS around personalization approach an understanding of how communities can be developed and managed is vital.

Learning makes organisations knowledge assets usable. Knowledge relates to a ‘knower’, we treat information as being more independent but knowledge will be associated with someone (Snowden, 2009).

For example: we will ask ‘where is that information?’ but not ‘who knows that?’

Learning in organisations is vital to knowledge creation, sharing and transfer. There is a new emphasis on people.

Learning in practice, for example: in work based situations not classroom learning, involves becoming member of a community of practice (CoP) (RSK – KM, 2009).

I think stories and narrative play important role within organisation learning and sharing knowledge. Some organisations culture might not allow the convenience to have storytelling. This depends on the type of strategy the organisation adopts, for example: personalization approach will be more open to using storytelling. A typical reason for storytelling in organisations could be the avoidance of past project failures, which I understood when many people in the industry were telling one in the Knowledge Café.

4. THEORY IN PRACTICE

Recently I visited a Knowledge Café and found out that storytelling is well-liked as a mechanism for sharing knowledge within organisations. As many representatives from many organisations said they prefer to ask someone that knows, rather than use a database to search and they would only use the database when they can not find anybody that does know.

Examples of storytelling can happen in CoP, see my earlier work (RSK – KM, 2009)

4.1. Storytelling Workshop at IBM

I met senior employee from IBM at the Knowledge Café; the story he told one was ‘How storytelling works within IBM’.

IBM uses the strategy of personalization to capture tacit from its employees and codification strategy to store this tacit as explicit within systems to reuse the knowledge.

IBM developed storytelling workshops where storytellers tell their stories to observers to document and the group that want to learn the knowledge and experience. The observers are trained to identify: decisions, judgements, problem and resolutions; they collect this information and link it on charts.

At the end of the storytelling the observers ask the group to validate the charts for each decision, judgement, problem and resolution in clusters, which knowledge was used and what was its nature. Bahra (2001) states “tacit in the form of skills possessed by individuals (experience, intuition, relationships, understanding); explicit in the form of artefacts (pricing models quality control producers, rules, research)”. Therefore this storytelling can benefit the group by understanding the storytellers experience and also to codify and store it. However the capturing will never be the same as to hearing from someone that processes this.

References

Bahra, N. (2001) Competitive Knowledge Management, Palgrave, Basingstoke.

Beckett, A.J., Wainwright, C.E.R. & Bance, D. (2000) Knowledge management: strategy or software? Management Decision, vol. 38, no. 9, pp. 601-606.

Denning , S. (2004) What Story and Narrative Mean-Meaning of Story and Narrative-Social Dimension of the Meaning of a Story Or a Narrative [Stephen Denning Webmaster CR WEB CONSULTING], [Online]. Available: http://www.stevedenning.com/What_story.html [2009, 15/02/2009].

Hansen, M.T., Nohria, N. & Tierney, T. (1999) What's Your Strategy for Managing Knowledge? [Vol. 77 No.2, pp.106-16, Harvard Business Review], [Online]. Available: http://www.itu.dk/~kristianskriver/b9/Whats%20your%20strategy%20for%20managing%20knowledge.pdf [2009]

Kelleher, D. & Levene, S. (2001) Knowledge Management : A Guide to Good Practice, PAS 2001, 120 p. : ill. ; 30 cm, GBA267176 Edition, British Standards Institution, London.

KPMG (2003) Insights from KPMG’s European Knowledge Management Survey 2002/2003 [KPMG knowledge Advisory Services], [Online]. Available: http://ep2010.salzburgresearch.at/knowledge_base/kpmg_2003.pdf [2009, 10/02/2009].

Merono-Cerdan, A.L., Lopez-Nicolas, C. & Sabater-Sanchez, R. (2007) Knowledge management strategy diagnosis from KM instruments use, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 60-72.

Robson, W. (1996) Strategic Management and Information Systems, 2nd Edition, Pitman, London.

RSK - KM (2009). Knowledge Management…? [Blogger: http://rsk666.blogspot.com], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/02/week-2-what-is-knowledge-management_01.html [2009]

RSK - Strategy (2009). 23/01-last update What is Strategy? [Blogger: http://rsk666.blogspot.com], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/01/week-1-what-is-strategy.html%20%5b2009]

Snowden, D. (2009) London Knowledge Cafe with Dave Snowden, How can we best keep employees engaged in their work, in the current economic climate?, [17/02/2009] Knowledge Café - Gurteen Knowledge, London.

Week 3 - Knowledge Management...?

2009-02-02T09:21:00.002Z

1. INTRODUCTION

The rapid change in the business world led to many organisations underestimating the role knowledge had on their organisations and did not assess the impact of knowledge loss (Chaffey & Wood, 2005).

Karl Wiig (1997) a well known Knowledge Consultant noticed in the 1980s, “individuals and organisations began to appreciate the increasingly important role of knowledge in the emerging competitive environment”.

Today many organisations find knowledge a crucial source, as Ichijō & Nonaka (2007) state that knowledge provides a “competitive advantage and as a factor that some how could be managed”.

Knowledge Management (KM) has developed and expanded as a concept since it came to prominence in the 1990s when researchers / writers such as Nonaka, Ichijō, Wiig, Davenport and Prusak were the first to publish some of the articles on the topic.

2. “MY PASSING THOUGHTS”

Knowledge management is new concept to one and seems to be same for the scholars that read KM.

‘I think knowledge is what is inside the individual’s head’

‘Knowledge Management is the idea to manage the knowledge inside the individual head’

3. BACKGROUND READING

3.1. What is Knowledge Management?

I found many meanings of KM from journals, books, websites, word of mouth, etc. All defined in different ways. The reason could be that KM has no standardised meaning, so there is ‘no right’ or ‘wrong’. However, KM is nothing new, apart from the name, Hansen et al. (1999) state:

“For hundreds of years, owners of family businesses have passed their commercial wisdom on to their children, master craftsmen have painstakingly taught their trades to apprentices, and workers have exchanged ideas and know-how on the job”

To understand ‘What is KM?’ I have outlined some prominent scholars in KM and listed their definitions in Table 1:

This table is not exhaustive (just constraints)…

As shown in Table 1, definitions are not so one dimensional. In agreement to each scholar’s they define KM in accordance to their own research, which they all come to the same assumptions from different ways.

3.2. The value from KM

According to Hansen et al. (1999) KM started to take off in the 1990s when chief executives started to talk about knowledge sharing, which it was only a matter of time that we Humans “shifted from natural resources to intellectual assets”. As a result, organisations started to evaluate the knowledge within and how that knowledge is used.

One trend I have seen from experience is the expression on organisation literature is ‘our people are our most valuable asset’ through promotional leaflets or slogans, which emphasis the value of knowledge within their employees.

Therefore employees are sometimes considered along with other knowledge resources as Intellectual Capital (IC) (Nerdrum & Erikson, 2001, Skyrme, 2008, Wexler, 2002). In addition organisations realised that KM could offer benefits such as competitive advantage and increase productivity across the organisation (Coulson-Thomas, 1997).

3.3. KM is not all about IT

KM came a reality within organisations because the use of IT, which Hansen et al. (1999) states “the rise of networked computers has made it possible to codify, store, and share certain kinds of knowledge more easily and cheaply than ever before”. Therefore KM ideas became popular with many organisations, which they could measure the value of the IC. For example: system applications could provide stored codified knowledge to others that required it.

According to Nicholas Bahra (2001) many organisations misunderstand KM as a form of IT, which could eventually replace the “skills and judgment of experience human workers” and Davenport & Prusak (1998) mention that IT does assist in the exchange of information and knowledge within and outside the organisation. Therefore it is critically important that the organisation understand the relationship between knowledge and technology.

3.4. Communities of Practice

An example of KM with and without IT is Communities of Practice (CoP).

Etienne Wenger el al (2002) was one of the originators of the CoP, which he states “CoP are group of people who share a concern, a set of problems or a passion about a topic and how they deepen their knowledge and expertise in this area by interacting on ongoing basis”. The purpose of CoP is that the group will learn and share.

I knew the idea of CoP, however I never knew there was a name for it. This practice has been going on for centuries Hansen et al. (1999). CoP has always existed in organisations and when knowledge became progressively more important to competitive advantage, CoP became essential activity within the organisation. CoP differs from traditional organisation structures (Wenger el al, 2002); this is shown in Figure 1:

The organisation boundaries are all distinct to each department and structured around the organisation.

Whilst the CoP is blurred between boundaries within the organisation, it can be internally or externally (Wenger el al, 2002). For example: universities could have a helping practice between departments (internally) and with subsidiaries (externally).

An organisation must understand how CoP will be implemented, for example: using IT or conventional (face-to-face). This could be achieved by KM strategies that Hansen et al. (1999) outlines of codification and personalization, this is discussed in my work of KM Strategies (RSK – KMS, 2009).

3.5. Problems with KM

KM is the process of learning to share knowledge, skills and experience. The aim of the organisations is to capitalise on the shared ‘brainpower’ of its people. Cook (1999) states: “practical implementation of knowledge management is often problematic”. KM is suffering because most individuals believe KNOWLEDGE = POWER. Cook (1999) suggests another equation of “knowledge sharing and usage = much increased power, both formal and informal” and this is the way forward.

3.6 Controversy over KM

When something new appears, there will always be controversy for the good or for the bad, and KM is no exception. It has its critics for example: Professor Tom Wilson (2002) who wrote an article on ‘The nonsense of Knowledge Management’, who thinks it is just a passing fad. He goes on to say “it rests on two foundations: the management of information - where a large part of the fad exists and the effective management of work practices”. His opinion is that ‘knowledge can not be managed’, except by the individual that holds the knowledge and data and information are the only two that can be managed because they are tangible.

4. MY PERSONAL STAND POINT

I previously did not think about what KM meant to in terms of definitions. However I have come up with my own definition: ‘Knowledge Management is the process of identifying and then sharing the knowledge one creates; and then applying it with communities or within organisations to achieve goals’. This idea is shown symbolically in Figure 2:

I think definitions do matter, but to who uses them, for example: organisations must outline a KM definition to show its position and meaning of KM.

In response to Professor Tom Wilson (2002) article, I think KM, has been maturing, adding value and research improvement by many scholars. One issues Wilson say “management of work practices”, this is problem that needs addressed in many organisations, sharing of knowledge needs to happen for KM to really become effective.

5. THEORY IN PRACTICE

5.1. Develop a KM Definition for your Organisation

An organisation must develop a definition of KM in relation to their own business activities. This is evidently shown in Davenport & Prusak (1998) definition of the Procter & Gamble organisation (shown in Table 1). Procter & Gamble definition shows how they use KM processes to add value to there business activities, for example: Create à Share à Reapply the knowledge to the organisation on global scale. In addition, the knowledge gained by a manager in the USA could be shared with another manager in the UK, which means it could be reapplied to achieve business objectives within the UK.

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) have defined KM as:

“The re-use of experience for the benefit of the organisation”

(MPS, 2006)

MPS organisation knows that tacit is held in the knowledge of the employees which they want to get hold of to use again for the organisation, this will help to achieve and provide better services for the wider community.

5.2. KM and the MPS

The MPS have embraced KM and introduced many initiatives to achieve their organisation goals. The use of KM is to assist in identifying crime trends and the corresponding knowledge about the detection and prevention of crime. In addition the increasing use of e-services by the public that demand 24hour information and knowledge for problem solving (Home Office, 2005).

5.3. Identify, Creating & Sharing Knowledge

Knowledge can be indentified and captured within the MPS in various forms, for example: incident reports, crime scene investigator reports, witness statements, suspect statements, crime scene photographs and drawings, informants, etc (Fraser, 2004).

From my earlier work I discussed knowledge can be defined as explicit and tacit knowledge (RSK - Knowledge 2009). The MPS define explicit knowledge as information management, which is different to what I have discussed, however contains the same characteristics. For example: the MPS will hold explicit knowledge in the form of a documentation which is used as guidance for police actions and decision-making. These document(S) such as polices, general orders, standard operating procedures contains the identification and codification to allow being stored on database.

The MPS sees tacit in terms of what goes on inside the head (thinking) is how they perceive knowledge, for example: experience and skills gained at crime scene, which is dynamic and fast changing compared to explicit knowledge (Berg et al, 2008).

According to Berg et al (2008), in order to be successfully in creating and sharing the tacit knowledge within police officers, this involves motivation and capacity to create and share the knowledge.

The motivation requires the willingness for creation and sharing the knowledge with other police officers. This involves leadership from a senior officer who, encourage(s) sharing, for example: CoP in social way of meetings, workshops, seminars, etc.

The capacity can be dealt with through training to improve the skills and abilities of police officers to do their jobs more efficiently using overall quality and IT. For example: CoP in IT way of e-mails, intranets, forums, collaboration tools, etc.

The MPS want officers to create and share knowledge, which at most of the time is a difficult task. Many reasons for why the MPS might find knowledge sharing a difficult challenge, is because it could be the lack of responsibility, systems, routines and resources (Berg et al, 2008).

5.4. Example of Sharing Knowledge

In MPS knowledge is shared through out the organisation. A local police station would hold a CoP for fortnightly to share, develop, validate and disseminate best practices. An example would be techniques to gather intelligences from the public and sharing this with other police officers to offer better service as whole.

This knowledge would be useful to new recruit(s) or even to the most experienced officer’s, so they can improve their techniques. This knowledge may have come from a very experienced officer with up to 30 years of experience. Also roles could be reversed as new dynamic recruit might have knowledge of certain culture that could be useful to the most experience officer.

Another important CoP is the MPS intelligence sharing communities, which share knowledge of Greater London criminals. This consists all levels of the organisations, internal and external officers from different police constabulary. This knowledge would spread throughout the organisation as shown in Figure 3. Strategic level would use this knowledge to act on, for example: develop new policy to tackle the issue, like Knife Amnesty....

5.4. Short Example of Software Experts using CoP

IT professionals recognise the importance of knowledge and they perceive the idea, more than just managing knowledge. They have recognised that environments can help to exchange knowledge, for example: CoP using collaboration tools to share knowledge between experts.

Twentyman (2009) states “corporate knowledge management initiatives have seen a steady rise in the use of wikis, for example, with groups of experts working together, pooling ideas and solving problems”. This is also the same case for IT professionals, the group of experts, which are specialising on the same work. For example: object oriented programming, would have CoP of innovation to discuss ways to develop new ideas or themes, with the aid of using of Wikis or Blogs to share these ideas or theories with other experts.

Knowledge would be shared in the CoP and new knowledge would also be created. This value added by sharing knowledge. The sharing of knowledge here creates an added value.

5.5. Reasons for not Sharing

From my own experience and from others, people see knowledge as power or IC. Something they see as asset that has value. For example: in the construction industry; people feel threatened to share their trade secrets, because they feel their position might become weaker and devalued.

People hold back for various reasons as they may feel they have leverage with the knowledge they hold (power). I have personally held knowledge back to protect my IC (ownerships), some organisation(s) in the private sector are very competitive and individuals appear to hold onto knowledge for power. Cook (1999) idea is fair because if knowledge is shared then organisation(s), society and communities would all improve.

References:

Bahra, N. (2001) Competitive Knowledge Management, Palgrave, Basingstoke.

Berg, M.E., Dean, G., Gottschalk, P. & Karlsen, J.T. (2008) Police management roles as determinants of knowledge sharing attitude in criminal investigations, International Journal of Public Sector Management, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 271-284.

Chaffey, D. & Wood, S. (2005) Business Information Management : Improving Performance using Information Systems, Financial Times Prentice Hall, Harlow.

Cook, P. (1999) I heard it through the grapevine: making knowledge management work by learning to share knowledge, skills and experience, Industrial and Commercial Training, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 101-105.

Coulson-Thomas, C.J. (1997) The Future of the Organization: Selected Knowledge Management Issues, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 15-26.

Fraser, C. (2004) Strategic Information Systems for Policing, Police Executive Research Forum, Washington, DC.

Hansen, M.T., Nohria, N. & Tierney, T. (1999) What's Your Strategy for Managing Knowledge? [Vol. 77 No.2, pp.106-16, Harvard Business Review], [Online]. Available: http://www.itu.dk/~kristianskriver/b9/Whats%20your%20strategy%20for%20managing%20knowledge.pdf [2009]

Hicks, R.C., Dattero, R. & Galup, S.D. (2006) The five-tier knowledge management hierarchy, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 19-31.

Home Office (2005) Guidance on Statutory Performance Indicators for Policing 2005/2006 [Standards Unit, Home Office of the UK Government, London], [Online]. Available: http://www.policereform.gov.uk/ [2009]

Ichijō, K. & Nonaka, I. (2007) Knowledge Creation and Management : New Challenges for Managers, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Lin, C. (2007) To share or not to share: modeling knowledge sharing using exchange ideology as a moderator, Personnel Review, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 457-475.

MSP (Metropolitan Police Service) (2006) Information Management Strategy 2006 -2011 [Information Management Steering Group], [Online]. Available: http://www.met.police.uk/foi/pdfs/aims_objectives_plans/corporate/mps_information_management_strategy_2006-11_analysis_and_supporting_material.pdf [2009]

Nerdrum, L. & Erikson, T. (2001) Intellectual capital: a human capital perspective, Journal of Intellectual Capital, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 127-135.

Skyrme, D. (2008) 22/01-last update Measuring Knowledge: A Plethora of Methods (no. 24) [Knowledge Connections], [Online]. Available: http://www.skyrme.com/insights/24kmeas.htm [2009, 08/02/2009].

Tomlinson, H. & Evans, R. (2005) 20/09-last update Tesco Stocks Up on Inside Knowledge of Shoppers' Lives [Guardian News and Media], [Online]. Available: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2005/sep/20/freedomofinformation.supermarkets [2009, 08/02/2009]

Twentyman, J. (2009) 27/01-last update Business Starts to Take Web 2.0 Tools Seriously [FT.com], [Online]. Available: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d28887ea-eb49-11dd-bb6e-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1 [2009, 08/02/2009]

Wenger, E., McDermott, R.A. & Snyder, W. (2002) Cultivating Communities of Practice : A Guide to Managing Knowledge, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Mass.

Wexler, M.N. (2002) Organizational memory and intellectual capital, Journal of Intellectual Capital, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 393-414.

Wiig, K.M. (1997) Knowledge Management: An Introduction and Perspective, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 6-14.

Wilson, T.D. (2002) The Nonsense of 'Knowledge Management' [Information Research, 8(1), paper no. 144], [Online]. Available: http://informationr.net/ir/8-1/paper144.html [2009, 04/02/2009]

Week 2 - How to define Knowledge…?

2009-01-30T18:34:00.001Z

1. INTRODUCTION

This is a short article on knowledge, which looks at how knowledge is considered.

2. “MY PASSING THOUGHTS”

Some years back, when I was learning to cook chilli chicken, I observed that the second effort took considerably less time than that of the first one and the second had fewer defects and was more delicious than the first one. This was the start of the process of learning by doing and learning from experience (Prusak, 2001).

In addition, if organisations can manage the learning process better, then they can become more efficient. For example: from my working experience in the retail industry; learning / training that was provided, gave information how to carry out the responsibilities. However the only way I could actually gain the knowledge was by doing and experiencing the work.

3. BACKGROUND READING

3.1. Knowledge Approach of Tacit & Explicit

Nonaka & Takeuchi (1995) introduce two definitions of knowledge, shown in Figure 1:

In order to understand the value that knowledge can bring to specific business processes and objectives it is vital to understand the nature of organisational knowledge and the transfer and conversion process that take place.

3.2. SECI Model

Nonaka & Takeuchi (1995) identifies four different processes in which knowledge is created and transferred. These processes are:

Tacit to Tacit through a process of socialization;
Tacit to Explicit through a process of externalization ;
Explicit to Tacit through a process of internalization;
Explicit to Explicit through a process of combination;

Knowledge management practitioners regard the Nonaka SECI model has limitations as it has been developed in Japanese cultural context and is based on manufacturing industry experience (Snowden, 2003) many knowledge initiatives often fail as they focus too closely on the tacit to explicit section of the SECI model.

THIS ARTICLE IS STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION

Week 2 – Data <—> Information <—> Knowledge

2009-01-27T17:02:00.001Z

1. INTRODUCTION

A practical way of arriving at a definition of knowledge … is to differentiate it from what it is not. One of the most common distinctions in the current knowledge literature is between knowledge, information and data.

2. “MY PASSING THOUGHTS”

I have read numerous books on Information Technology (IT) and followed the discipline of information management on managing information as a resource; for that reason data and Information is something I understand well.

Knowledge is something I have not really thought about defining. To one it means analysing and understanding the information or data and acting upon it. Figure 1 shows what I think of the three terms:

3. BACKGROUND READING

3.1. Understanding the Terms

From previous reading of these three terms, it is not straightforward to find one concise definition. Moteleb & Bakry (2004) find the “lack of a definition that clearly distinguishes between the terms” and “the terms are usually used interchangeably in literature”. Consequently confusion occurs.

To understand these three terms, I have found some prominent scholars in Knowledge Management (KM) and also the everyday Cambridge dictionary; and listed their definitions in Table 1 to see the difference:

This table is not exhaustive (just limitations of constraints)…

As you can see from the above table, that there is no clear definition for each term, each scholar takes a different view from each other. This is supported by the work of Dick Stenmark (2002) who finds “many researchers use the terms very casually”. For example: information and knowledge, is sometimes used interchangeable in the earlier work of some scholars like Kogut and Zander (1992) who state that “knowledge as information” which they “mean knowledge which can be transmitted without loss of integrity”. Thus leading to confusion by indicating that information is a type of knowledge.

The earlier work on KM did not specify the clarity of knowledge and information, therefore the reason of perplexity about these terms (Stenmark, 2002, Lang, 2001, Hislop, 2004).

3.2. Understanding Knowledge

The meaning of data and information and the relationship between them is fairly straightforward, however defining knowledge is not that clear cut. Knowledge can be regarded as the next level of business value after the transformation from data to information (Chaffey & Wood, 2005; Lang, 2001).

Knowledge can be interchangeable to information and then data, it is not linear as thought out, Orna (1999) states “knowledge and information are separate but interacting entities, that transform one to another constantly” and agreed by scholars such as Moteleb & Bakry (2004) say “knowledge could be used to derive information, as well as to create data from information”, this is shown evidently in Figure 2:

For example: knowledge that is held inside an individual must be converted and communicated to others, either via verbal, written or visual information (Gurteen, 1998). Knowledge has a propensity to be less structured and is often transmitted informally, which it is less tangible than structured and formal information (Bellinger, 2004).

If you wish to read further on knowledge, view my other article ‘How to define Knowledge…?’

4. MY PERSONAL STAND POINT

Table 2 shows what I think of terms.

From experience I have seen data, information and knowledge valued in accordance to what the other side sees it as. For example: when I was working for certain company (won’t mention names, don’t want to be sued), when they wanted to leak some facts at price, they would explicitly say information and not data, because data is perceived as useless and information as quality.

Knowledge and information would some time be mixed up together to generate more value, because by saying knowledge it seems superior the information.

I do think it is important to distinguish between information and knowledge, as I originally thought it was not. This is because information is just processed data that can be reproduced quickly and cheaply, whilst knowledge is expensive but also something far harder to gain. Therefore understanding the difference helps the individual or organisation to achieve better efficiency

5. IN PERSONAL CONTEXT

This example is not exhaustive, it just shows the process data, information and knowledge goes through the time in reading for a master degree.

6. THEORY IN PRACTICE

6.1. Tesco ClubCard

Tesco have been collecting data and information from customers for some time with there ClubCard. This is very popular with customers because of the incentive in reward points and discounts vouchers because of the loyalty the customer shows.

To have ClubCard; Tesco must first obtain personal information about you, so they can send your vouchers to you, for example: name, address, etc.

Tesco Clubcard is highly beneficial to the organisation. Data is captured at the point when a customer makes a purchase at the checkout. This is then sent and stored to a large database which allows them to forecast/manipulate and see what other products or services offered or suited to different types of customers.

This data becomes information when required, for example: Tomlinson & Evans (2005) state they are “mapping out their personality, travel habits, shopping preferences and even how charitable and eco-friendly you are”. This information is used by senior management to analysis and makes decisions to drive up sales by marketing products that suit the customer. In addition this is the knowledge gained by the senior management because they understand the retail market and intend to use this knowledge to make decisions that will add value to the organisation, for example: through sales, customer service, etc.

This knowledge does not stop here; it could be sold to different marketing firms that want to find out information about certain individuals

This is not all negative to the customer; it helps Tesco to stay competitive by offering better services to its customers.

6.2. Tesco Strategic Management Example

Figure 4 shows an example of strategic management using data, information and knowledge to make decision that will impact the organisation.

This example is not exhaustive, it just shows the process data, information and knowledge goes through making a decision at strategic level. There are many possibilities.

6.3. Metropolitan Police Service Definitions

The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) is organisation with vast amounts of data, information and knowledge. Figure 5 shows the position of MPS with these terms.

I have some pervious experience working within the MPS organisation. In addition I thought this example is interesting:

Data would arrive in boxes containing police officers completed ‘stop and search’ slips. The slips would contain information about the subject that was stopped and searched. Processing of this data would happen manually if it was unreadable for the automotive optical character recognition (OCR) reader. OCR reader would capture the data and store it in a database. The data would become information when the annual statistic reports are published. This annual statistic report would be analysed by officials with experience of interpreting the information into knowledge to make an expert opinion of what actions can be taken. Thus information can be interpreted in anyway by anyone; however knowledge is far more valuable because it has expert opinion on what appropriate action to take.

References:

Bellinger, G. (2004) Knowledge Management—Emerging Perspectives [theWay of Systems], [Online]. Available: http://www.systems-thinking.org/kmgmt/kmgmt.htm [2009, 03/02/2009].

Chaffey, D. & Wood, S. (2005) Business Information Management : Improving Performance using Information Systems, Financial Times Prentice Hall, Harlow.

Coulson-Thomas, C.J. (1997) The Future of the Organization: Selected Knowledge Management Issues, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 15-26.

Davenport, T.H. & Prusak, L. (2000) Working Knowledge : How Organizations Manage what they Know, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Mass.

Gurteen, D. (1998) Knowledge, Creativity and Innovation, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 5-13.

Hislop, D. (2004) Knowledge Management in Organizations : A Critical Introduction, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Ichijō, K. & Nonaka, I. (2007) Knowledge Creation and Management : New Challenges for Managers, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Kogut, B. & Zander, U. (1992) Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology [Organization Science, Vol. 3, No. 3], [Online]. Available: http://zonecours.hec.ca/documents/H2008-1-1548530.seance10knowledgeofthefirm.pdf [2009]

Lang, J.C. (2001) Managerial concerns in knowledge management, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 43-59.

Moteleb, A.A. & Bakry, W.M. (2004) Polymorphic Nature of Knowledge: Towards a Knowledge Creation Model [Proceedings of the conference of Information Science, Technology and Management (CISTM2004)], [Online]. Available: http://www.information-quarterly.org/CISTMProc/CISTM-04-CD/Hm_Main.swf [2009]

MSP (Metropolitan Police Service) (2006) Information Management Strategy 2006 -2011 [Information Management Steering Group], [Online]. Available: http://www.met.police.uk/foi/pdfs/aims_objectives_plans/corporate/mps_information_management_strategy_2006-11_analysis_and_supporting_material.pdf [2009]

Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. (1995) The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation, Oxford University Press, New York ; Oxford.

Orna, E. (1999) Practical Information Policies: How to Manage Information Flow in Organizations, 2nd Edition, Gower, Aldershot.

Stenmark, D. (2002) Information Vs. Knowledge: The Role of Intranets in Knowledge Management [Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences], [Online]. Available: http://www.viktoria.se/~dixi/km/chap3.htm [2009, 06/02/2009]

Walter, E. & Hewings, M. (2005) Cambridge Dictionary - Advanced Grammar in use, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Week 1 - What is Strategy?

2009-01-25T11:36:00.001Z

Cambridge Dictionary definition: “a detailed plan for achieving success in situations such as war, politics, business, industry or sport, or the skill of planning for such situations”

Wendy Robson (1996) gives the definition: “Strategy is the pattern of resource allocation decisions made throughout an organisation. These encapsulate both desired goals and beliefs about what are acceptable and, most critically, unacceptable means for achieving them”

Chaffey & Woods (2005) gives a good definition: “the direction and scope of an organisation over the long-term: which achieves advantage for the organisation through its configuration of resources within a changing environment to meet the needs of markets and fulfil stakeholder expectations”

From the definitions, the following elements can be highlighted:

Strategies defines the future direction of the organisation;
To achieve competitive advantage for the organisation;
The allocation of resources to achieve advantage;
Strategies are primarily driven by the needs of the organisation;
Strategies should be responsive to the dynamic environment in which an organisation operates.
(Greasley, 2006)

Strategy within Organisations

Strategic Management is concerned with deciding on strategy and planning how that strategy is to put into effect via:

Strategic Analysis
Strategic Choice
Strategic Implementation
(Campbell & Craig, 2005)

Strategic Managements are situated on the top of the organisation hierarchy, which is shown below:

(Laudon & Laudon, 2007)

Senior Management = Strategic Level (long-term decisions)
Middle Management = Tactical Level (medium-term decisions)
Operational Management = Operational Level (short-term decisions)

(for further reading please visit: Wikipedia Strategic Management)

Example of a Strategy: ‘Business Strategy’

(Geetha Abeysinghe Seminar, 2008)

‘The A-Team’ Strategy…

‘The A-Team’ strategy is outlined in the Team Charter…

One example of strategy is: To become successful knowledgeable organisation

My Strategic Plan…?

I personally have a long-term strategic plan for the MSc…

For this semester i have planned in advance the key strategies to achieve the successfully completion of this module (arguable if its strategic or tactical planning)…

I have devised a large calendar to remind myself of key dates and what objectives must be achieved…!

Currently, it is still ‘work in progress’…

My Strategies

attend all classes...
do the assignments…
do the readings…
contribute to the organisation…

References:

Campbell, D.J. & Craig, T. (2005) Organisations and the Business Environment, 2nd Edition, Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Amsterdam ; London.

Chaffey, D. & Wood, S. (2005) Business Information Management : Improving Performance using Information Systems, Financial Times Prentice Hall, Harlow.

Greasley, A. (2006) Business Information Systems : Technology, Development and Management for the e-Business, 3rd Edition, Financial Times Prentice Hall, Harlow.

Laudon, K.C. & Laudon, J.P. (2007) Management Information Systems : Managing the Digital Firm, 10th Edition, Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J.

Robson, W. (1996) Strategic Management and Information Systems, 2nd Edition, Pitman, London.

Week 1 - What is an Organisation?

2009-01-23T14:30:00.001Z

Cambridge Dictionary definition: “a group of people who work together in a structured way for a shared purpose”

According to Huczynski & Buchanan (2001) an organisation are social arrangement for the controlled performance in of collective goals.

The two most important features of organisations: they are social arrangements and they exist to perform.

The following are typical organisation characteristics:

They all contain people;
The people in the organisation perform a role and their continued membership of the organisation is dependant upon such performance;
The organisation has a collective goal to which all members subscribe;
All of the roles taken together, help the organisation achieve its collective goal;
The roles are divided so that members of the organisation perform different tasks according to their expertise, interest or specialism;
there is a clearly defined hierarchy of authority so that each member of the organisation is aware of where the individual ‘fits-in’;
The limits or borders of an organisation are usually clearly defined, and thus there is usually no doubt weather a particular person is ‘inside’ or ‘outside’ of the organisation.
(Campbell & Craig, 2005)

‘The A-Team’ Organisation

An example of the above characteristics can be applied to the newly formed organisation ‘The A-Team’

Representation of ‘The A-Team’

Hierarchy Diagram of ‘The A-Team’

Purpose of ‘The A-Team’

I think most people would be thinking why not simply act alone to fulfil my own individual objectives?

The only answer i have is that the format of an organisation offers many advantages over the other option which is many people acting alone.

The Reasons of an Organisation Existences:

Organisations facilitate synergy. Robson (1996) states synergy as “the benefits that can be gained when people work together rather than apart”. People working together can achieve far more work than people working separately. For example: Tesco supermarket has many staff workers on the operational level working on replenishing stock at mass level, compare to an individual in a small convenient store. This can also apply to ‘The A-Team’ organisation when all members can work together to present there findings on given topics in the weekly presentation.

Organisations facilitate the division of labour. This is when tasks are divided into two separate but complementary jobs (Campbell & Craig, 2005). The specialists working together do not not only produce synergy, they also enable a task to be accomplished that neither member could accomplish alone. For example: software development projects involve technical and creative people, who both have skills in different areas, but still accomplish there tasks by working on there area of expertise. This can also apply to ‘The A-Team’ organisation where all members bring different skills and expertise, like research, presentation, reading, language, etc skills to accomplish the organisation goals.

Adopting the format of organisation enables increased performance owing to the establishment of formal systems of responsibility and authority. Campbell & Craig (2005) state that “this allows all members to fully understand how roles are divided and to accept and respect both responsibility and authority”. They facilitate synergy and an effective division of labour by coordinating activities so that individuals act in concert to the overall benefits of the organisation. This can also apply to ‘The A-Team’ organisation where we have devised ‘The A-Team Charter’, which each individual will accept, respect and fulfil there duties.

How ‘The A-Team’ Organisation Works:

I belong to the ‘The A-Team’ organisation… and also 5 others:

Man-Chie Abh Parsad Deepak Hamza

‘The A-Team’ organisation has a blog that contains: agenda, discussions, presentations, notes, etc… of all the work that is done together…

This blog is my individual posts on my own personal positions…

I will try not to post repeats or duplication information on this blog that are already posted on the organisation blog or are organisation blog contents…

‘The A-Team’ organisation is currently working on innovate ideas to make the organisation prosper… so please visit next week…

References:

Campbell, D.J. & Craig, T. (2005) Organisations and the Business Environment, 2nd Edition, Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Amsterdam ; London.

Huczynski, A. & Buchanan, D.A. (2001) Organizational Behaviour: An Introductory Text. 4^th Edition, Financial Times / Prentice Hall, London.

Robson, W. (1996) Strategic Management and Information Systems, 2nd Edition, Pitman, London.

Week 0 - Ice Breaking Session

2009-01-16T16:30:00.010Z

The purpose of this blog stop is to share knowledge with anybody who wants it…!

I will write regular blogs for the requirements of the postgraduate course that I am currently studying…
That is MSc Business Information System Management and part of the module BIS4410 – Knowledge Management Strategies….

As far as I know… this module has no “Right or Wrong”…. Perhaps that gives one the license to pursue some far-reaching ideas….?

The 1st Lecture (15th January 2009) we were introduce to the module leader Aboubakr Moteleb and in partnership with Professor Mark Woodman, both appear knowledgeable and pleasant.

Then we were given the opportunity to form a group of 6 that will work together for the next 3 months. At this point we had an ice breaking session within the group and brief introductions were made front of the whole class…

The group is a representation of an organisation….

The name of our organisation is “The A-Team”…

And labelled with “EGOISTS” …

[Cambridge Dictionary definition of an Egoist:
“a person who considers themselves to be better or more important than other people”]

Only time will tell if this is true…?

Week 0 - Personal Profile

2009-01-16T10:38:00.011Z

This is first personal profile I have ever written online… IF I make a mess out of it please comment… ELSE............... STOP…!

First of all I need to stop writing in code IF... ELSE… this is a personal profile…. ¿

As usual I do over complicate things…

I think I should tell you about my brilliant achievements, success, skills, experiences, hobbies, blah, blah, blah….

Sounds bit like my CV…. So when I get around to it… I will upload my CV and you can read that…

What I could do here is say something different, what life has taught one so far:

“honestly is the best policy”

“you only live once. If you don't enjoy it, it's your own fault, nobody else's”

“the only way to get the best out of you is to compete against the best….”

“don't procrastinate - make the commitment to yourself today”

“work smarter, not harder”

“i don’t regret anything... everything is for a reason.......”

“fun the first time, not so much the second time”

“perseverance commands success”

Ravi Research

What is Health Knowledge Management?

rsk

CFD Exhibitions held at Middlesex University

rsk

Our ECKM 2011 Presentation & Poster

rsk

What happened at ECKM…?

rsk

Our ECKM 2011 Adventure…

What’s your Strategy for Measuring IT & Non-IT for Knowledge Management in an Organisation?

Ravinder Singh Kahlon & Man-Chie Tse {RK350, MT631}@live.mdx.ac.uk

Middlesex University, School of Engineering and Information Sciences The Burroughs, London, NW4 4BT, United Kingdom

Keywords:

Full Paper & Poster Available on: Academic Bookshop Website

Reference (or cite) Paper & Poster

Kahlon, R. S. & Tse, MC. (2011). What’s Your Strategy for Measuring IT and Non-IT for Knowledge Management in an Organisation?, In: Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Knowledge Management 1-2 September 2011, Passau University, Germany, Volume 2, Pp.1141 - 1146.

rsk

Tom Gilb & Kai Gilb Course 2: Real REQUIREMENTS

Course Contents:

rsk

Tom Gilb & Kai Gilb Course 1: LeanQA

rsk

Tom Gilb & Kai Gilb Guest Lecture at MDX 2009

rsk

How to Reference (or cite) this Blog!

Dubai CTIT 2009 Conference

Ravinder Singh Kahlon & Man-Chie Tse {RK350, MT631}@live.mdx.ac.uk

Middlesex University, School of Engineering and Information Sciences The Burroughs, London, NW4 4BT, United Kingdom

Reference (or cite) Paper

Kahlon, R. S. & Tse, MC. (2009). The Impact of Digitalisation in Higher Education Libaries, In: Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on the Current Trends in Information Technology 15-16 December 2009, Dubai Womans College, Dubai, U.A.E., Pp.184-189.

rsk

Journal of Knowledge Management (JKM)

Been Away…

Find Me On...

Week 11 – End of the KMS Module..?

Week 10 - Second Life & Knowledge Management…!

1. INTRODUCTION

2. BACKGROUND READING

2.1. Collaborative Virtual Environments

2.2. 3D CVE

2.3. Using 3D CVE for KM

2.4. What is Second Life?

2.5. Impact of Second Life to an Organisation

2.6. Second Life & Organisation Knowledge

2.7. Social & Business Networks & CoP

3. MY PERSONAL STAND POINT

4. THEORY IN PRACTICE

4.1. Universities in Second Life

4.2. IBM in Second Life

4.3. NASA in Second Life

References

Chen, Y.C., Chen, P., Hwang, J.J., Korba, L., Song, R. & Yee, G. (2005). An analysis of online gaming crime characteristics, Internet Research, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 246-261.

RSK (2009a). 31/03/2009-last update Week 10 - Second Life & Knowledge Management…! [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/03/week-11-second-life-knowledge.html [2009, 03/31].

RSK (2009b). 26/01/2009-last update Week 2 – Data <—> Information <—> Knowledge [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/01/week-1-orgnetcop.html [2009, 03/09].

RSK (2009c). 01/02/2009-last update Week 3 - Knowledge Management...? [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/02/week-2-what-is-knowledge-management_01.html [2009, 03/09].

RSK (2009d). 12/03/2009-last update Week 8 - Knowledge Management Systems… [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/03/week-11-second-life-knowledge.html [2009, 03/20].

RSK (2009e). 14/03/2009-last update Week 9 – Web 2.0 [Ravi KM - Blogger Google Inc], [Online]. Available: http://rsk666.blogspot.com/2009/03/week-9-web-20.html [2009, 03/21].

Krange, I., Larsen, A., Fjuk, A. & Ludvigsen, S. (2002). 01/07/2002-last update Describing Construction of Knowledge through Identification of Collaboration Patterns in 3D Learning Environments [InterMedia, University of Oslo], [Online]. Available: http://www.citeseerx.ist.psu.edu [2009, 03/04].

O'Driscoll, T. (2008). 04/04/2008-last update Learning Matters! [Blog at WordPress.com], [Online]. Available: http://wadatripp.wordpress.com/2008/04/04/the-i-web-singularity-redux/ [2009, 03/17].

Pasteur, E. (2007). 24/11/2007-last update NHS Plans Future in Second Life [Massively Weblogs, Inc. Network], [Online]. Available: http://www.massively.com/2007/11/24/nhs-plans-future-in-second-life/ [2009, 03/10].

Saleeb , N. (2009). 02/01/2009-last update Second Life Researchers Forum [Nabble], [Online]. Available: http://n2.nabble.com/(no-subject)-td2101031.html [2009, 03/30].

Second Life (2009). What is Second Life? [Linden Research, Inc], [Online]. Available: http://www.secondlife.com/ [2009, 03/19].

Stanney, K.M. (2002) Handbook of Virtual Environments : Design, Implementation, and Applications, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, N.J. ; London.

Tomek, I. (2001). Knowledge Management and Collaborative Virtual Environments, j-jucs, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 458-471.

Week 9 – Web 2.0

THIS ARTICLE IS STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION

Week 8 - Knowledge Management Systems…

1. INTRODUCTION

2. “MY PASSING THOUGHTS”

3. BACKGROUND READING

3.1. Knowledge Management System

3.2. KMS in Organisation Context

3.3. Organisation KM Strategy & KMS

3.4. The Role of IT to support KMS

3.5. Closed vs. Open KMS

4. MY PERSONAL STAND POINT

5. THEORY IN PRACTICE

5.1. European Commission

5.2. European Rail Network

Ravinder Singh Kahlon & Man-Chie Tse
{RK350, MT631}@live.mdx.ac.uk

Middlesex University, School of Engineering and Information Sciences
The Burroughs, London, NW4 4BT, United Kingdom

Ravinder Singh Kahlon & Man-Chie Tse
{RK350, MT631}@live.mdx.ac.uk

Middlesex University, School of Engineering and Information Sciences
The Burroughs, London, NW4 4BT, United Kingdom

Aso, T. (2009) Aso Lays Bare G20 Split, Financial Times, Wednesday 1^st April 2009, p.1