Join me in the search for Knowledge!!!

Information Technology: Enabler and not Creator!!

2009-04-03T14:12:00.004+01:00

Information technology (IT) is well known for causing evolutionary changes in almost every field. So has it in the field of Knowledge management. In context of web 2.0, it is recognized that technology has brought about massive changes in Knowledge Management with its new tools and approaches. But the controversy whether IT is the only significant facet in KM still continues.

KM is a combination of interrelated activities between people, processes and technology (Deepti, 2009). There are various steps in KM like knowledge sharing, knowledge creation and dissemination of knowledge within and outside an organisation. IT can help in most of these steps. For instance technology can assist in storage and retrieval of knowledge, or even in transfer of knowledge. Explicit knowledge can be efficiently managed with the help of IT, but technology is not very effective in the case of tacit knowledge (Jashapara, 2005).

During the 1990’s many organisations made huge investments in developing and using IT for KM, but most of them failed due to reasons unrelated to technology (Sinclair, 2007). This itself is an indicator that IT is not the only aspect of KM. It does require the interaction of people. Technology is just an enabler for knowledge management. IT makes the steps in knowledge management easier and facilitates the sharing and integration of knowledge. Again, it should be considered that technology can aid to store or retrieve knowledge and information but cannot create new knowledge; it is more static than dynamic in this phase (Borghoff, et.al., 1997)

According to Shehzad, IT supports KM with two basic approaches codification and personalisation. With codification explicit and organised knowledge can be stored in knowledge bases and with the aid of personalisation tacit knowledge can be shared. He gives the examples of knowledge expert directories and video conferencing techniques to support this argument. But one should also consider that KM does have a human aspect which technology cannot put into operation on its own. Hence there should not be too much of stress on the technology aspect in KM.

Analysis and conclusion
The article reflects the use of IT in KM but it also has specific concerns which cannot be dealt with IT alone. With the loads of information on the role and use of IT for knowledge management, it is also not possible to completely rule out the IT aspect in KM. KM needs the support of IT but does not rely purely only on IT. The managerial team needs to identity the necessity of technology in their organisation and work out a suitable combination of IT to match with the human characteristic within. “People work best with technical tools and functionality they feel in control of and that mimic their use of technology in their daily lives, e.g. instant messaging, texting, blogs, etc.” (Sinclair, 2007). This is the most appropriate approach that should be considered when using IT for Knowledge Management. Nevertheless, we should not forget that technology is created by humans and for their convenience and not to be ruled by it. Thus, we should use it for our convenience but acknowledge that the human factor is more essential.

References:

Borghoff U.M., Pareschi R (1997), “Information Technology for Knowledge Management”, Journal of Universal Computer Science, Volume 3, Issue 8 , pg 835-842.

Hooff, B. V. D.; Huysman, M. (2009), “Managing knowledge sharing: Emergent and engineering approaches”, Information and Management, Volume 46, Issue 1, pg 1-8.

Jashapura, A. (2005), “The emerging discourse of knowledge management: a new dawn for information science research?”, Journal of Information Science, Volume 31, Issue 2, pg 136-148.

Shehzad, (2007), “The Role of Information Technology in Knowledge Management”, Available online at http://www.associatedcontent.com accessed on 2nd April 2009

Sinclair, N. (2007), “The KM phoenix”, VINE: The Journal of Information and knowledge Management systems, Volume 37, Issue 3, pg 255-267

Vaidya, D. (2009), “Knowledge Management in a business milieu…..”, Available online at http://kms-deeptirohit.blogspot.com/ 3nd April 2009

Web 2.0 technologies: curse or boon???

2009-04-03T09:55:00.002+01:00

Web 2.0 is one of the hottest, ever growing and a never ending topic. The term 2.0 was coined by Tim O’Reilly and MediaLive International after the end of the dot com age in a conference (O’ Reilly, 2005; Levy, 2009). This article gives a brief over view of Web 2.0, the new era that began after web 2.0, its support to Knowledge Management and finally examines the possible problems and issue with the dawn of web 2.0.

Web 2.0: Some say it is just a new buzz word, some fantasy it and some do not care about the name as long as it is useful. No complete definition or explanation has been given for web 2.0. Whatever reaction one may give to Web 2.0, it is something that no one can avoid. All of us are using it in some or the other form. Like it or hate it but you cannot avoid it. This is apparently the main feature of Web 2.0. With the beginning of Web 2.0 a major revolution took place and many new companies and applications were formed. Some of the features of Web 2.0 are: making the web a platform, forming a two way connection with individuals to one another and to the web as whole, provision of services instead of software, user involvement as co- developer, continuous innovation and improvement, cost effective, and many more. Also its use is not limited to PC platforms. Web 2.0 is believed to have caused and evolution in the web world.
Web 2.0 Introduced new concepts of socialising and connecting to the world. It certainly did make the world smaller and connected. Many old features of web 1.0 were replaced with new ones which provided more flexibility. Individual websites were replaced by Blogs, anyone could make their own blog and add their own thoughts on it. Web 2.0 provided a two way communication which transformed the role of users to co-developers. A real time monitoring of what features are used and how they were used could help websites to undergo continuous improvement. “The cost of information creation and publishing continues to be reduced and barriers against activities are lessened” (Akiyoshi, 2008). In other words the emergence of web 2.0 created an absolute new world for exploration, innovation, information and communication.

KM 2.0
Since the module is related to KM, we need to acknowledge the impact of Web 2.0 on KM. The advent of Web 2.0 has bought many new concepts like blogging, tagging, RSS (Really Simple Syndication) feeds, podcasting, social networking and Wiki. It is perfectly said by Niall Sinclair in his article ‘The KM phoenix’, that “the web 2.0 architecture is one designed to encourage participation”. Web 2.0 in many ways is supportive or one can say a type of a KM system. Some tools and concepts of web 2.0 can also be used to manage organisation knowledge. There is active participation of users in web 2.0 so does KM. Applications like blogging, social networking, RSS feeds can be of great use in KM. The concept of knowledge management lies in sharing, distribution, creation and dissemination of knowledge for different individuals by individuals. Web 2.0 follows exactly the same concept but on a larger level and not just organisational. Also in web 2.0 it is on an individual’s choice whether to share his knowledge or not. Tools like blogging though not very professional can be used to share tacit knowledge in organisations. It is noteworthy that KM and web 2.0 are similar in most of their principles. Therefore it would be appropriate to merge KM and web 2.0 to make KM 2.0.

Possible problems caused by Web 2.0
Just as every coin has two sides web 2.0 also has its own issues to be dealt with. There is so much of information available on the web that there are quality and quantity issues (Bawden, 2009). We all are aware that any simple search on google or any other search engines give thousands of hits which make it difficult to choose. The identity of and authority over the information available is reduced or in some cases lost. One of the concerns of web 2.0 is the loss of identity since some of the tools allow using anonymity even while adding or editing information. Since applications like Wikipedia allow anyone to make changes to the information it is difficult to keep track of the constant innovation. Also sometimes the tool of anonymity is wrongly used and false information is uploaded.
Another aspect bought into view is that the socialising and social networking concept introduced by web 2.0 is greatly being misused and even lost in some cases. Earlier contact would be made by emails but now the RSS feeds and other applications have completed changed the outlook. Since web 2.0 tools are easy to manage and get information for utilisation a more thoughtful and researched work is rarely done (Bawden, 2009). In some ways web 2.0 is making our minds and bodies mere lazy.

Overview and Perspective:
The article speaks about the advantages of Web 2.0 and the dramatic changes brought about by it. The tools and principles similar and/or supportive to KM are discussed. Also, the problems and issues raised by web 2.0 are clarified. On the whole it gives an indication that the advantages of web 2.0 are humongous but the disadvantages cannot be ignored. Some restriction should be placed on the abuse of web 2.0 technology or it could lead to severe consequences in future.
In regards to KM, web 2.0 has certainly proved to be a blessing in disguise. More and more tools of web 2.0 can prove to be useful in knowledge management. Opportunities are many for KM in web 2.0, they only need to be recognised and used appropriately. Web 2.0 has certainly caused an evolutionary revolution.

References:
Akiyoshi, M. (2008), “Knowledge sharing over the network”, pg 1512- 1514, Available online at http://www.sciencedirect.com, accessed on 2nd April 2009.

Bawden, D., Robinson, L., (2009), “The dark side of information: overload, anxiety and other paradoxes and pathologies”, Journal of Information Science, Volume 35, Issue 2, pg 180-191.

Levy, M. (2009), “WEB 2.0 implications on knowledge management”, Journal of Knowledge management, Volume 13, Issue 1, pg 120-134.

O’ Reilly, T. (2005), “What is Web 2.0”, Available online at http://www.oreillynet.com , Accessed on 2nd April 2009.
Sinclair, N. (2007), “The KM phoenix”, VINE: The Journal of Information and knowledge Management systems, Volume 37, Issue 3, pg 255-267

Knowledge Management in a business milieu…..

2009-04-02T11:59:00.006+01:00

The hype Knowledge management (KM) has been tremendous since 1990’s (Bennet and Bennet, 2002, as cited by Brane Kalpicˇ and Peter Bernus, 2006). KM has become an integral part of every organisation that aspires to grow. It has become a very popular trend in most of the organisations. But one question remains unanswered and that is why and what is the need for KM? Organisations have always used tried to manage knowledge, but business purpose is rarely connected to KM. What is the importance or the relevance of KM in a business environment? This article gives some of the problems related to the realistic use of KM in a business environment.

Managing data is relatively easier with the use of technology. Data management systems can be employed for data storage and retrieval. But it is not so easy to manage knowledge, and alone technology cannot help in Knowledge Management. Technology can facilitate to manage explicit knowledge but is not good enough for tacit knowlegde. “Despite increasing sophistication of KM technologies, we are observing increasing failures of KM technology implementations” (Malhotra, 2004b, as cited by Malhotra, 2005).Various IT solutions have been futile to serve the purpose of KM for reasons not related to technology. Information, knowledge and data is collated from various levels for knowledge sharing, hence this data is not balanced. Therefore KM systems require an ontological orientation (Raghu, et.al. 2005). Knowledge management requires a combination and co-ordination of people, process and technology.

Organisational culture also plays a vital role in the success of KM. The biggest hitch in managing knowledge in an organisational environment is to bind various knowledge inputs (from different levels) together into logical organisational intellect and instil this intellect in the organization’s memory (Raghu et.al, 2005). People form a major part of an organisation and their involvement and interaction is crucial for Knowledge Management. The management in most organisations are practicing KM but do not interpret it correctly or do not follow the true approach for KM. The approach of KM is misleading in such circumstances. Knowledge is managed but they do not know why this knowledge is managed or how it can be utilised in a business framework. A business context is essential for KM and its efficient usage.

A collection of interacting and interrelated activities performed to achieve business goals is termed as ‘business processes’. They are carried out at various levels in different functional sectors in the interior and exterior of organisations. These business processes should be co-ordinated to achieve the business goal efficiently. A justification and rationale is provided to KM by business processes. KM interacts with business processes and hence indirectly with business goals, hence KM is imperative in a business perspective. Brane Kalpicˇ and Peter Bernus also point out that knowledge which is easily accessible has restricted ability to offer a competitive edge and may enhance a company’s competitive level.

Deepti’s point of view
The above write up gives some understanding of how and why organisation’s today fail to understand the pragmatic application of KM and hence eventually fail to use KM effectively. It is about time that organisations realise the power of Knowledge Management and apply it efficiently in practical business. It is worthless practicing KM without understanding the reasoning behind it. Also, how to manage knowledge in the commercial atmosphere is vital. Another aspect that should be considered is the inventory and expenditure for KM. An organisation should first analyse to what extent KM is useful for achieving their goals, decide how imperative it is and then plan the budget and resources accordingly. The lesson learnt from reading and researching carried out is remarkable and will be of significance for future application.

References:
Bhatt, G.D. (2002), “Management strategies for individual knowledge and organisation knowledge”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Volume 6, Issue 1, pg 31-39.

Kalpic, B., Bernus, P., (2006), “Business process modeling through the knowledge management perspective”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Volume 10, Issue 3, pg 40-56.

Malhotra, Y. (2005), “Integrating knowledge management technologies in organizational business processes: getting real time enterprises to deliver real business performance”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Volume 9, Issue 1, pg 7-28.

Raghu, T.S., Vinze, A. (2007), “A business process context for Knowledge Management”, Decision Support Systems, Volume 43, Issue 3, pg 1062-1079.

KM Models

2009-02-17T11:40:00.001Z

Knowledge management models are needed by companies to manage their assets and to develop their knowledge management systems in the best possible way. This is what I read generally on the net. I have just written in simple words. I still have many question and doubts in my mind which I shall come to later.

I would like to first give a critical overview of the different models for Knowledge management. One of the first model’s to be established was Nonaka’s SECI model. (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995).In this model the socialising character of human beings is taken into consideration. According to this model knowledge management takes place through different ways which is Socialisation, Externalisation, Combination, and Externalisation. This model shows the modification of knowledge from one form to another. It does not take into consideration the fact that knowledge can be created through some other forms. It has been criticised for various other reasons also.
After this model an improvised version was formed which is the Nonaka and Hedlund model. This model contained different carriers of knowledge. Again the same question aroused that is knowledge only within the minds of people and cannot it be created?
Various other models have then been formed. Some of them are listed below:

McElroy’s Model
Frid’s Model
Tiwana’s model
Demerest’s model
The KLC Model

After having gone through all these models in brief, it is the company’s choice which model they would prefer to follow.

My Perspective:
As I have said in the beginning of this article I do have some doubts as to WHY a model is required. I wonder if it is not possible to for a company to formulate its own KM system or model. Why do we need a common model for all companies? Are we trying to generalise the KM model in all companies? As far as I can think I don’t think this is possible and hence according to me it not possible that every company can have a general model. I imagine that every company could have its own diverse features on which it can form its own KM model.
The recent trend is of using hybrid models, i.e. two or three different models combined into one. This according to me is a good concept and can bring huge success if used wisely. Each company should acknowledge and analyse its own resources and then determine which model/models should be used for their betterment. I think that companies should not hesitate to form their own KM model if needed. It may be possible that none of the present models fit perfectly for a company.
During my research on KM models I came across a blog by Denham which attracted my attention. There is a mention of quantum model which takes into consideration 4 different aspects viz. network, philosophical, Cognitive and community. A mix and match of these different types of models could facilitate in forming a perfect model. But again I would like to mention that different combinations of models would be required for every company. Or some unique model could be formed which I think would be more appropriate.

In action:
To bring my ideas into action I will try to form a unique Knowledge management model for my previous company and present it to them. I will take into consideration the facts of the company and its statistics in terms of employee size, communicating ways, confidentiality, etc. After taking this information from the company I shall use my skills and help from other experienced people to form a perfect knowledge management model for the company. Well in case they like it I do stand a chance to get a better position in the same company. After all in the time of recession I can still get a good job. (heheheh)!!!!

References:
Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, K. (1995), The Knowledge Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Hedlund, G. (1994), “A model of knowledge management and the N-Form Corporation”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 15, pp. 73-90.

Durant-Law, Graham. (2006), “A Knowledge productivity Model for the Public Sector” pg: 4 http://www.durantlaw.info/sites/durantlaw.info/files/PhD%20Seminar%201.pdf

Grey, Denham. (2003), “KM models Mix and Match” Available online at http://denham.typepad.com/ Latest accessed on 19/02/09

What is KID??????????

2009-02-16T17:59:00.009Z

Most of us wondered what our tutor meant when he said KID but it did not take us long to realise that he was talking about Knowledge Information and Data. Though I had always heard and used these words I never thought about them so deeply until this day, and these words which seem so simple to use have so much detailing in them. We do know what these three words mean and have a raw idea of their definitions.

The initial perception of each of the three words is given below:
Data: consist of raw facts and figures - it does not have any meaning until it is processed and turned into something useful. Data comes in many forms, the main ones being letters, numbers and symbols. However, it is essential that DATA is available because it is the first step in creating meaningful INFORMATION.
Information: Information is data that has been processed in such a way as to be meaningful to the person who receives it. INFORMATION = DATA + CONTEXT + MEANING
Knowledge: The next level up from collecting information is having wisdom - the capability of understanding the relationship between pieces of information and what to actually do with the information. This ability is called Knowledge.

What I would like to talk about here is the interrelation and the discrimination between the words KNOWLEDGE, INFORMATION & DATA. The easier that these words seem the more difficult it is differentiating between the words. Some article written on a paper can be data for one person, information for another and knowledge of another person. It is something similar to the saying “Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder”. Also some writing on paper can be data at one stage, information when it is processed and knowledge when it is read with understanding. This makes it really difficult to distinguish between the three.

This is my perspective on the differences of KID. Last but not the least, a small example to explain the difference or say the similarity.
When a software programmer writes codes for new software it is knowledge for him. The same code is Information for the other software people who use the codes but when a non-IT person looks at the codes it is data for him as the codes are only symbols or letters which make no sense to him.

References:

Helina Melkas, Vesa Harmaakorpi (2008), "Data, Information and Knowledge in regional innovation networks", European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol 11 No. 1, pg- 103-124 Available at: www.emeraldinsight.com/1460-1060.htm

http://www.teach-ict.com/as_a2/topics/data_info_know/datainfo/index.htm

Knowledge Mangement, What is it???

2009-02-07T07:33:00.001Z

I have been through various definitions on the internet of which I would like to list a few:
· “ The process of capturing, organizing, and storing information and experiences of workers and groups within an organization and making it available to others. By collecting those artifacts in a central or distributed electronic environment (often in a database called a knowledge base), Knowledge Management (KM) aims to help a company gain competitive advantage.”
· “Discipline within an organisation that ensures that the intellectual capabilities of an organisation are shared, maintained and institutionalised.”
· “The Process responsible for gathering, analysing, storing and sharing knowledge information within an Organisation. The primary purpose of Knowledge Management is to improve Efficiency by reducing the need to rediscover knowledge.”

As you read these definitions you will notice that they are almost similar with most of the words being repeated. All these three definitions imply that KM is a process or a practice and so on.
After I read these definitions I came up with some similar definition but just mixing and matching words. This did not satisfy me and kept me thinking about it. Even during the discussion and debates in seminars I pondered on how should I explain my view on KM. Eventually I started to form a diagram in my mind which helps me to explain what Knowledge Management is, so read further for some interesting stuff.
In my opinion KM is a continuous cycle. It does not stop at any step and goes on. There is an input of KID at every step and more enhancements. Be it a big organisation or any small company, there may or may not be a KM team but the cycle of KM is continuously in function. I would like to represent my ideas in the form of a small diagram which is given below

Let me explain it further with an example. Take any company ABC corp. which is a KPO with say 2000 employees. In this company there will be different teams and processes. Every team member has his own pool of knowledge and information. They pool their individual KID(Knowledge Information and Data) together to form a larger pool of KID which is then analysed and organised by a few and stored in some form (e.g. documents, files, folders, etc.); this pool of refined knowledge is then shared among the whole company so that each person in the company has this minimal bit of knowledge. Here one should note that when this knowledge is shared or distributed to others it becomes information or data for them. Every individual who receives this information will apply his/her own knowledge to the same and come up with further developments or improvements to the same. When he/she shares their knowledge with others it will again undergo the same process and this is always continued.
In every organisation/group/team there is always some form of knowledge Management which may or may not be documented but this cycle is in action always. One may try applying it to different scenarios and see the results.
I would like to hear your views or comments on the same and any corrections are welcome.

References:
An E-Learning Glossary, Information & Communication Technologies ICT, Imperial College London, Available online at http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/ict/services/teachingandresearchservices/elearning/aboutelearning/elearningglossary [Accessed 28th Jan 2009]

IT & ITIL based Glossary of Terms, Information Services Knowledge base, The University of Melbourne, Available online at http://www.infodiv.unimelb.edu.au/knowledgebase/itservices/a-z/k.html [Accessed 28th Jan 2008]

Information Security Glossary, ISM3 Consortium, Available online at http://www.ism3.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=10&Itemid=13 [Accessed 28th Jan 2008]

Day 1

2009-01-24T18:44:00.001Z

The first day of new module on Knowledge management system seemed very interesting. Since I have been a part of the knowledge management team (on a begining level) in my previous company in India I know how exciting the work is. I knew from before that this module had no exams but loads of presentations and courseworks so I was looking forward to it.

To begin with we were asked to read about the following topics:
1) Organisation and strategies
2) Community of practice (cop)
3) Social networking
4) Team
5) Street Gang

My findings and the discussions with my team members are displayed below. I would like to mention that I have not given any definition but tried to highlight the points which are more connected to the topic.

1) Organisation and strategies:
An organisation is a group of individuals having some special characteristics. This group works towards collective goals and has control over its actions. It is unique and has formal rules and regulations. The organisaiton can be big or small and may consist of different smaller organisations or teams.
Strategies are somethings adopted by organisations or individuals or teams to achieve certain goals. In simpler words it means 'Plan'. It is like working stepwise to reach your ultimate goal. It is also a kind of preventive measure to avoid last minute rushes. An example of an organisation would be the university or any bank or any company. The planning or the steps the companies or banks would follow to achieve its goals would be their strategies.

2) Community of practice (cop):
Cop is like a platform to exchange ideas and knowledge. Small bits of information get structured to form knowledge. An example of Cop would be facebook, orkut or even small clubs.

3) Social networking:
As the word network suggests bonding between different nodes, Social networking is the connections between different people of the society for the interchange of view, opinions, ideas and knowledge. Each individual has different objectives and motives for this networking, yet it is the similarity in the views or ideas that bonds them. Cop offers a platform for social networking.

4)Team:
It is again a group of individuals working towards some set goal/target. A team does have deliverables and it is the effort of every individual in the team that counts. They may have different posts assigned and be managed by some one.

5) Street Gang:
They are a bunch of people with out any particular goal set. The individuals like being together and hence form a gang. Mostly they are known as antisocial elements. They do not have any strategies or planning and do not fulfill any deliverables.

University calling.....

2009-01-22T14:56:00.001Z

Gone are the vacations and now it is time to be back to uni.... I feel gr8 after the trip to India. Feeling rejuvenated and full of energy. Now i seem prepared to be here for the rest fo the term and further. Uni seems to be more and more nicer now and the new modules are just amazing. They seem to be crafted just for me. I liked both the new modules and hope to give my best in it.

When i learnt this thursday that we had to write our own blog it kinda got me excited coz its something new that I ahve never done. And the best part is that it gives me an opportunity to write what i feel. It's like writing my own book and reading the comments on it. hmmmm thats something.

So here I come and be prepared for some excellent bits of information coming down to you from the great mind.