|
Description
Technology companies aren't the only ones that rise or fall on their knowledge management abilities. Virtually all companies must be able to acquire knowledge, store it efficiently, encourage and share ideas, and apply knowledge to improve processes, performance, and products and services. An examination of knowledge management in a manufacturing company, Acushnet, famous for golf products, sheds light on the kinds of questions managers should ask and the types of improvements that could be made to help knowledge management drive improved company performance.
Introduction
Knowledge management (KM)--the management of the organizational processes that create, transfer, store and reuse organizational knowledge--has become one of the major challenges facing organizations in today's post-industrial society. KM is a cross-functional, multifaceted phenomenon (Bontis and Fitz-enz, 2002; Chase, 1997a; Lee and Choi, 2003; Nonaka, 1994). It is a difficult and costly process requiring a careful assessment of the knowledge considered crucial to the organization and the process of knowledge capitalization. Effective KM means approaching organizational knowledge as a process (e.g., Lee and Choi, 2003; Davenport and Prusak, 1998).
Although KM researchers embrace varying views of what KM entails (e.g., Alavi and Leidner, 2001; Liebowitz, 2000; Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995; Wiig, 2000), knowledge acquisition (KA), knowledge documentation (KD), knowledge transfer (KT), knowledge creation (KC), and knowledge application (KP) are generally regarded as the five basic dimensions of the process. KM focuses on capturing an organization's knowledge and using it to foster innovation through organizational learning. Successful organizations are expected to adopt processes that continuously create and incorporate new knowledge in new products.
This research investigates KM practice at Acushnet Company, a mid-size U.S. company headquartered in the Northeast. The goal is to diagnose current KM practice and discuss the research implications.
Background
To remain competitive, organizations must effectively practice KM to solve problems, exploit opportunities, and develop capabilities that rivals cannot easily copy (Argote and Ingram, 2000; Sharkie, 2003). KM is essential to sustained competitive advantage (e.g., Davenport and Prusak, 1998), improved organizational performance (Bontis and Fitz-enz, 2002), and innovative processes and products (Kremp and Mairesse, 2004).
As discussed in the literature, KM consists of the processes an organization uses to acquire, create, document, transfer, and apply knowledge to achieve its goals. KM practice focuses on the tactical and operational implementation of knowledge-related activities (Wiig, 1997), and will vary from one company to another.
Tiwana (2000) views KA (knowledge acquisition) as the process of developing insights, skills, and relationships, enabling an organization to go through a process of self-renewal and expand its boundaries. It's a continuous process during which the organization's tacit and explicit knowledge is augmented or replaced (Pentland, 1995). Edwards (2003), however, uses KA and KC (knowledge creation) interchangeably. Davenport and Prusak (1998, p. 52) define KA as one of five modes of knowledge generation: acquisition, dedicated resources, fusion, adaptation, and knowledge networking. For the purpose of this research, KA refers to the mechanisms that an organization uses to import external knowledge into the organization. This is similar to Zack's (1999) definition of knowledge exploration.
KD (knowledge documentation or codification) refers to the mechanisms that an organization uses to institutionalize its knowledge so that it can be reused in the future. These mechanisms or forms, e.g., documents, databases, pictures, illustrations, spreadsheets on a disk, e-mails, video tapes, Web pages, make it explicit, portable, accessible and usable (Davenport and Prusak, 1998, p. 68; Tiwana, 2000). KM literature emphasizes the importance of organizational processes and information technology (IT) in recording, storing, and dissemination of knowledge (Zack, 1999; Handzic, 2003). KD should include the capturing of the whole experiences in the form of an organizational memory.
KT (knowledge transfer) refers to the activities that diffuse and share knowledge. It includes the exchange tacit and explicit knowledge, among individuals, groups, and units at the same and different organizational levels. Argote and Ingram (2000) add that KT is a process through which one unit (e.g. group, department, or division) is affected by the experience of another. Knowledge can be transferred through personal communication, codified communication, and embodied knowledge transfer (Abou-Zeid, 2002). KT also includes exchange of knowledge externally with other individuals, groups, and organizations. Furthermore, knowledge transfer can occur explicitly, when an individual or a unit communicates with another individual or another unit, or implicitly, through norms and routines (Argote and Ingram, 2000). In this research, KT focuses only on intra-organizational knowledge transfer.
Bhatt (2001) views KC as activities aiming at reconfiguring and recombining existing pieces of knowledge, developing competence by focusing on capabilities and limiting shortcomings, strengthening research and development (R&D) capabilities, scanning and monitoring external environments, and borrowing and employing external technologies. On the other hand, Nonaka's (1994) model of KC comprises knowledge socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization. This model views organizational knowledge creation as processes that involve an ontological dimension, which is learning at the individual, group, and organizational level, and also an epistemological dimension, which includes the two complementary types of explicit and tacit knowledge (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). They interact with one another and may be transformed from one type to another through individual or collective human creative activities. Knowledge is created and shared in organizational settings through social and collaborative processes as well as through individuals' cognitive processes (Nonaka, 1994). For the purpose of this research, however, KC refers to the mechanisms that an organization uses to develop new knowledge internally.
KAP describes the methods and mechanisms that an organization adopts to use available knowledge to improve its processes, products and services, and organizational performance. KAP also refers to any broadly available thought in the organization that can be generalized and applied, at least in part, to new situations (Tiwana, 2000, p.75). Organizations should focus not only on knowledge acquisition and creation but also knowledge application (Grant, 1996; Spender, 1994). Organizational knowledge must stay active for the organization to create values (Bhatt, 2001). In other words, organizational performance is a function of how organizations use, apply, and leverage what they know.
Although management scholars and practitioners are increasingly aware of the importance of KM practice, there are... |
More articles from SAM Advanced Management Journal
Competitive and performance implications of business definitions., June 22, 2006
Looking for additional articles?
Click here
to search our database of over 3 million articles.
|
