||Global Knowledge Management
||Hansen, Kristian Karstoft
||Møller, Niels (Teknologi, Organisation og Arbejde, Institut for Planlægning, Innovation og Ledelse, Danmarks Tekniske Universitet, DTU, DK-2800 Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark)
||Technical University of Denmark, DTU, DK-2800 Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark
||*Virksomheden has initiated a programme, with the purpose to focus on and improve knowledge sharing in the company.
I was involved in the development of this programme, and my role was to give academic i*Virksomhedenut on how knowledge sharing in the company is working, and what could be improved. My theoretical basis for the project is the SECI-model by Nonaka that focuses on developing a flow of knowledge transfers, to reach an organizational effective knowledge sharing in the company.
To obtain a good understanding of how the different knowledge transformations could look like, I have operationalised the theory from three different perspectives.
After interviewing 24 employees at The company, I have gained insight regarding the knowledge sharing process of the company. Also I was able to determine if the knowledge transformations, recommended in the SECI model, are present in the company. I have boiled down the large amount of empirical observations to 15 dilemma areas, which are all hindering knowledge sharing at *VIRKSOMHEDEN. The general trend in the interviews is that the employees aren’t happy about the knowledge sharing in the company, and often expresses frustration.
I have sketched the managements motivation and attitude towards knowledge sharing, which at offhand seems good. But still I don’t think that the management realises the importance of well implemented knowledge sharing and how crucial this is to the success of the company.
In the context of the chosen theory, I have analysed how the experienced reality and the theoretically recommended model correlate. The overall conclusion is that almost all the knowledge transformations exist in the company, but that almost none of the existing knowledge sharing activities works well.
I believe that the company fails to focus on and encourage knowledge sharing amongst employees. Motivation is important for the knowledge to flow continuously, no matter what obstacles the employees might meet.
To improve the knowledge flow, and the knowledge sharing, I have developed a series of recommendations, which in general states, that the company has to set aside the necessary resources in order to create a knowledge management department, which is supposed to take ownership of the knowledge sharing in the company.
Besides some incentive structures should be introduced in order to motivate knowledge sharing between employees to a higher extent. Moreover I recommend to create a more “push oriented” approach to knowledge sharing, because I don’t believe that a solely pull oriented knowledge sharing fits in an organization like The company.
The company has a lot of IT systems, none of them is seen as effective and thoroughly thought out, and I recommend to close down the “non-value-creating” ones, and instead of a lot of systems, focus on a few well implemented systems.
||Technical University of Denmark (DTU) : Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark
Creation date: 2010-02-01
Update date: 2010-02-01