In order to better understand the notion of “managing” knowledge, there is a need to better understand what it is about knowledge flow in organizations that lends itself to any form of management. The process view, on the other hand, largely emphasizes the emergent nature of knowledge that is often embedded within a person or within organizational routines, activities, and outcomes, or arises from the interplay of persons and existing information or knowledge.
In the course of innovation and production of goods and services, information and knowledge are regarded as central inputs to organizational processes. Learning and knowledge are then seen as direct outcomes of activities performed commensurate with the organization’s central mission and core competencies. Whether as a resource or as a process, for organizations that have begun to recognize organizational knowledge as a source of competitive advantage, knowledge generation and retention have become strategic necessities for such knowledge dependent firms.
While knowledge itself may be perceived as a resource, its creation occurs through human interactions, whether physical or virtual. For example, for knowledge to emerge from within a group, interactions that occur among its members shape the knowledge that emerges from the mutual engagement and participation of the group members.
Nonaka and Takeuchi are the most prominent theorists in the knowledge management domain. Their SECI (Socialization, Externalization, Combination, Internalization) model posits a spiral-type process in which knowledge goes from within a person’s own knowledge store to a more explicit state that can be shared socially with others.This happens through a series of transformations that involve externalization and combination of what a person learns with experience and beliefs and then to the internalization stage where one takes what is learned and incorporates it within.
By suggesting an alternative stance of knowing as mediated, situated, provisional, pragmatic, and contested, as opposed to a more classic view of knowledge as embodied, embrained, encultured, and encoded, Blackler recognizes that knowledge permeates activity systems within the organization. proposes that knowledge can be observed as emerging out of the tensions that arise within an organization’s activity systems, that is, among individuals and their communities, their environment (rules and regulations), and the instruments and resources that mediate their activities.
In the course of innovation and production of goods and services, information and knowledge are regarded as central inputs to organizational processes. Learning and knowledge are then seen as direct outcomes of activities performed commensurate with the organization’s central mission and core competencies. Whether as a resource or as a process, for organizations that have begun to recognize organizational knowledge as a source of competitive advantage, knowledge generation and retention have become strategic necessities for such knowledge dependent firms.
While knowledge itself may be perceived as a resource, its creation occurs through human interactions, whether physical or virtual. For example, for knowledge to emerge from within a group, interactions that occur among its members shape the knowledge that emerges from the mutual engagement and participation of the group members.
Nonaka and Takeuchi are the most prominent theorists in the knowledge management domain. Their SECI (Socialization, Externalization, Combination, Internalization) model posits a spiral-type process in which knowledge goes from within a person’s own knowledge store to a more explicit state that can be shared socially with others.This happens through a series of transformations that involve externalization and combination of what a person learns with experience and beliefs and then to the internalization stage where one takes what is learned and incorporates it within.
By suggesting an alternative stance of knowing as mediated, situated, provisional, pragmatic, and contested, as opposed to a more classic view of knowledge as embodied, embrained, encultured, and encoded, Blackler recognizes that knowledge permeates activity systems within the organization. proposes that knowledge can be observed as emerging out of the tensions that arise within an organization’s activity systems, that is, among individuals and their communities, their environment (rules and regulations), and the instruments and resources that mediate their activities.
0 comments:
Posting Komentar