Since childhood we learn to manage knowledge. The concept of knowledge management can be traced back to 4th Century BC. Plato, in the Theaetetus, one of his Socratic dialogues tries to answer the question "What is knowledge?" He proposes three key concepts: "Knowledge is perception"; "Knowledge is true belief"; and "Knowledge is true belief with an account"(Grant, Grant, 2008). With the time we have progressed so much that today Knowledge management Systems have become an inseparable part of the organizations. But one thing that came into my mind is that even before the term “Knowledge Management or Knowledge Management Systems” became evident, knowledge management systems were already into existence and a part of each and every organization. Because without knowledge its management no organization will function. Knowledge management is an ongoing process and doesn’t have a life cycle as such.
The continuous research and development of Knowledge management led to a stage when it became necessary to manage knowledge at strategic and operational levels.
Wiig was one of the first people to give the essence of KM in Business. He gave various frameworks for KM in business.
Earl also gave 7 taxonomy or strategies for KM which he called as schools in 2001.This taxonomy seems very complex to me.
Kakabadse in 2003 also come up with taxonomy according to their orientation.
Both Earl and Kakabadse classified the KM systems into models for a particular approach.
Another interesting thing is that there can be a variety of KM systems each one varying from other depending upon its thinker (Kakabadse;Kakabadse; Kouzmin, 2003). I agree to this fact as when searching for KM schools and models I came across so many models or systems that it scared me. With each paper a new approach was developed.
Earl’s 7 Schools –My perspective
It’s a complex classification and the worst part is that the organization has to decide which school it will apply. Also the type of knowledge is different in each school. In an organization the type of knowledge is not fixed it may be tacit or explicit. Does that mean the organization will apply different school depending upon the situation? None of the schools is actually doing justice to “knowledge” in that KMS and they don’t seem to address philosophical proposition which is proves that it is managing Knowledge (Blackman, Henderson, 2007).
Also Earl’s schools show how to do knowledge management but isn’t it more important to validate this knowledge. This is not addressed by Earl. This issue has been addressed by Blackman and Henderson where they say that KMS should also address epistemological issues and the schools or taxonomy should be such that they should be able to “know what they don’t know.” (Blackman, Henderson, 2005). I agree to this because innovation is closely linked with KM and this is only possible if by using KM Systems we can develop new knowledge and give answer to questions which we dint know before.
Still I will add in this Part…..
Knowledge Management Perspectives by Kakabadse;Kakabadse; Kouzmin
This is another interesting classification done on the basis of how knowledge is treated. For this paper
Click here
I will add more on this classification soon.
References
Grant, Garnt , (2008), “Developing a Model of
Next Generation Knowledge Management”, Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology Volume 5, 2008
Kakabadse, N., Kakabadse, A. and Kouzmin, A. (2003), “Reviewing the knowledge management literature: towards a
taxonomy”, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol.7, no.4, pp. 75-91
Deborah A. Blackman, Steven Henderson,(2007), “Being and Knowing – Ontological Perspectives on Knowledge Management Systems ”, Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management Volume 5 Issue 3 2007 (283 - 290), AvailableAt:http://www.ejkm.com/volume-5/v5-i3/Blackman_and_Henderson.pdf
Deborah A. Blackman, Steven Henderson, 2005 “Know ways in knowledge
Management”, The Learning Organization, Vol. 12 No. 2, 2005, pp. 152-168, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Available at: www.emeraldinsight.com/0969-6474.htm
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
yes this knwoledge schools are very important to learn knowledge from child hood where knowledge is tacit or explicit
ReplyDeleteHello Nidhi, Thank you for sharing your KM schools. On your question embedded of "that mean the organization will apply different school depending upon the situation?"
ReplyDeleteMy answer to this is yes because there are so many different organisations specialising in different area's of the sector. Say like for example a small self employed washing machine fixer, this person will come under the category of "systems" school, because I think this is remote solving and learning how to fix on their own.
I disagree to "proves that it is managing knowledge" (correct me if I'm wrong). Reason for this is because no one can manage the knowledge of others. There is no way this can be done unless of course the human mind is plugged and connected with cables into some sort of device to pull/tell.
But thank you for your above context, as I have learnt many new things from this! :)
nice idea...
ReplyDeletebut u mention "Wiig was one of the first people to give the essence of KM in Business"
but i think it was Nonaka, Ikujiro, “The Knowledge-Creating Company,”
Harvard Business Review, Volume 69, November-
December 1991, pp. 96-104.
was first to give idea of KM in business