Knowledge Management Practices

STEP 1: Read one book and one article and watch two videos.

To pen this page, I read Minna Stenius’ book ‘Why share? Motivational predictors of individual knowledge sharing expert work’ and an article by Andreena & Kianto, named ‘Does knowledge management matter?’ I watched two YouTube videos by Nancy Dixon, titled ‘Sharing Tacit Knowledge’ and ‘Why different organizations do KM differently’, and visited some additional websites. All resources were found online. Please check the references at the end of the page for details.

STEP 2: Evaluate knowledge sharing practices in your organization. Focus especially on tacit knowledge. Integrate theory and practice: use models presented in the book that you selected in order to describe your organizations practices. Evaluate knowledge sharing in a) teamwork and b) manager – employees context.

According to GlobeNewswire (2022), successful knowledge management within businesses has become one of the most important aspects of a modern enterprise and is projected to attain a global market value of approximately 1.1 trillion USD by the year 2026. This trend highlights the importance of this concept. Knowledge management is defined as a management specialty that collects and organizes, analyzes, archives, and ensures safe sharing of a company’s intellectual property. (GlobeNewswire 2022.) Andreeva & Kianto (2012) describe many economic advantages of knowledge management, such as promoting creativity, innovation, and product leadership in the market, attracting and retaining high-quality employees, organizational efficiency, and overall company performance. Knowledge sharing is achieved through two major items in an organization, namely Information Communication Technology (ICT) and Human Resources Management (HRM). The former provides the hardware, software, and pathways to move information quickly to and from where it needs to be, and the latter provides guidelines for the human capital of an organization, the workforce that needs to steer the ICT tools into the desired direction. ICT and HRM practices must be acting in harmony to achieve performance improvements. (Andreeva & Kianto 2012, pp.619, 621, 631.)

In three organizations I have worked for since 2018, knowledge sharing has been an obvious focus. All companies had in common well-designed websites to attract clients, efficient HR programs for their workforce, and an extensive, proprietary, intranet-based library of explicit knowledge (policies & procedures, forms, documents, clinical information, etc.) that could be accessed more or less easily by employees. As a new hire, I obtained tacit knowledge through formal in-person training, either on audio-visual platforms like Zoom or in a classroom setting, and more informally by shadowing mentors. Stenius (2016) distinguishes between In-role behavior (knowledge sharing in work meetings) and extra-role behavior (knowledge sharing in informal personal interactions) (Stenius 2016, p.16). Especially shadowing mentors provided lots of tacit wisdoms, as I was able to observe their extra-role demeanor, as well as how and when something was done, and how the patient, caregiver, or situation responded to it. During mentor shadowing it was also possible to speak frankly, without a paper trail or recording, which allowed sharing of hacks and tricks how to be more efficient. These workarounds sometimes deviated from, or even contradicted, norms or procedures upheld by the company for the sake of compliance with government or industry rules. While I was grateful for this deeply tacit information, it also often caused me uncomfortable dilemmas, as management watched closely whether I was following the rules, but blindly trusted my trainers, as they were well-established employees.

Nancy Dixon (2012, 2015) identifies that especially tacit knowledge is best shared in person and while on location. She illustrates this finding well, using an example of engineers helping each other pinpoint best techniques for different oil drilling sites and their specific geographic features. Such a complex and organic setting, where multiple conditions vary fluidly with every location, calls for being on-site, in-person, and brainstorming together with collective expertise, for the sake of efficiency and the safety of environment and staff. A further example described technicians at the Xerox copy machine company teamworking to build a knowledge base that went beyond explicit repair manual text and drawing from resources like failed printouts found in the waste paper basket by the printer, providing valuable tacit information about the problem at hand. Further tacit knowledge was shared among technicians, who sometimes empirically discovered solutions, such as wedging a paper clip into the copy machine – simple hacks that were celebrated and fostered a cheerfully competitive team spirit, at least back in lenient 2012. In contrast, in other settings, such as the Ford Motor Company, states Dixon, best practices discovered in any of the world-wide production plants could be easily written down and shared as rather transactional, explicit knowledge, to become standard procedure at all the other plants. (Dixon 2012, 2015.)

These distinctions make sense to me. When I worked in an advice nurse call center, information flow was handled along the lines of the Ford Motor Company: strictly regulated by rules and protocols and its use controlled by metrics. At the beginning of each shift 7 minutes were reserved for all nurses to review the latest explicit workflow updates in form of concise, instructional newsletters on the company’s intranet. These blurbs had a uniform appearance and only provided information approved by senior management. Nurses were not allowed to print these newsletters, even though that would have really helped with correct application and retention of the knowledge. It was difficult to get clarification if one had questions regarding the information. Searching for the newsletters on the intranet later was cumbersome and time consuming, especially while on the phone with a patient. Sometimes newsletters could not be found again; maybe they were saved in wrong folders, or deleted. Tacit knowledge was shared when managers listened to several of our recorded calls or sat in on live calls with patients once a month and provided feedback. It was obvious that they were required to find some critique points, even if the call was quite perfect. On rare occasions, we were allowed to shadow (listen in on) a more experienced or time-efficient colleague, which provided a great deal of tacit knowledge. This created a little more intimacy between us peers, and when we talked off the recording (extra-role, between incoming calls), we would exchange a few confidential tips and tricks, some of which elegantly circumvented strict and clumsy company policy.

Minna Stenius (2016) extracted interesting findings from a very complex study, investigating motivations for knowledge sharing and their relationship to the quality of knowledge shared. Using an existing theory called SDT, or Self-Determination Theory, she describes the various degrees of motivation to share knowledge along a fluid spectrum: from being totally unmotivated to finding real personal pleasure in teaching or learning a subject.

According to Stenius, the spectrum of desire to share knowledge can range from

• amotivation (no motivation whatsoever, which can result in knowledge withholding) to
• external regulation (doing something to get rewarded or avoid external punishment)
• • introjected regulation (doing something to elevate self-worth or avoid internal guilt)
• • identified regulation (personal identification with the values & goals of an activity)
• • integrated regulation (external values/goals are internalized and adopted as own values)
• to intrinsic motivation (acting because of personal interest, out of pleasure).

Stenius states with some certainty that the more a sharer autonomously identifies with and internalizes the knowledge, or is truly interested in it, the more readily high quality information is shared. (Stenius 2016.)

At the advice nurse call center, we had monthly team meetings via group call, where our manager spent 60-90 minutes on team-building, going over recent policy updates (the newsletters), and asking the team’s input or feedback. Most of the meetings were on virtual platforms, because our work was remote. These team meetings were management’s attempt at creating what Nonaka and Takeuchi call “Ba” – a space for tacit knowledge sharing that would continually result in refined explicit knowledge (MindTools s.a.). Due to the transactional and rather punitive job environment, however, the more experienced nurses remained reserved and amotivated, despite the manager beginning the meetings with a façade of lengthy, trivial social sharing activities (so-called ‘ice breakers’). Further barriers to sharing, besides the setting of external regulation, were a sense of futility that any change would result from our feedback, a fear of being perceived as the teacher’s darling (which the manager was obviously vying for), and shyness of new employees, due to inexperience. The real knowledge sharing happens instead on our underground advice nurses’ WhatsApp chat. On our WhatsApp ‘Ba’, new and seasoned advice nurses use text messages to ask and answer questions we would not dare to share with our managers. Experienced nurses freely provide extremely helpful high-quality information, fueled by a true need for collaboration to ensure everyone’s professional survival and by compassion for the new hires. The questions posted intrinsically motivate the knowledgeable nurses to let their experience shine. No managers are allowed on the chat, and its policy states that anything learned here is then owned by the individual using it; there must be no reference to where they heard this information. Such a protective clause provides the privacy needed to speak frankly and not withhold information.

Japanese professors Nonaka & Takeuchi suggest that knowledge can flow and innovate in a circular and ever spiraling way through the SECI process, an acronym for Socialization,  Externalization,  Combination, and Internalization. In addition to this, while knowledge is shared, it can morph from tacit to explicit or vice versa, or it can stay explicit or tacit without changing. (MindTools s.a.)

• Socialization (tacit stays tacit): knowledge is transmitted between people through observation, imitation, experiencing situations together, or through brainstorming.
• Externalization (tacit becomes explicit): tacit knowledge turns explicit when people verbalize or document their ideas, which can then be captured as written resources.
• Combination (explicit stays explicit): documents, policies, etc., already in pictures or writing are collected, organized, and categorized to create an archive of information.
• Internalization (explicit becomes tacit): the newly captured written knowledge is made available and used within the company. As people internalize the information, it becomes tacit knowledge – over time infused again with personal ideas and experiences during Socialization, thus repeating this cycle in a spiraling fashion. (MindTools s.a.)

These terms will be used in the next section. Please continue reading.

STEP 3: Write practical development ideas how different knowledge management practices can be developed. Focus on 2 different KM practices that are relevant in your organization. Be practical.

KM Practice 1: Improve access to explicit knowledge on the company’s intranet.

Steps to develop it:

• make important keywords in various documents into hyperlinks that give options to
  • open the according paragraphs in the company policyshow a brief phrase how this keyword promotes the company’s mission & vision
  • click on a link to email the correct department to ask for assistance
  • click on a link to send feedback and improvement ideas to a dedicated think tank department (Externalization)
• reorganize company policy (Combination) into
  • policies mandated by government entities (non-negotiable)
  • policies chosen by company leadership to define belief system, mission, & vision
  • a separate folder, where company history, structure, and accolades & awards can be viewed
• provide short, simply worded policy summaries above the extended text (Combination)
  • write also the extended text in concise, plain language in short paragraphs
  • use quick view tables and diagrams in addition to the text
• hold brief, frequent, special team meetings to review relevant policies, so they become second nature (Internalization)
• avoid social foreplay in meetings and kindly, but concisely focus on the material instead
• archive audiovisual recordings of the brief team meetings on the intranet for easy review
• allow employees paid time to review these materials upon request (Internalization)

KM Practice 2: Appreciate and utilize the value of employees (Human Resources)

Steps to develop it:

• Improve peer-to-peer relations
  • facilitate periodic peer-to-peer shadowing/collaboration opportunities (Socialization)
  • encourage peer-to-peer chat threads (“Ba”) without manager presence
  • provide cozy meeting spaces (“Ba”) that employees want to collaborate in
  • refrain from a punitive stance when employees report difficult relationships
  • treat friction as opportunity for diversity and innovation
• Managers as attentive stewards of employee creativity (Socialization; Externalization)
  • attention to/encouragement of/collection of innovative ideas and workarounds
  • create a ‘brainstorm platform’ to deposit concepts/ideas into that everyone can see
  • encourage private emails from team members who are to shy to share
  • no public celebrations, only factual appreciation of good contributions
  • refrain from explicit or public praise of employees (avoid creating ‘teacher’s pets’)
  • refrain from punishment of employees – focus on causes for deviant behaviors
  • treat friction as opportunity for diversity and innovation

References

Andreeva, Tatiana & Kianto, Aino 2012. Does knowledge management really matter? Linking knowledge management practices, competitiveness and economic performance. March 2012. https://moodleold.savonia.fi/pluginfile.php/2112078/mod_resource/content/1/10-1108_13673271211246185.pdf. Accessed 19.3.2024.

Dixon, Nancy 2012. Sharing Tacit Knowledge – Nancy Dixon tells the story about Xerox Copy Repair Technicians. 23. July 2012. Youtube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tA8loDhPRJI. Accessed 16.3.2024.

Dixon, Nancy 2015. Why different organizations do KM differently. 20. August 2015. Youtube video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PEUI5-khjU

GlobeNewswire 2022. Global Knowledge Management Market to Reach $1.1 Trillion by 2026. Report Linker. 20. June 2022. https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2022/06/20/2465289/0/en/Global-Knowledge-Management-Market-to-Reach-1-1-Trillion-by-2026.html. Accessed 9.4.2024.

MindTools s.a. The Nonaka Takeuchi Knowledge Spiral. https://www.mindtools.com/aqwn9zx/the-nonaka-takeuchi-knowledge-spiral. Accessed 31.3.2024.

Stenius, Minna 2016. Why share? Motivational predictors of individual knowledge sharing expert work. 12. December 2016. Academic dissertation. Publications of the Faculty of Social Sciences 33 (2016) Social Psychology. Department of Social Research University of Helsinki, Helsinki. ISSN 2343-2748 (online). https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/169204/WHYSHARE.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. Accessed 24.3.2024.