Taken from The Proceedings of the 1st ISPIM Innovation Symposium, Singapore - 14-17 December 2009 ISBN 978-952-214-665-6.
The full paper and/or presentation is available to current members of ISPIM who must log in to the Members Section of http://www.ispim.org to gain access.
http://www.ispim.org/members/proceedings/Singapore08/commonfiles/files/7241730_Presentation.ppt
INCREASING THE VALUE AND THE INNOVATION CAPACITY THROUGH KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT
Abstract
Scope
Along with some relevant authors we define knowledge as something we do, instead of something we have. By applying this perspective we overcome some of problems of knowledge management referred to solve the paradox of treating knowledge as information. We transcends from first generation knowledge management that treats knowledge as a thing, and we enter second generation knowledge management where knowledge is a flow, or both. In this sense knowledge management is only meaningful when is oriented to new knowledge creation and application, therefore to innovate.
In fact most research about "knowledge management" concentrates in trying to identify relevant knowledge and its taxonomy. The intent is vain taking into account that knowing is a complex act created among interactions within individuals in a given context. Seminal authors like Polanyi , Nonaka and Takeuchi, and Sveiby , propose that knowledge is best understood as a dynamic social process. Seely goes further by saying that Communities of Practice (CoP) are the best social spaces for personal interaction because CoPs are on one hand communities of people sharing social capital, and on the other hand practice is the most powerful ingredient for knowing. CoPs have both ingredients to be the space - time for knowledge sharing.
Empirical research
Following this view we have undertaken an empirical research in 10 organizations trying to analyse how knowledge flows between different people within an organization. This diagnosis has been made in 10 organizations of different sectors and sizes. After this general diagnosis, the work has concentrated in making specific and deeper generation of concrete dynamics in several knowledge channels in 4 organizations. The objective has been to activate the exchange and creation of new knowledge developing a process of operative and structural transformation that allows the emergency of new forms of work within the organization, fomenting creativity and establishing a systematic way of doing things that allows innovation arise constantly.
The model of the research is an original model elaborated from the work of Sveiby about knowledge conversion acts between external structure, internal structure and individual competence complemented with Klaus North´s approach about intelligent enterprise and its capacity to capture signals, to react, and to act. Through the research we pose the question about who, how and when firms are managing the flows of information and making sense of it.
Research shows that most firms are concentrated in operative routines, but few firms are really devoting effort to share information and providing time for making sense of this information. Apparently one main obstacle for this lack of creative routines is an organizational problem instead of technological or motivational one considering that firms have been designed to process information by specialists where managers try to put together the pieces of the puzzle.
The paradox is that the overload of information makes it almost impossible a correct sense making activity, in order to create value. This lack of organizational resources for knowledge conversion has important negative consequences as firms have the temptation to castle in the known, those lacking innovative capacity.