Knowledge, Action, and Context: Impact on Knowledge Management

This paper reports progress in research into the applicability of the knowledge management ( KM) paradigm to third sector organizations. Case studies and an action research project are described. Although KM techniques are in use, resource priorities, program funding, and dispersed authority inhibit KM in these organizations. There is little intentional consideration of the relationships between the values held by these organizations and the data gathered from experience. A relational knowledge domain model is proposed that shows how knowledge is derived from observing real or imagined universes, is stored in knowledge artifacts, and is operated on by natural and designed processes to realise future states of the universe being observed. This model is intended to promote a more holistic approach to knowledge and its management in values driven organizations but can be applied in any organization or community of practice.

Episteme, 2015

Pragmatic encroachment offers a picture of knowledge whereby knowledge is unstable. This paper argues that pragmatic encroachment is committed to more instability than has been hitherto noted. One surprising result of the arguments in this paper is that pragmatic encroachment is not merely about changes in stakes. All sorts of practical factors can make for the presence or absence of knowledge on this picture – stakes are just one factor among many that are knowledge-depriving. In this way, the focus in the literature on ‘stakes-sensitivity’ is misleading. Furthermore, insufficient attention has been paid to the variety of ways in which on this view pragmatic factors affect knowledge: pragmatic factors are not merely knowledge-depriving but are also knowledge-inducing.

2007

Abstract The study starts form the insight that knowledge is essentially related to action. This implies specific requirement concerning the dynamics knowledge which dissents from the widespread view of a static nature of knowledge reflected in the image of explicit knowledge. The gap between universal explications and particular action contexts is bridged by the implicit knowledge of the respective agent. It is argued that explications are described in terms of relational patterns that possess a specific ambit of validity.

This conceptual paper argues that knowledge involves individual and social construction. As such, knowledge is more often than not subjective and inter-subjective. Furthermore, a specific form of constructed knowledge (known as collective tacit knowledge) can only be attained across social immersion and engagement. Paradoxically, it is through this subjective contextualisation of knowledge that we can attain more pertinent knowledge in dealing with a situation at hand. The implications for management in regards to routines, procedures and expert systems, as well as on the need for hands-on mediation are discussed.

The use of computers has over the last two decades led to the dominance of a database-centred view of organisational information resources. It is this school of thought that has become the focal point of many conceptualisations of knowledge management (KM). Many proponents of this school of thought propagate the development and implementation of KM databases. But knowledge is more organic than mechanical. Therefore, substituting database structures for the people who actually creates organisational knowledge will ultimately remove the intrinsic meaning of knowledge. This paper, based on an ongoing doctoral work, takes a dichotomous view of knowledge as either explicit or tacit and argues that the management of tacit knowledge, so far neglected in the literature on KM, is very important in conferring competitive advantages on organisations. Using empirical results from the research, it reveals the advantages of managing tacit knowledge. These benefits range from better customer service to prevention of project period escalation and improved workmanship. This paper concludes that behavioural approach to KM ensures that employees, who are the source of organisational knowledge, are well motivated to 'go the extra mile' in pursuit of organisational goals.

The paper considers the proposition that recognising the mental model that is held of knowledge by the individuals of an organisation may help us to understand whether or not knowledge building potential can be effectively developed. It is argued that the potential for effective knowledge utilisation will be dependent upon the epistemological perspective held by organisational members. Processual and structural perspectives of knowledge are described and utilised here to discuss two identifiable mental models that exist in organisations. The notion that a perspective of knowledge will affect its management is not new, but the idea that organisations need to actively identify the epistemological foundations they are working with and may need to change them, is.

2002

The paper is based on an activity based and relational conception of knowledge. We expose Activity Based Knowledge Management through two empirical cases from Norwegian Professional Service Firms. The cases illustrate two Knowledge Management initiatives aiming at enabling prioritised and ongoing activities within the organisations: The development and use of two ICT support systems. The design and content of the systems are based in the activities they are intended to enable. We define Knowing actions as the as a skilful joint venture of acting agents, and expose how these actions can be enabled. Actions and activities are always performed within a context and in given circumstances, and we expose how the need of enabling the collective working patterns can be evaluated by these concepts. By the empirical exploration we show that Activity Based Knowledge Management enables Knowing Action and Knowing Activities through intrinsic motivation, mutual enabling, and distributed responsib...

International journal of scientific and technology research, 2016

The study of knowledge is one of the most fundamental and necessary components in today's world. A claim to knowledge should be evaluated to determine whether or not it is knowledge in its real sense. To conduct this sort of evaluation, understanding of what knowledge is and how much knowledge is possible is required. This paper provides an overview of the important aspects of knowledge, and with the help of epistemology tries to answer the most fundamental questions of what is knowledge? Moreover, how do we know what we know? The paper attempts to show the effect of culture on organizations and how foundational knowledge can help us develop logical decisions in a fluctuating environment. To manage an organization within evolving paradigm, knowledge of variation acts as a necessary requirement. As Deming defined management as a prediction, a leader must have skills to predict and adapt to its external environment. Most of the time organizations fail to observe the paradigm shift and couldn't adjust to the changing environment. The paper also discusses the effect of diverse culture and their respective interpretation of language. Thus, the paper highlights the necessity of understanding human psychology, attaining foundational knowledge and ability to validate the knowledge to establish a successful organization.

Handbook on the knowledge economy, 2005

Much of the literature on knowledge-based performance develops the theory of knowledge performance rather than that of the nature and behaviour of knowledge upon which the performance is based. Indeed, several HRM-knowledge-performance studies use organisational outcomes in knowledge-intensive environments as a proxy for knowledge-based performance. Although useful in developing our understanding of the links between HRM and performance the former approach does not advance our understanding of knowledge. Put differently, until we understand the nature of knowledge and develop a scale of knowledge in and of itself, we cannot advance our understanding of the HRM-knowledge-based performance linkages. A convincing understanding of knowledge is therefore a prerequisite of any attempt to examine knowledge-based performance in organisations. One such dimension would be to answer the question of 'how much is known?'