Knowledge Management in Theory

and Practice

Lecture 3: Selected Knowledge

Management Models
2
 Week 3: Knowledge Management
Models

Focus on these: Additional models:

 Nonaka and Takeuchi  Choo, Weick
 Boisot  K. Wiig
 EFQM - European Foundation for
 Beer and Bennet & Bennet Quality Model
 McAdams & McCreedy  Inukshuk Model
Model  Wang & Noe knowledge sharing
 Stankosky & Baldanza KM model
Pillars Model  IC models
 KM Strategy models
 Collaboration models
3
 The Nonaka-Takeuchi Model
of Knowledge Management

“In an economy where the only certainty is

uncertainty, the one sure source of lasting
competitive advantage is knowledge.”
I. Nonaka

The problem is that few managers understand how to

manage the knowledge-creating company
Focus on ‘hard’ or quantifiable knowledge

See KM as information processing machine

4
 Nonaka & Takeuchi/2

 The authors studied successful Japanese companies

to try to identify how they achieved creativity and
innovation
 Found it was more than mechanistically processing
objective information
 Depending on highly subjective insights
 Slogans, metaphors, symbols
 Holistic model of knowledge creation and management
of “serendipity”

5
 Nonaka & Takeuchi:
The Spiral of Knowledge
 Knowledge creation always begins with the individual
 Brilliant researcher has an insight that leads to a new patent
 Middle manager has intuition of market trends and becomes
the catalyst for an important new product concept
 Shop floor worker draws on years of experience to come up
with a process innovation that saves $$$$
 In each case, an individual’s personal knowledge is
translated into valuable organizational knowledge

6
 The Basis for the Nonaka –
Takeuchi Model
 Making personal knowledge available to others in
the company is at the core of this model of KM
 It takes place continuously
 It takes place at all levels of the organization
 Individual
 Groups
 Company-wide
 Can be unexpected
 E.g. home bread-making machine innovation

7
Explicit vs. Tacit Knowledge
Explicit Knowledge
Tacit Knowledge

files

80-85% 15-20%
active passive 8
 Nonaka and Takeuchi Model

Tacit Explicit

Tacit

Explicit ..

9
 Nonaka & Takeuchi – the
Knowledge Spiral Model
Tacit Explicit
Socialization Externalization
Brainstorming Capturing
Tacit Coaching Sharing

Explicit Internalization:
Internalization Combination:
Understanding Systemizing
Learning Classifying
10
 Tacit to Tacit Transformation

 Individual to individual(s)
 Apprenticeship  Imitation
 Mentoring
 Observation
 Practice
 Shadowing  Brainstorming
 Coaching

Apprentice may learn from the master, but the knowledge

remains tacit & is not leveraged across the organization
11
 Tacit to Explicit
Transformation

 Able to articulate the knowledge, know-how

 Can be written, videotape, audiotape format
 Often need intermediary to capture this
knowledge – a journalist, a workshop…
 It now exists in a tangible form
 It can now be more easily shared with others and
leveraged throughout the organization
12
 Explicit to Explicit
Transformation

 Can combine discrete pieces of tangible

knowledge into a new form
 E.g. a synthesis in the form of a report, a
comparative evaluation, a new database
 Simply a new combination of existing
knowledge – no new knowledge is created
It is easiest to convert from the same type of knowledge – tacit
to tacit and explicit to explicit – harder to change the type
13
 Explicit to Tacit
Transformation

 As new knowledge is shared throughout the

organization, employees now begin to
internalize it
 They use it, broaden it, extend it and reframe
their own existing tacit knowledge base
 They learn – they do their jobs differently now

14
 Boisot KM Model

 The more easily data can be structured and

converted into information, the more
diffusible it becomes
 The less data that has been so structured
requires a shared context for its diffusion, the
more diffusible it becomes

15
 Boisot KM Cycle/2

explicit codified

tacit uncodified
abstract
concrete
undiffused diffused

16
 Complex Adaptive System KM
Models

 Key processes include:

 Understanding
 Creating new ideas
 Solving problems
 Making decisions
 Taking actions to achieve desired results

17
 Complex Adaptive System KM
Models/2
 Based on 8 emergent properties:
1. Organizational intelligence
2. Shared purpose
3. Selectivity
4. Optimum complexity
5. Permeable boundaries
6. Knowledge centricity
7. Flow
8. Multidimensionality

18
 Complex Adaptive System KM
Models/3
Organizational
Intelligence

Shared Multi- Knowledge Optimum

Purpose dimensionality Centricity Complexity

Flow Selectivity Flow

Permeable Barriers

creativity complexity change

19
 McAdams & McCreedy KM
Model
 Focused on socially constructed models of KM
 Desmarest
 Nonaka & Takeuchi
 Boisot
 Knowledge is created through social interactions
 Guided by social and scientific norms
 Becomes institutionalized knowledge

20
 McAdams & McCreedy KM
Model /2
Scientific Social
paradigms paradigms

Knowledge Construction

Knowledge Embodiment Knowledge Dissemination

Knowledge Use
 Stankosky & Baldanza KM
Pillars Model
 4 key pillars
 Leadership
 Organization
 Technology
 Learning
 KM strategy has to be aligned with the business strategy
 The organizational structure has to change in order to integrate KM
 Technology needs to support KM – tools to share, document, store,
preserve knowledge
 Learning means KM should lead to improvement

22
 Stankosky & Baldanza KM
Pillars Model

Strategic Framework
Environment Economy Society

4 KM Pillars

Leadership Organization Technology Learning

 Choo’s KM Model
Streams of
experience
1 Sense
Making Shared meanings
Shared meanings

3
Knowledge Decision
Creating Making
New knowledge,
new capabilities
2 Goal-directed adaptive
behavior
External
Information Next
& Knowledge knowing
cycle
24
 Decision Making

 Rational decision making models used to identify

and evaluate alternatives by processing the
information and knowledge collected to date
 Variety of decision making theories
 Theory of games and economic behaviour
 Chaos theory, complexity theory, emergent theory
 Bounded rationality theory
 Garbage can theory

25
 Bounded Rationality Theory

 First proposed by H. Simon a limited or

constrained rationality:
 The capacity of the human mind for formulating
and solving complex problems is very small
compared with the size of the problems whose
solution is required for objectively rational
behaviour in the real world - - or even for a
reasonable approximation to such objective
rationality (Simon, H.A 1957, p. 198)

26
 Bounded Rationality Theory/2

 When confronted with a highly complex world, the

mind constructs a simple mental model of reality
and tries to work within that model
 Even though the model may have weaknesses, the
individual tries to behave rationally within it
 Individuals can be bound in a decisional process by:
 Limited in intelligence, skills, habits and responsiveness
 Availability of personal information and knowledge
 Values and norms which may be different from the org.

27
 Bounded Rationality Theory/3

 This theory has long been accepted in

organizational and management sciences
 Characterized by individuals’ uses of:
 Limited information analysis, evaluation, and
processing
 Shortcuts and rules of thumb (heuristics)
 “Satisficing” (good enough, 80/20 rule, not
necessarily optimization)

28
 K. Wiig KM Model

 For knowledge to be useful and organized it

must be organized
 Organize knowledge differently depending
on what knowledge will be used for
 In our minds, we store knowledge as a
semantic network with multiple links
 We choose the appropriate perspective
depending on the cognitive task at hand

29
Semantic Network Example:
Four Perspectives on a Car

30
Commute

31
Maintain

32
Vacation

33
Driving

34
 K. Wiig KM Model/2

 Organize knowledge so that it can be

accessed and retrieved using multiple paths
 Useful dimensions to consider:
 Completeness
 Connectedness
 Congruency
 Perspective and purpose

35
 Completeness

 How much of the relevant knowledge is available

from this source?
 Human mind
 Knowledge base
 We need to know that it is there
 May be complete in the sense that all that is available
about the subject is there but no one knows it is there &
therefore cannot make use of it

36
 Connectedness

 There are well-understood and defined

relations between the different knowledge
sections
 There are very few knowledge items that are
totally disconnected from the others
 The more connected the knowledge base, the
greater its value

37
 Congruency

 A knowledge base is congruent when all facts,

concepts, perspectives, values, judgments and
associative and relational links between the mental
objects are consistent
 There are no logical inconsistencies, no internal
conflicts, no misunderstandings
 Consistency in concept definitions
 Needs to be constantly ‘fine-tuned’

38
 Perspective and Purpose

 When we ‘know’ something, we often know

it from a particular perspective or for a
specific use in mind
 We organize much of our knowledge using
perspective and purpose
 Just-in-time knowledge retrieval
 Just-enough – on-demand basis

39
 Degrees of Internalization
1. NOVICE: Ignorant or barely aware: Not
aware of what the know or how it an be used
2. BEGINNER: Know that the knowledge exists: Aware of
where the knowledge is and where to get it but cannot reason with it
3. COMPETENT: Knows about the knowledge: Can use
and reason with the knowledge, given external knowledge bases such as
books, people to help
4. EXPERT: Knows the knowledge: Holds the
knowledge in memory, understands where it applies, reasons with it without
outside help
5. MASTER: Internalizes knowledge fully: Has deep
understanding with full integration into values, judgments, & consequences
of using that knowledge

40
 EFQM overview

 How can KM be used to achieve

organizational goals?
 KM is positioned as an organizational enabler
 KM is used to achieve organizational goals and
not KM-oriented goals
 Never a good idea to do KM for KM’s sake!

41
 EFQM components

People Key
Performance
Results
Policy &
Leadership Stategy Processes (people,
customer,
Partnerships society)
& Resources

Enablers Results
42
 Inukshuk model

 Developed to help Canadian government

departments manage their knowledge better
 An Inukshuk is used to mark paths by First National
people
 Derived from quantitative research and a review of
existing models
 Uses the SECI (Nonaka and Takeuchi) model for the
process piece and emphasizes the role played by people

43
 Inukshuk components

Measurement

Tacit Knowledge Explicit Knowledge

Socialization Externalization
Internalization Combination
Leadership
TECHNOLOGY

CULTUR
E
44
 Next:

 Knowledge Capture and Codification

45