Knowledge Management

Although much has been written on knowledge management (KM), the learning organisation and intellectual capital (IC), little, if any has been written about the relationship and correlation between KM and intellectual capital management. The challenge seems to be to provide integrated guidelines on how organisations can use both KM and IC for the formulating of a comprehensive intellectual capital management approach (CICM). The exceptional growth of information in the knowledge economy focuses attention on the importance of managing knowledge in organisations. These organisations are referred to as the so-called learning organisations. These are organisations that recognise the value of knowledge within the organisations Although there is a general consensus that the knowledge society and the knowledge economy has arrived, and that knowledge is a key business asset, organisations are still in the early stages of understanding the implications of knowledge management and intellectual capital. The rise of the “new economy” that is principally driven by information and knowledge, can be attributed to the increased prominence of intellectual capital (IC) in organisations. Intellectual capital features prominently in recent economic, managerial, technological and sociological developments in a manner previously unknown and largely unforseen. Although there are many similarities between KM and intellectual capital (IC), these concepts are not the same. KM relates to the creation of value, the gathering of ideas, the measuring of employee brainpower, and the conversion of taught knowledge into explicit knowledge that the organisation can codify and transfer. IC relates to the maximization of value. This achieved through the licensing of knowhow, patents, trademarks, and the use of intellectual capital to gain a competitive advantage. Further uses are to enter new markets, establish strategic alliances, and generate revenue. The proponents of the KM and IC approaches identify the benefits of each of these management approaches, but fail to see the connection or the interaction between KM and IC. It is possible in some industries that one approach may seem more important than the other. Nonetheless, for any organisation to succeed in the knowledge economy, it is essential to adopt both KM and IC approaches to some extent, as each deals with complementary strategic needs. What some organisations fail to see is that KM and IC are essential components for the total management of an organisation’s intellectual asset management. The question can now be asked: What can be done to ensure a successful relationship and effective correlation between knowledge management and intellectual capital in the organisation? This question will be answered with this paper.

The physical toil of manufacturing is being replaced by the world where we can work more with our head than hands (Sewell 2005: 685-6) (Hilshop, 2013), the statement clearly shows how important it is to control and manage our knowledge in this new era of knowledge economy. There are numerous ways that knowledge can be managed and there are no simple solutions to this challenge. This article starts by defining the term “knowledge” and explaining the fact how it can be managed using some key frameworks that are widely accepted by many firms, so that knowledge based resources can be managed effectively. It then identifies the barriers and suggests some steps to overcome those barriers. The article is based on published exploratory and primary research regarding knowledge management(KM) and results of applied KM application drawn from corporate sectors.

Global Journal of Enterprise Information System, 2013

Knowledge today is more comprehensive and complex than before. In the era of globalization changing technology requires adaptation at a breathtaking rate. Knowledge is ability of adaptation to changing condition and is now regarded as a most valuable and critical resource for creating sustainable competitive advantage. Thus paper states and explains the concept, background origin of knowledge as a driving force for today’s organisation.Knowledge management is a new branch of management for achieving breakthrough in business performance through the synergy of people, process and technology. Its focus is on the management of change, uncertainty and complexity.The paper highlights the issues about knowledge management which acts like a key force in a business organisation. If a knowledge management is properly maintained and integrated, it can act as a source of power for the business organisation because of its dynamic nature. With this tool, organisation can achieve developmental res...

Taking steps towards the knowledge society. …, 2002

Journal of Knowledge Management, 1997

This paper traces various strategic ideas for creation of knowledge to attain competitive advantage by organization. Knowledge (both implicit and explicit) is created through dynamic interactions among individuals, the organization, and the environment. The key factors create tacit or implicit knowledge and are practical experience through application of talents, transformation through conversation, escapes observation and evaluation of various actors and forces in a particular situation, embedded in stories and narratives, held within self through understanding and judgments, through experiment, using insights and under-standings of individuals and their judgments and so on. Extracting knowledge from within the employees, creation of knowledge culture, interaction among virtual teams, connection between knowledge and organizational learning, encouraging communication, face-to-face and synchronous conversation, apprenticeship and training, contacting expert, sending e-mail, transcribing talks, team intersection are the major options for the creation of explicit knowledge. However, in utilizing these strategic options, manager should maintain cohesion among all the variables and a consideration of contingency to make the knowledge creation process a fruitful one. Kawsar Ahmmed and Md. Aftab Anwar

British Journal of Management, 2004

While adopting a knowledge-based perspective on organizations has been valuable, since, among other things, it enables us to see links between organizational learning and a firm's competitive advantage through the development of idiosyncratic capabilities, it has nonetheless tended to treat organizational knowledge as 'given', exploring how it is related to other 'given' variables. The focus of this special issue is to unpack the notion of organizational knowledge by exploring the processes and practices through which knowledge is constructed and created in organizations. A constructivist perspective assumes that 'knowledge' presupposes work and seeks to explore how what comes to be considered as organizational knowledge is established and validated (or fails to do so). By seeing organizational knowledge as work we can further probe into how knowledge is shaped by organizational strategies and incentives and, more radically, how power and politics influence the struggle between competing bodies of knowledge in organizations. The papers in this special issue are derived from the 'Third European Conference on Organizational Knowledge, Learning, and Capabilities' (OKLC 2002), which was hosted by the Athens Laboratory of Business Administration (ALBA), in Athens, Greece, in April 2002. This conference was the third in a series of conferences on organizational knowledge and knowledge management that had been previously hosted by the University of Warwick (2000) and the University of Leicester (2001). The topic of OKLC 2002 formally extended the thematic scope of the conference to include papers not only on organizational knowledge and knowledge management, but also on organizational learning and organizational capabilities. The widening of the conference topic reflected the increasing emphasis that has been given in the last ten years or so on seeing organizations as knowledge systems: from a knowledge-based perspective, business organizations are viewed as bundles of knowledge assets, the effective management of which affords firms competitive advantage (Choo and Bontis, 2002). The organizational capability to maintain, learn and create knowledge, as well as the conditions under which such capabilities are developed, was a core theme of OKLC 2002, which, to a large degree, is manifested in the four papers included here. Although knowledge has always been an organizational asset, it is only relatively recently that this has been widely recognized. There are several reasons why this has happened, including the increasing digitization of social and economic *We would like to thank the following colleagues who generously gave their time and acted as reviewers for the 12 papers that were initially considered and reviewed for

2012

This paper is about Knowledge Management, (KM), its rise, meaning, importance and why it is so complex. The explanation shows in brief why the rise of KM as a major concept is sweeping organisations around the World in a whirlwind. Narrations from various researchers across the globe give a vivid picture of why this concept is worth the efforts and thoughts of so many exemplary scholars, researchers, practitioners and thinkers. The search through various reliable current literatures for the rise of the KM, with its popular meaning conveyed by scholars and researchers from various corners of the globe divulge interesting results. KM importance as a concept is seen where appropriately adopted; organisations position themselves better in the market. The knowledge-based industries that produce knowledge intensive products are breaking new grounds for future organisations that are dynamic, robust and capable of internal and external oriented rapid changes. Several options are available a...

Knowledge and Process …, 2002

The Knowledge-Creating Company from Nonakay Takeuchi and their following papers became a essential reference for practitioners and academics interested in understanding how knowledge is shaped and how can this knowledge be applied to the firm. Time has told us that the capability to create and apply new knowledge successfully constitutes the true source of competitive advantage of the firm. In our study about the knowledge creation process we must pursue three main issues-a. the nature and typology of knowledge based on relevant and generally accepted criteria. b. the determination of the different entities, levels, systems or agents that are able to create knowledge and c. how this entities can develop knowledge within them and capture and transfer knowledge related to lower to higher levels. Firstly, the issues of classifying knowledge by means of a relevant and generally accepted criterion must be addressed. We can consider this issue as already solved through the consideration of the named knowledge epistemological dimension. The extensive use of Polany's (1996) distinction between tacit or implicit knowledge and explicit knowledge has proved that knowledge tacitness can establish a two-extreme continuous typology for knowledge, by which one extreme shows characteristics quite different from the opposite. Distinction between tacit knowledge and explicit can be considered generally accepted if we examine the knolwedge creation and knowledge management literature.