4.4
COMMUNITY-BASED MODELS
The
Information Systems literature points to an abundance ofKMstrategies in the
category of Computer Mediated Communication (CMC). Such systems provide the
infrastructure for enabling the interactions needed for a group’s knowledge
synergies and interactive activities [Maier, R., 2002] and may include bulletin
boards, electronic meeting/conferencing, or online chat.
Further,
such CMC interactions allow for the creation of persistent records [Robins, J.,
2002] of the interactions. Chat and other kind of social media transcriptions
can be preserved too as another example. To the extent that discourse occurs
through such interactions, the dialectics can be archived for future reference
and subsequent “reuse.” However, as Hislop, D. [2002] points out, while
technology may provide the tools for interaction and communication, the application
of technology alone may not be a sufficient condition for sustaining the
creation and sharing of knowledge.
Group
Decision Support Systems (GDSSs) were originally conceived of as collaborative
tools where groups came together, participated in brainstorming and then,
through human facilitation, voted on items and issues important to the
organization.These systems allowed for anonymous voting that moved decisions
along rapidly by prioritizing topics more easily than trying to do so without
the system’s assistance. Participants’ knowledge and experience contributed to
the democratic process.
Another
advantage of Group Decision Support Systems, in general, is the ability for
each person to speak (through entering opinions via a keypad, or original ideas
via a keyboard) anonymously without fear of being politically incorrect or
worrying about speaking in opposition to the manager. Contributions could be
confidential with the shy on an even plane with the extroverts.
Other
dependable DSSs have used the expertise of meteorologists to predict storms,
knowledge of cattle managers to give advice on culling herds, or the know-how
of environmentalists on managing water resources. No doubt, these systems will
be replaced by others as technology advances, and their capabilities and
functionality will increase.
4.5 REPOSITORY MODEL
The
knowledge management repository, a space to store and retrieve knowledge
objects has long been a standard in KM programs. It is a model that emphasizes
the creation of quality knowledge content in online repositories with re-use as
a goal. Markus, M. [2001] argues that the purpose and content of knowledge
records in repositories often differ depending on who needs the documentation:
the content producer, similar others, or dissimilar others.
A
great deal of effort is required to produce quality content, and, as such, part
of the burden of documenting and packaging knowledge objects can be transferred
to intermediaries, saving time and energy of the organization’s staff. In
addition, adding context is also another aspect of making content more usable.
Proposes the roles of human intermediaries in what she terms as “repurposing”
of repositories to make them more appropriate for use by others.
Examples
of activities that could be performed include abstracting, indexing, authoring,
and sanitizing or scrubbing content. Because of the costs involved in
repackaging and making repository knowledge content more usable to the
knowledge seeker,Markus looks to an expanded role for technological support of
core competencies of librarians, archivists, data curators, and other
information professionals.
4.6 ACTIVITY-BASED MODELS
While
there has been significant work done in terms of Information Systems support
for the coordination of work [Winograd,T., 1988], the next logical progression
would be to link knowledge production and capture with work processes. For
example, Blackler, F. [1995] considers knowledge in organizations as socially
distributed collective activity systems, and emphasizes the significance of
incoherence and dilemma as the key issues in social systems. Similarly,
Engeström, Y. [1999] research, using activity systems as cycles of expansive
learning in work practices, also points to the importance of activities as
providing the necessary context for grounding organizational knowledge.
Based
on such a historical-cultural perspective of activity, Hasan, H. [2003]
proposed rudiments of a KM system influenced by activity-based models that
would link work activities with people and content. Continued development of
the model would focus on the motivation of people to contribute content and the
meaningfulness of information and knowledge that can be extracted from the
contents of such an activity-based system. Incorporating workflow support with
a knowledge repository, Kwan and Balasubramanian [2003] take the notion a step
further; they propose the design of a KMsystem they call KnowledgeScope that
provides integrated workflow support to capture and retrieve knowledge as an
organizational process within the context it is created and used.
They also propose a meta-model knowledge
structure called Knowledge-In-Context that specifies relationships among
processes. The model was implemented with limited workflow functions at a
global telecommunications company.While repositories and workflow support have
largely developed with limited integration, designs such as this, grounded in
case implementations, provide some empirical validity as to the appropriateness
and value of incorporating activity as context for knowledge reuse. This
emphasis upon context can be seen as part of the maturation of KM as described
above in the discussion of stage IV of KM development.
end chapter 4
source:
Knowledge Management (KM)
Processes in Organizations
Theoretical Foundations and Practice
