Knowledge Management Summary

What do we talk about when we talk about knowledge?

(Davenport & Prusak, 1998)

Data
Data

Information

Knowledge

A set of discrete, objective facts about events; structured records of transactions.

Data by itself has little relevance or purpose.
Quantitative measures: cost, speed and capacity
Qualitative measures: timeliness, relevance and clarity

Information

More data is not always better:

1. It is harder to identify and make sense of the data that matters.
2. There is no inherent meaning in data; provides no judgment.
Like a message, it has a sender and receiver. It is meant to change the way the
receiver perceives something, to have an impact on his judgment and behavior. The
receiver decides whether the message is really information.
Quantitative measures: connectivity and transactions
Qualitative measures: informativeness and usefulness
To

Knowledge

transform data into transformation:

Contextualized (purpose)
Categorized (key components)
Calculated (analyzed)
Corrected (errors removed)
Condensed (summarized)

Having more IT will not necessarily improve the state of information, because the
medium is not the message.
Fluid mix of framed experiences, values, contextual information and expert insights
that provides a framework for evaluating new experiences and information. It
originates and is applied in the mind of individuals; embedded in organizational
routines, practices, processes and norms.
To

transform information into knowledge:

Comparison (situations)
Consequences (implications)
Connections (relations)
Conversation (what do others think?)

Knowledge in action

Knowledge is valuable because it is close to action. It can be

evaluated by the decisions or actions to which it leads.

Knowledge as a corporate asset

Experience (knowledge develops over time)

Ground truth (knowing what really works; knowledge of the
everyday, complex, messy reality of work is generally more
valuable than theories about it.
Complexity (knowledge is not a rigid structure)
Judgment (knowledge contains judgment and it judges and
refines itself in response to new situations)
Rules of thumb and intuition (= heuristics; shortcuts to
solutions to new problems)
Values and beliefs (integral to knowledge, determine what the
knower sees, absorbs and concludes)
The Changing Global Economy (knowledge-based activities are
primary for providing competitive advantage
Product and service conversion (knowledge is part of
everything a firms offers)
Sustainable competitive advantage (unlike material assets,
knowledge assets increase with use)
Corporate size and knowledge management (the value
increases with the level of accessibility)
Computer networks and knowledge exchange (knowledge
enablers)

The Knowledge Creating Company (Nonaka, 1991)

Explicit knowledge
Tacit knowledge

From Tacit to Tacit

(Socialization)
From Explicit to
Explicit
(Combination)
From Tacit to
Explicit
(Articulation)
Form Explicit to
Tacit
(Internalization)

Formal and systematic. Can be easily communicated and shared trough easy
codification.
Highly personal. Hard to formalize and, therefore difficult to communicate.
Ground Truth

An individual shares tacit knowledge directly with another. Socialization is a

rather limited form of knowledge creation.
When an individual combines discrete pieces of explicit knowledge into a new
whole. Combination does not really extend the companys existing knowledge
base.
When individual converts tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge, thus
allowing it to be shared with the whole organization.
As new explicit knowledge is shared throughout the organization other
employees begin to internalize it. (Use it to broaden, extend and reframe
their own tacit knowledge.)

To convert tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge, means finding a way to express the inexpressible.
When tacit and explicit knowledge interact, something powerful happens.
2

Metaphor

Metaphor

Analogy

Model

Analogy

Model

Distinctive method of perception. A way for individuals to understand

something intuitively through the use of imagination and symbols without the
need for analysis or generalization.
However, it only trigger the knowledge-creating process, it alone is not
enough.
Whereas metaphor is mostly driven by intuition and links images, analogy is a
more structured process of reconciling contradictions and making distinctions.
Intermediate step between pure imagination and logical thinking.
Far more immediately conceivable than a metaphor or analogy; contradictions
get resolved and concepts become transferable trough consistent and
systematic logic.

Building a redundant (internal competition, strategic rotation, free access to company information)
organization is the first step in managing the knowledge-company because it encourages frequent
dialogue and communication. This helps creating a common cognitive ground.

Whats your strategy for managing knowledge? (Hansen et al,

1999)
Codification strategy
Strategy that centers on the computer.
Knowledge is carefully codified and stored in
databases, where it can be accessed and used
easily by anyone in the company.

Provide HQ, reliable, and fast IS

implementation by reusing
codified knowledge.
Reuse economics:

Personalization strategy
Knowledge is closely tied to the person who
developed it and is shared mainly through direct
person-to-person contacts. The purpose of
computers is to help people communicate
knowledge, not to store it.

Competitive strategy

Invest once in a knowledge

asset, reuse it many times.
Use large teams with a high
ratio of associates to partners.
Focus on generating large
overall revenues.

Provide creative, analytical

rigorous advice by channeling
individual expertise.
Expert economics:
Charge high fees for highly
customized solutions to unique
problems.

Economic model
Use small teams with a low ratio
of associates to partners.
Focus on maintaining high profit
margins.
3

People-to-documents:
Develop electronic document
system that codifies, stores,
disseminates and allows reuse
of knowledge.
Invest heavily in IT, goal:
connect people with reusable
codified knowledge.
Hire new college graduates (well
suited to reuse knowledge and
implement solutions)
Train people in groups and
through computer-based
distance learning.
Reward people for using and
contributing to document
databases.

Person-to-person:
KM strategy

Information Technology

Human Resources

Develop networks for linking

people so that tacit knowledge
can be shared.
Invest moderately in IT, goal:
facilitate conversations and
exchange of tacit knowledge.
Hire MBAs (like problem solving
and can tolerate ambiguity)
Train people through one-onone mentoring.
Reward people for directly
sharing knowledge with others.

Executives who try to excel at both strategies risk failing at both. (A 80%-20% approach is desirable.)

Strengthening Your Organizations Internal Knowledge Market

(Matson et al, 2003)
Organizations face two common
errors:
1.

2.

They
dont
have
a
systematic
approach
to
knowledge (this prevents
the real value of a global
corporation
from
being
captured).
Act as a central planner
(limits the natural flow of
knowledge).

Solution: understand that knowledge sharing happens within a market

Knowledge markets often have difficulty reaching equilibrium: Lack of clarity around price.

The market lens is a practical tool for systematically analyzing and improving knowledge flows within
an organization.

Using the market lens to solve

business problems:

Reducing
duplication
of
effort
(organizations paying for the same
work twice)
Improving
suboptimal
decisions
(Incorporate the best knowledge of
the
firm)

Understanding the effect of knowledge management strategies (Kim et al, 2014)

Motivation/Research
Gap

Theory/Hypotheses

Conclusion

Managerial Implications

Understanding
the effect of
knowledge
management
strategies (Kim
et al, 2014)

How does the effect of

KM strategies on KM
performance differ
depending on a firms
external and internal
contexts?
Previous studies:
Universalistic
perspective
(assumption that
certain KM strategies
are consistently
effective regardless of
their organizational
context)
Only considered a single
KM dimension
(knowledge type or
origin)

H1: When a firms organizational

IS maturity and environmental
knowledge intensity are both
high; the external codification
strategy is the most effective
way to improve that firms KM
performance.
H2: When a firms organizational
IS maturity is high and its
environmental knowledge
intensity is low, the internal
codification strategy is the
most effective way to improve
that firms KM performance
H3: When a firms organizational
IS maturity is low and its
environmental knowledge
intensity is high, the external
personalization strategy is
the most effective way to
improve that firms KM
performance.
H4: When a firms organizational
IS maturity and environmental
knowledge intensity are both
low, the internal
personalization strategy is
the most effective way to
improve that firms KM
performance.

Combining both
dimensions to derive 4
KM strategies.
To suggest the optimal
choice of KM initiatives,
authors propose a
contingency model
based on TOE
framework.

Given its circumstances and

knowledge dimensions, firms
can consult the framework to
find the best KM Strategy.
To find the most optimal KM
Strategy, the firm should
conduct further analysis to
find out which knowledge
dimensions to focus on under
given circumstances.

Environmental
Knowledge Intensity:
Extent to which a firm
relies on knowledge
inherent in its activities
and outputs for a
competitive market
advantage.
Organizational IS
Maturity:
Degree of IS
effectiveness in
supporting
organizational decisions
and the contribution of
IS to a firms desired
outcomes.

Technological

Organizational

Environmental

Strategic Management of Intellectual Property (Fisher &

Oberholzer-Gee, 2013)
IP rights constitute significant fraction of enterprise value.
R&D, strategy and legal functions are poorly integrated missed opportunities to create and exploit
value. There are significant benefits of close and early collaboration.
Holding (T1) Offense
1. Exercising Market Power
Choosing among the potential Sources of
Market power (Whether the potential
advantages of a patent justify its costs).
The Cost of exercising Market power (Three
mechanisms that can turn it into a liability:
changes in competition, rivals incentive to
innovate, smaller markets for complements).
2.

Selling
It is challenging to sell innovative products
and services in the presence of buyer

Non-Holding (T2) Defense

1. Asserting Legal Privilege
To create room to operate the newcomer
must secure permission by the court.
a) Challenge the validity of the incumbents
rights
b) Acknowledge the validity of the
incumbents rights, but content that the
product or practice would not run against
those rights.
2.

Develop an Alternative Technology

Avoid territory already claimed by the
8

uncertainty and incomplete property rights.

While techniques (such as block to fence,
partial disclosure and skin the game) facilitate
the sale of valuable IP, they remain costly to
the seller.
3.

Licensing
Companies compare return of the license fee
with the cost of increased competition. By
making a product available at a reasonable
cost, rival firms have reduced incentives to
challenge validity.

4.

Collaborating
a) standard-setting organizations:
agreements among competitors to adhere to
common standards.
b) working with developers of complements.
c) encouraging and then capitalizing upon
innovations by independent developers and
even customers (open innovation).

5.

Donating
Non-strategic donation (Wikipedia).
Strategic donations:
a) fast scientific progress
b) reduce risk of rival firm patenting research
c) signal value to capital market

3.

incumbent.
Getting Permission
The easier it is to invent around, the more
willing the licensor to give right.

4.

Dtente
Build large patent portfolios. Brought cross
licensing that leads to neutral dependence.

5.

Rapid Dissemination
Disregard the potential claims of rivals and
instead disseminate a potentially infringing
technology in rapid fashion. By the time it is
challenged, persuade firms or judges. Highly
risky.

None is optimal under all circumstances. Which is best varies by context; weighing relative costs and
benefits and short-term and long-term objectives (T3). Wise choices arise out of consultation among
managers, lawyers and creators (T4).
The choices are not mutually exclusive.

The effects of incentive subjectivity and strategy communication on knowledge-sharing

and extra-role behaviors (Cheng & Coyte, 2014)
Motivation/Research Gap
1.

2.

Examine the effect of

subjective weighting vs.
formula-based incentive
schemes on individuals
willingness to share
knowledge with a co-worker
and on their tendency to
pursue extra role
behaviors
Examine whether
communicating the
strategic role of a firms
human-based intangible
assets (HIA) moderates the
effect of incentive schemes
on employees knowledge
sharing and extra role
behaviors

Theory/Hypothesis
H1. Employees willingness to share
knowledge with a co-worker is higher under a
subjective weighting incentive scheme than a
formula-based incentive scheme.
H2. The introduction of a strategy map that
communicates how the firms human-based
intangible assets can contribute to its strategic
goals will increase employees willingness to
share knowledge with a co-worker under a
subjective weighting incentive scheme, but
decreases employees willingness to share
knowledge with a coworker under a formulabased incentive scheme.
H3. Managers tendency to perform extra-role
behaviors is higher under a subjective
weighting incentive scheme than a formulabased incentive scheme.
H4. The introduction of a strategy map that
communicates how the firms human-based
intangible assets can contribute to its strategic
goals will increase employees tendency to
perform extra-role behaviors under a subjective
weighting incentive scheme, but decreases
employees willingness to perform extra-role
behaviors under a formula-based incentive
scheme.

Theory Development

Conclusion

H1. Under a formula based

scheme, the cost of
knowledge sharing is highly
salient. Any time/effort
spent away from improving
one of the incentivized
activities is likely to reduce
managers opportunity to
obtain a bigger financial
report. Under a subjectiveweighting scheme the
employees potential costs
from engaging in knowledge
sharing activities is
eliminated. It allows a
supervisor to indirectly
recognize high performance
in KS by reallocating weights
to those incentivized
performance areas.
H2. A strategy map is a
visual representation of the
hypothesized causal
relationship between a firms
financial and nonfinancial
performance objectives, and
how together these
objectives are aligned with
business strategy.

Using a strategy map

to communicate to
employees the
importance of HIA
further improves
employees general
tendency to perform
extra-role behaviors
under a subjective
weighting scheme but
can potentially
backfire under a
formula-based
scheme.
Subjectivity in
incentive schemes
has benefits w.r.t.
knowledge-sharing
and extra-role
behaviors.

10

Acquiring tacit and explicit marketing knowledge from foreign partners in IJVs (Hau &
Evangelista, 2007)
Motivation/Research Gap

Theory/Hypothesis

Theory Development

Identify the factors that

facilitate or inhibit the
acquisition of tacit and explicit
marketing knowledge by local
partners from their foreign
counterparts in IJVs.

H1 The learning intent of the local

partner has a positive influence on
the acquisition of both explicit and
tacit marketing know-how.
H2 The learning capability of the
local partner has a positive
influence on the acquisition of both
explicit and tacit marketing knowhow.
H3 Partner assistance provided by
the foreign partner in an IJV has a
greater positive influence on the
acquisition of explicit than of tacit
marketing know-how.
H4 Knowledge protectiveness has
a negative influence on the
acquisition of both tacit and
explicit marketing know-how.
H5 Cultural distance has a greater
negative effect on the acquisition
of tacit marketing know-how than
on the acquisition on explicit
marketing know-how.
H6 The extent of explicit
marketing know0 how acquired
from the foreign partner has a
positive effect on the acquisition of
tacit marketing know-how.
H7 Learning intent has a positive
effect on learning capability.

H1. The result of knowledge

acquisition depends upon the effort
of both sides, of which learners may
play a more important role.
Learning intent is the extent of
desire and will of the local partner
to acquire knowledge from its
foreign partner and internalize the
other firms knowledge and skills.
H2. Learning capability is the
receptivity or a firms ability to
absorb new knowledge from its JV
partner. Effective learning requires
not only the combination of different
types of knowledge but also the
combination of present and past
knowledge.

Conclusion
Evidence to emphasize the role
of learning intent and capability
as the most important drivers
for knowledge acquisition from
the foreign partner.
Alliances provide an ideal
platform for learning.
In order to learn effectively, the
local parent must set clear
objectives of acquiring the
partners knowledge , rather
than merely utilizing the
knowledge as a substitution for
its insufficiency.

H4. Knowledge protectiveness is the

extent of hurdles caused
(un)intentionally by foreign
members that disrupt the
communications between foreign
and local members.
H5. Verbal communication may
suffer from both perceptual and
encoding/decoding gaps. It may
lead to misunderstandings and

11

H8 The hypothesized relationships

between marketing know-how
acquisition and its antecedents are
moderated by the environmental
challenge faced by the IJV.

suspicion, and eventually to lower

commitment and trust.
H6. The development of a common
language and mental model trough
explicit knowledge facilitates the
acquisition of tacit knowledge.
H8. Environmental challenge can be
viewed as consisting of 2
dimensions:

Hostility (Importance and

deterrence of
environmental factors)

Dynamism (Degree of
predictability and variability
of environmental factors)

12

Evaluation of competing Candidate Solutions in Electronic Networks of Practice

(Meservy et al, 2014)
Motivation/Research Gap

Theory/Hypothesis

Theory Development

Exploring the process by

which knowledge seekers
evaluate and filter knowledge
found on internet forum
associated with electronic
networks of practice.

H1 An ENP forum solution of

higher perceived content
quality is more likely to be
retained in the choice set
than a solution of lower
perceived content quality.
H2 An ENP forum solution
contributed by a source of
perceived high expertise is
more likely to be retained in
the choice set than one
contributed by a source of
perceived low expertise.
H3 An ENP forum solution
that is validated (i.e., as an
indicator that the solution
has worked for at least one
other person) is more likely
to be retained in the choice
set than one that has not
been validated.
H4 In the context of an ENP
forum, elaboration
H4a: Positively moderates
the influence of content
quality on choice set
retention
H4b: Negatively moderates
the influence of source
expertise on choice set

Features of ENP:

Participation is voluntary
and self-organizing

Dual-process filtering:
Filtering: Process by which a
set of possible alternatives is
reduced prior to making a
final choice.
Consideration set: A subset of
alternatives of which the
knowledge seeker is aware
and willing to evaluate
further.
Choice set: The set of
alternatives considered
immediately prior to choice.
Competing objectives when
reducing their consideration
set to a choice set: speed vs.
quality
Information evaluation occurs
through to processing routes:

Participation is open to
anyone, regardless of
personal acquaintance
with other users or
familiarity with the
network

Network participants are

linked through their
shared engagement in
practice

Rely on asynchronous
computer-mediated
communication and exist
primarily in electronic
space

The openness and searchability create the potential to

support rapid knowledge
sharing among thousands of
individuals at a relatively low
cost.
Unique challenges:
The lack of formalized control,
coupled with the number and
anonymity of knowledge

Conclusion
1.

2.

3.

4.

Knowledge seekers rely heavily on

peripheral cues such as source expertise
and validation when forming their
source set
Dual process theory suggests that
greater elaboration should decrease the
relative importance of accompanying
peripheral cues in determining the
knowledge adoption choice.
During the filtering stage, the perceived
expertise of the knowledge source does
play a role in choice set formation.
However, validation seemed to exert a
stronger effect on ultimate retention in
the choice set than did source
expertise.
The additive impact of having congruent
peripheral cues that both indicate high
content quality exceeds the summed
incremental impact of adding each
peripheral cue individually.

Practical Implication:
Peripheral cues are highly salient to people
who must filter solutions on a forum. It
holds even for skilled professionals who
presumably possess the capability and
motivation to analyze the solution content.
1.

Practitioners should not assume that

13

Central (Focus on
analyzing the quality
of the knowledge
content itself)

Peripheral (Focus on
peripheral
accompanying the
knowledge, e.g. the
credibility the
knowledge of the
source.
Filtering Consideration set
(Central or peripheral)
Choice set (Central or
peripheral)

retention
H4c: Negatively moderates
the influence of validation
on choice set retention
H5 In an ENP forum where
multiple potential solutions
are available, peripheral
cues (e.g., source
credibility, validation) have
a stronger influence on
choice set retention than
content quality.

contributors, complicates the

task of the ENP knowledge
seeker.

objective quality of online solutions

alone will influence filtering decisions,
even when a target audience is
relatively sophisticated.
2.

Designers and supporters of ENPassociated online forums would be well

advised to implement these cues as a
valuable guide to knowledge seekers.

3.

Validation was shown to be the single

most influential feature of candidate
solutions, outweighing both objective
content quality and source expertise.
Validation is unique because it typically
relies on the experience of others.

14

Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: examining the roles of extrinsic

motivators, social-psychological forces, and organizational climate (Bock et al, 2005)
Motivation/Research
Gap
Understanding the factors
or inhibiting individuals
knowledge sharing
intentions.
The movement on
knowledge ultimately
depends on employees
knowledge sharing
behaviors.
Pay-for performance
compensation discourages
knowledge sharing if
employees belief it will
hinder their personal
efforts to distinguish
themselves.
A work climate
unfavourable to knowledge
sharing is difficult to
change.

Theory/Hypothesis
H1 The more favorable the attitude
toward knowledge sharing is, the greater
the intention to share knowledge will be.

Theory Development
Motivational forces derive from
two bases:

Extrinsic rewards may

very well hinder the
development of
favorable attitudes
toward KS.

The attitude towards KS

is driven primarily by
anticipated reciprocal
relationships regarding
KS and the subjective
norm regarding KS.

The sense of self-worth

through KS intensifies
the salience of the
subjective norm
regarding KS.

The organizational
climate has a strong
influence on the
formation of subjective
norms regarding KS; it
also directly affects
individuals intentions to
engage in KS behaviors.

1.
H2 The greater the anticipated extrinsic
rewards are, the more favorable the
attitude toward knowledge sharing
will be.
H3 The greater the anticipated reciprocal
relationships are, the more favorable the
attitude towards knowledge sharing
will be.
H4 The greater the sense of self-worth
through knowledge sharing behavior is,
the more favorable the attitude toward
knowledge sharing will be.
H5 The greater the sense of self-worth
through knowledge sharing behavior is,
the greater the subjective norm to
share knowledge will be.
H6 The greater the subjective norm to
share knowledge is, the greater the
intention to share knowledge will be.
H7 The greater the subjective norm to

Employees personal belief

structures
2. Institutional structures

Climate: Situation at a point

in time, temporal, subject to
manipulation

Culture: Evolved context,

rooted in history, collectively
held, complex enough to
resist manipulation

Conclusion

15

share knowledge is, the more favorable

the attitude towards knowledge
sharing will be.
H8 The greater the extent to which the
organizational climate is perceived to be
characterized by fairness, innovativeness
and affiliation, the greater the subjective
norm to share knowledge will be.
H9 The greater the extent to which the
organizational climate is perceived to be
characterized by fairness, innovativeness
and affiliation, the greater the intention
to share knowledge will be.

16

How knowledge validation processes effect knowledge

contribution (Durcikova & Gray, 2009)
Motivation/Research Gap
Explain how the perceptions individuals
form as they interact with knowledge
validation processes affect their beliefs
about repository knowledge quality, as
well as the rate at which they
contribute new knowledge to the
repository.
To succeed, a repository must contain
knowledge that will prove useful for
employees.

Theory/Hypothesis
Signaling Theory
H1 Perceived validation
process duration is
negatively associated with
perceptions of repository
knowledge quality.

Transparency positively
influences knowledge
contribution while
duration has no effect
on it.

The validation process

should not be
weakened to maximize
contributions+ the
positive link between
knowledge quality and
knowledge sourcing
established in previous
research makes it
apparent that doing so
would be very
managing.

To reduce the negative

effect of
restrictiveness,
validators should give
ideas on how to
improve contributions.

H2 Perceived validation
process transparency is
positively associated with
perceptions of repository
knowledge quality.

To ensure that repositories contain HQ

knowledge, the contributions must
undergo stringent validation processes.
SMEs filter employees contributions,
rejecting those that are redundant,
incorrect, ineffective, or outdated.

H3 Perceived validation
process restrictiveness is
positively associated with
perceptions of repository
knowledge quality.

Knowledge Validation

Reinforcement Theory

Characterizing the validation processes

as simple sorting mechanisms fails to
take into account the significant impact
such processes may have on
contributors who must interact with
them. They are capable of observing
and forming judgments about 3 key
characteristics:
1. Time lag between submission
of a new contribution and
decision by a reviewer
2. The extent to which
contributors can observe the
validation process in action
3. Restrictiveness (overall
rejection rate) of the process

H4 Perceived validation
process duration is
negatively associated with
perceptions of repository
contribution frequency.

Perceptions are more important in

understanding contributors behaviors
than are any actual or objective
measures of validation process
characteristics.

Conclusion

H5 Perceived validation
process transparency is
positively associated with
perceptions of repository
contribution frequency.
H6 Perceived validation
process restrictiveness is
negatively associated with
perceptions of repository
contribution frequency.
H7 Perceived repository
knowledge quality
negatively influences
repository contribution
frequency.
17

18

The openness of knowledge sharing within organization (Chow et al, 2000)

Motivation/Research
Gap
Examines the interaction
effects of national culture
and contextual factors
(nature of the knowledge
and the relationship
between the knowledge
sharer and recipient) on
employees tendency to
share knowledge with coworkers.
Findings can increase the
understanding of when and
how national-culture
attributes may facilitate or
impede KS.

Theory/Hypothesis
H1a: When knowledge sharing does not
involve a self vs. collective interests
conflict, PRC and U.S. nationals are
equally open in knowledge sharing.
H1b: When knowledge sharing involves a
self vs. collective interests conflict, PRC
nationals share knowledge more openly
than do their U.S. counterparts.
H2a: When knowledge sharing involves a
self vs. collective interests conflict, PRC
nationals share knowledge less openly
than do U.S. nationals when the potential
recipient is an out group member.
H2b: When knowledge sharing involves a
self vs. collective interests conflict, PRC
nationals share knowledge more openly
than do U.S. nationals when the potential
recipient is an in group member.

Theory Development
National culture: supplies the
values toward which the actions
are oriented.

Conclusion

Individualism/collectivism: relative
emphasis on self-interests vs.
those of the group
Other cultural attributes:

Confucian dynamism
Emphasis on long-term
consequences or objectives: if
high, it increases knowledge
sharing

Concern for face

Need for group affiliation;
deterrence from sharing
knowledge that can damage
their face or social standing
In-group/out-group
distinction
Individualist cultures are less
affected by this

When the private

knowledge has no
potential to damage the
sharers self-interests,
there is no significant
difference between US
and PRC nationals
willingness to share
With knowledge that can
damage the sharers selfinterests while benefiting
the firm, PRC nationals
indicate a higher
propensity to share,
putting the interest of the
collective ahead of their
own
PRC nationals are less
inclined than US nationals
to share info files with
other employees who are
not considered to be part
of their in-group

The effects of national culture

on KS are not monotonic.
They interact with attributes
of the knowledge and
employment setting.

19

Motivating employees to share their failures in KMS (Huerta et

al, 2012)
Willingness to share knowledge is a critical success factor; information about failures can reduce
avoidable costs. Despite the potential benefits to the organization, revealing a failure might have
negative personal consequences for the knowledge sharer.
Type of
information
Anonymity
Culture

Repositories
Directories

Intrinsic

Extrinsic

Successful experience
Non-threatening failure experience
Threatening failure experience
Identity disclosed
Identity not disclosed
Individualist
Collectivist

KMS
Store knowledge derived from past experience
Knowledge transfer from implicit and explicit
Locate person based on the expertise
Yellow pages

Type of motivation
Individuals value and interest
Leads to knowledge sharing
Hard to influence
Individuals desire to obtain a desired outcome or to avoid a negative
outcome

20

21

Chapter 9: Using Past History Explicitly as Knowledge: Casebased Reasoning systems (Becerra-Fernandez et al, 2004)

Weaknesses of Rule-Based
Systems

Basic Concepts in CBR

Indexing and Case Library
Organization
Matching and Retrieval
Evaluation and Adaptation
Learning
Discussion

Difficulties trying to manage expert knowledge:

1. Relying on these experts to interpret the domain for us; thus, the
source of the knowledge can have an impact on the knowledge
gathered.
2. Transferring the knowledge can be difficult and error prone;
experts can misinterpret the data.
3. The rules have to be coded, verified, validated and maintained.

Advantages

Disadvantages

Variations

22

The Psychology of Case-Based Reasoning (Wheeler & Jones,

2008)
Afasf

Communities of practice: The organizational frontier (Wenger

& Synder, 2000)

Enterprise 2.0: The Dawn of Emergent Collaboration (McAfee,

2006)
Blank Slates: Platforms that companies can buy or build in order to make the practices and outputs of
their knowledge workers visible.
Search
Link
Authoring
Tags

Extensions

The 6 Components of platforms (SLATES)

Keyword searches
Guide to what is important; structure to online content
Let Intranet be built by large group rather than by small one.
Blogs: Individual author, cumulative
Wikis: Group authorship, iterative (people undo/redo each others work)
Better Categorization of content
Folksonomy: Outsource the work of categorization to users; develops over time, not
upfront
Automating some of the work of categorization and pattern matching (like
recommender systems: match preference to show the user what he likes)
23

Signals

When new content of interest appears (so that users dont feel overwhelmed)

Two intelligent ground rules:

1. Easy to use
2. Let the aspects of knowledge work emerge naturally (how work should proceed/categorization)

Internal corporate prediction markets (OLeary, 2013)

Asd

The Dynamics of Organizational Forgetting (de Holan et al,

2004)
Adsas

The World is not small for Everyone: Inequity in Searching for

Knowledge in Organization (Singh et al, 2010)

Social Network effects on Productivity and Job Security (Wu,

2013)

24

When using knowledge can hurt Performance (Haas & Hansen,

2004)

Profiting from knowledge management: The impact of Time

and Experience (Ko & Dennis, 2011)
As

Tacit knowledge as a source of competitive advantage in the

NBA (Berman et al, 2002)

25