Knowledge Management Literature Review Research Proposal

Pages: 8 (2586 words)  ·  Style: Harvard  ·  Bibliography Sources: 8  ·  File: .docx  ·  Level: College Senior  ·  Topic: Business - Management

Knowledge Management

Literature Review of Knowledge Management

Relationship between Data, Information, and Knowledge

Evaluating the Types of Knowledge and Knowledge Management Systems

Power of Knowledge to Transform Organizations

Web 2.0 Meme Map

Download full Download Microsoft Word File
paper NOW!
The re-orienting of knowledge management from rigid, functionally driven, ontological data structures to more collaborative approaches to capturing, classifying, analyzing data and creating knowledge is occurring at a rapid pace today. The combining of Web 2.0 technologies (O'Reilly, 2006) and social networking are transforming the area of knowledge management, making the field more mercurial and rapid in its change. As a result of these fundamentally different approach to knowledge management including greater collaboration-based workflows that are capitalizing on the lessons learned from social networking (Parise, 2009) while at the same time finding that real-time data and system integration (Dadzie, Lanfranchi, Petrelli, 2009) can yield significantly greater knowledge generation. The net effect of this fundamental reordering of knowledge management systems that capitalize more on the collaborative nature of how organizations, groups, teams and individuals work with each other (Baldi, Heier, 2009). This reorientation of knowledge management to align more closely with how collaborative process workflows in modem organizations has also been shown to increase an organization's competitiveness (Massa, Testa, 2009). The greater the level of knowledge propagation and collaborative use, the greater the agility of organizations to respond to turbulent economic conditions as well (Kiessling, Richey, Meng, Dabic, 2009). The intention of this literature review is to explain how knowledge management is transforming organizations.

Literature Review

TOPIC: Research Proposal on Knowledge Management Literature Review of Knowledge Management Assignment

Knowledge management's many forms of information, from structured content to the use of latent semantic indexing to interpret and build linguistic models of freeform or unstructured content, all are being reoriented by the en masse development of application, integration, and Web Services strategies base on the Web 2.0 design elements (O'Reilly, 2006). Appendix a, Web 2.0 Meme Map, is a graphical illustration of the design criteria of Web 2.0 including the significant influences that are reordering how knowledge management systems are designed, implemented, measured for performance and maintained. Clearly from the graphic shown in Appendix a the reliance more of collaborative levels of use and shared integration is a dynamic contributing to the development of Web Services specifically and Service Oriented Architectures (SOA) from a strategic standpoint (O'Reilly, 2006).

This re-orienting of knowledge management is unique in that it is being driven by a process-centric redefining of how knowledge is being captured, analyzed, and classified into ontological frameworks within highly regulated industries or those industries that rely on complex data structures for their use of knowledge overall (Sicilia, Sicilia, Sanchez-Alonso, Garcia-Barriocanal, Pontikaki, 2009). The creation of entirely new ontologies and taxonomies or structures for managing knowledge is also being increasingly driven not by the convenience possible for the Information Technologies (it) or MIS department but by the needs of a broader, more informed, and much more reliant user base than before. The rapid maturation of information needs within these user bases is being driven at a rapid pace of change by social networking technologies (Bernoff, Li, 2008) that allow for users to voice the opinions openly and also in certain social networking applications, define their own ontological relationships between data.

This shift in how knowledge management systems are being realigned my business processes, supported by Service Oriented Architectures (SOA) has also led to the concepts of Enterprise 2.0 (McAfee, 2006). At the center of Enterprise 2.0 is the concept of agile, process-driven workflows that align with the strategic priorities of the organization. The use of Web Services to automate critically important knowledge sharing workflows, and also develop taxonomies that align not just to the person but to their many roles within the organization they have signals the future of knowledge management in a Web 2.0 world as well. There is also the aspect of how knowledge management, when combined with SOA-based platforms, made more efficient through the use of Web Services, and aligned to specific needs of managers and associates, can also increase learning throughout an organization as well. The reliance on role-based taxonomies or structures of knowledge to suppliers in addition to internal manufacturing, logistics, quality management and services teams has the ability to transform a manufacturing-centric organization into one that competes primarily on knowledge (Dyer, Nobeoka, 2000). The transformation of manufacturing-based companies into learning ecosystems is further augmented by the real-time integration of knowledge management systems which had previously been siloed or isolated throughout their organizations, significantly limiting their value as a result (Ardichvili, Yoon, 2009).

Relationship between Data, Information, and Knowledge

The progression of data to knowledge is one that is also being re-ordered by the more process-centric and highly collaboratively-driven approach to knowledge management. Ontologically-based relationships between data elements are today creating entirely new data models that were not available in previous generation systems given the constraints of their technology (Sicilia, Sicilia, Sanchez-Alonso, Garcia-Barriocanal, Pontikaki, 2009).

The sources of knowledge within an organization continue to expand in proportion of the ability of companies to capture it. From the suppliers, network of channel partners, resellers, dealers, distributors and service providers to the sales, marketing and pricing teams, there is knowledge being generated continually within organizations. There is a massive amount of knowledge generated within manufacturing and service provider organizations, as the most optimal approaches to generating results is continually pursued. In short, each department within an organization generates knowledge. What varies is the extent of the structure of the data, from highly structured to unstructured, from data that is highly granular in nature to those data sets which are full records of quantitative data which need to be analyzed. The ability to gain insights from the knowledge within organizations is directly dependent on the rigidity or agility of taxonomies that support its capture and use (Ardichvili, Yoon, 2009).

Data then continues to be a more active element or component than the traditional, hierarchical and often rigid definition of this element of a knowledge management system from the past. Data now has itself become more collaborative within enterprises and serves as the catalyst of significantly redefining how knowledge management systems within the enterprise are created (McAfee, 2006). The combining of SOA platforms, the integration of Web Services, and the growth of XML as the means for interconnecting and integrating these systems and processes together has taken data would otherwise not have been as valuable and put it into a more productive context. Web 2.0 design objectives' impact on the design, development and continued fine-tuning of knowledge management applications is creating more contexts into which data can be applied, thereby increasing its value. In conjunction with the socially-driven, more collaborative aspects of how Web 2.0 is transforming knowledge management, this technical aspect is also increasing the value of data, its context in broader, more strategic knowledge management initiatives, and assisting in putting more into context.

Many of the evaluation frameworks of knowledge management (Nevo, Furneaux, Wand, 2008) include the core concepts of the Five C. Model (Ardichvili, Yoon, 2009). The Five C. Model is comprised of the process areas of Conduit; functional and process areas of Content; all process, functional areas and development areas of collaboration, often called the Conversation; Context; and the ability to manage of the many forms of content, often called Control. The Five C. Model is more attuned to the structure of knowledge management systems as repositories of data, often with taxonomies that are long-standing and rarely changing. Given the rapid growth of social networking based on the collaborative design objectives of Web 2.0 technologies (O'Reilly, 2006), taxonomies are becoming more role- and process-based, aligning more effectively to the needs of organizations. In conjunction with this change from rigid, static taxonomies to more role- and process-based ones, there is a corresponding shift to content that is contextual in scope (Baldi, Heier, 2009). The impact of the highly collaborative platforms of social networking has in fact created contextual content that is suitable for roles in an organization and the processes they support. This approach to using contextual content is also changing the nature, depth, and quality of Conversation within the Five C. Model as well. The Conduit and Control aspects of this model are also going through a transformation as a result of the adoption of more collaborative approaches to generating, sharing, analyzing and using knowledge as well. In short, Web 2.0 design principles are acting as an accelerator in the context of the Five C. Model, forcing each of the components to work more closely integrated with each other, making the entire ecosystem the model represents more focused on velocity and less on the areas of rigid, static and often limiting taxonomies that had dominated knowledge management systems in the past (Ardichvili, Yoon, 2009). In summary, Web 2.0 technologies in general and social networking specifically have created an accelerator effect driven by greater levels of collaboration and information sharing, all predicated on more agile, role- and process-based knowledge management system architectures (Parise, 2009). The advent of Web Services within knowledge management systems driven by Web 2.0 design principles… [END OF PREVIEW] . . . READ MORE

Two Ordering Options:

?
Which Option Should I Choose?
1.  Download full paper (8 pages)Download Microsoft Word File

Download the perfectly formatted MS Word file!

- or -

2.  Write a NEW paper for me!✍🏻

We'll follow your exact instructions!
Chat with the writer 24/7.

Imagery Literature Review Guided Imagery and Pain Literature Review


Human Dimension of Future Business Management Literature Review


Scenario Planning Literature Review


Virtual Team Communications Literature Review of Technologies Literature Review


Inventory Management a in an Importer Industry Case Study


View 200+ other related papers  >>

How to Cite "Knowledge Management Literature Review" Research Proposal in a Bibliography:

APA Style

Knowledge Management Literature Review.  (2009, September 22).  Retrieved October 27, 2021, from https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/knowledge-management-literature-review/39858

MLA Format

"Knowledge Management Literature Review."  22 September 2009.  Web.  27 October 2021. <https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/knowledge-management-literature-review/39858>.

Chicago Style

"Knowledge Management Literature Review."  Essaytown.com.  September 22, 2009.  Accessed October 27, 2021.
https://www.essaytown.com/subjects/paper/knowledge-management-literature-review/39858.