Role of ICT in Processes of Knowledge Sharing in Organizations

Role of ICT in Processes of Knowledge Sharing in Organizations Marieke Wenneker, Martine van Selm & Paul Nelissen paper presented at Internet Resear...
Author: Jordan Harrell
34 downloads 0 Views 209KB Size
Role of ICT in Processes of Knowledge Sharing in Organizations

Marieke Wenneker, Martine van Selm & Paul Nelissen

paper presented at Internet Research 3.0: Net/Work/Theory Conference of the Association of Internet Researchers Panel 4C The Internet in Work and Organizations Maastricht, The Netherlands, October 13-16, 2002

University of Nijmegen Department of Communication P.O. Box 9104 6500 HK Nijmegen, The Netherlands [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Wenneker, Van Selm & Nelissen

October 14, 2002

Abstract This paper presents a theoretical model, which will be applied in an empirical study on the role of information and communication technology (ICT) in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations. One consequence of organizations’ increasing implementation of ICT, is an increased ICT use among organizational members. Although one of the main reasons for ICT implementation in organizations is knowledge sharing, little is known yet about the role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing. This paper focuses on how ICT contributes to organizational knowledge sharing. ICT and knowledge sharing will be approached from an ICT perspective on the one hand, and a knowledge sharing perspective on the other. From the former perspective a theoretical model of organizational ICT architecture will be presented. This model conceives of an organization’s constellation of ICT applications as a ‘shared knowledge work space’. The model discerns content-, communication- and collaboration spaces between which interactions take place. In addition, the ICT perspective emphasizes the salience of the content of information exchanged, as this contributes to an understanding of processes of knowledge sharing. From the knowledge sharing perspective a theoretical model of processes of knowledge sharing on behalf of organizational learning will be presented. The model distinguishes the individual, the group, and the organizational knowledge level between which knowledge conversions take place. We assume the involvement of all three knowledge levels as a condition for optimal knowledge sharing. It is expected that ICT can stimulate and facilitate the various knowledge conversions between the three levels.

Role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations

1

Wenneker, Van Selm & Nelissen

October 14, 2002

1. Introduction Information and communication technology (ICT) are increasingly used in various contexts and seem to have an impact on society. At the same time, the technological development of ICT is influenced by society itself as individuals and groups use ICT in specific and often not prescribed manners. This mutual shaping of ICT and society is focus of the Dutch Council of Scientific Research program ‘ICT and Society’ (NWO, 2000). One of the foci in this program is organizational use of ICT. Organizations are increasingly implementing ICT, which leads to an increased use among organizational members (e.g., Rice & Gattiker, 2001). A main reason for ICT implementation in organizations is knowledge sharing as in modern economies knowledge is considered to be a factor of outstanding strategic importance for organizational development (e.g., Huysman & De Wit, 2000; Malhotra, 1996; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Senge, 1992). Processes of knowledge sharing are influenced by the presence and use of ICT in organizations, and vice versa. Little is known, however, about the mutual shaping of both knowledge sharing and ICT. In a number of studies is pointed out what role ICT potentially could have in processes of sharing knowledge (Büchel, 2001; Huysman & De Wit. 2000). However, what its role is in the reality of organizational processes of knowledge sharing remains to be seen. This study aims to contribute to an understanding of the role of ICT in social processes underlying knowledge sharing in organizations, and, hence, of its role in knowledge management. In this presentation a theoretical framework will be presented in which ICT’s role in processes of knowledge sharing is conceptualized. This model will, later on, be applied in an empirical study on the role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations. In line with the concept ‘mutual shaping’, stated before, the emergent perspective on ICT and knowledge sharing posits that stimulation of processes of knowledge sharing through ICT use, is a result of complex social interactions between the institutional framework and the actions of individuals (e.g., Büchel, 2001). In order to shed a light on this institutional framework and the actions of individuals, we approach the relation between ICT and knowledge sharing from an ICT perspective on the one hand and a knowledge sharing perspective on the other hand. In order to do so, we reviewed literature from both perspectives; the former emphasizing the ICT architecture, and the latter emphasizing knowledge sharing. This study puts emphasis on the overlap between these both perspectives. In this way various aspects of ICT and knowledge sharing are examined. Moreover the pitfalls of approaching ICT exclusively from a technologic deterministic or a social deterministic perspective (e.g., Huysman & De Wit, 2000; Spears et al., 2001) are overcome. Figure 1 illustrates the overlap of both perspectives schematically.

Role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations

2

Wenneker, Van Selm & Nelissen

October 14, 2002

Figure 1 Perspectives approaching ICT and knowledge sharing in organizations

ICT architecture in organizations ICT and knowledge sharing

Knowledge sharing in organizations

The two perspectives are illustrated by the two main triangles in Figure 1. The overlap of both triangles in the middle shows that ICT and knowledge sharing are approached from an ICT perspective and a knowledge sharing perspective. Sharing knowledge is defined as the sharing of both implicit and explicit knowledge, as well as any form of knowledge located somewhere on the continuum between these extremes. The label ‘implicit’ refers to knowledge that can not be expressed in words, such as skills that are to be observed or culture that is to be ‘sensed’. The label ‘explicit’ refers to knowledge that can be expressed in words, and, hence, can be considered ‘information’. We will return to this distinction later on in this paper. In general, ICT architecture is often thought to stimulate and facilitate the exchange of explicit knowledge, such as primary task information. However, in this study attention will be paid to the way in which ICT stimulates and facilitates the sharing of implicit knowledge too. Technological applications that may be suited for this purpose are video-conferencing, e-learning software, computer simulations, group decision rooms, et cetera. As stated, ICT and knowledge sharing is approached from two perspectives in order to leave room to the ‘mutual shaping’ character of the issue under examination. The notions and considerations sketched so far in this paper resulted in the following research question. -

Which concepts concerning (a) the ICT architecture in organizations and (b) processes of knowledge sharing in organizations are useful in order to construct a theoretical frame on the role of ICT for processes of knowledge sharing?

2. Procedure In order to gain insight in these questions literature on ICT in organizations and organizational processes of knowledge sharing was reviewed. We started with literature on the process of institutionalization of Berger & Luckmann (1966) and knowledge creation of Nonaka & Takeuchi

Role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations

3

Wenneker, Van Selm & Nelissen

October 14, 2002

(1995). Moreover we shed a light on outcomes of empirical studies on ICT and knowledge sharing hitherto. Main attention was paid to recent literature about the construction and testing of theoretical concepts on ICT and knowledge sharing, such as organizational learning processes and the role of ICT of Huysman & De Wit (2000), the shared information work space of Choo, Detlor & Turnbull (2000) and aspects stimulating information participating on an intranet of Van Selm & Nelissen (2001). In this paper we will now present a number of theoretical concepts regarding ICT architecture. Next, we present theoretical concepts regarding processes of knowledge sharing and the role of ICT. These concepts regarding ICT architecture and processes of knowledge sharing lay the foundation for a theoretical frame that will be applied in our empirical research later on.

3. ICT perspective: ICT architecture As stated in the introductory section, from an ICT perspective we will describe concepts related to ICT architecture and it’s contribution to knowledge sharing. We will present a model that conceptualizes a ‘shared information work space’ (Choo, Detlor & Turnbull, 2000) as in this model characteristics of ICT architecture are well explicated. In addition, the ICT perspective emphasizes the salience of the content of messages exchanged, as this contributes to an understanding of processes of knowledge sharing. Characteristics of ICT architecture Choo, Detlor and Turnbull (2000) describe an intranet’s architecture by means of a trilateral model, which portrays the intranet as a ‘shared information work space’ consisting of distinct content-, communication- and collaboration spaces. As a content space, intranets have the assumed ability to facilitate knowledge sharing in terms of improved information storage and retrieval (Choo et al., 2000), such as in knowledge bases, digital manuals, and procedures. As a communication space intranets have the potential of providing channels for conversations and negotiations with other organizational actors in order to share interpretations and perspectives (Choo et al., 2000). Examples are e-mail, threaded discussions and news groups. As a collaboration space, intranets enable organizational participants to coordinate the flow of information that is necessary for cooperative action (Choo et al., 2000). This space facilitates collaboration on tasks independent of time and place and has to be considered as a new form of groupware or computer supported cooperative work (CSCW), for instance shared white boards and workflow-systems. Choo et al. (2000) assume that between these spaces interactions take place and information is exchanged. Information is retrieved from the content space and serves as input for conversation and cooperation in the communication and collaboration spaces. In these spaces new information is created and stored back into the content space for later use. Figure 2 illustrates the intranet as ‘shared information work space’.

Role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations

4

Wenneker, Van Selm & Nelissen

October 14, 2002

Figure 2 Intranet as ‘shared information work space’ (Choo, Detlor & Turnbull, 2000, p. 87)

Content space Intranet: a shared information space

Communication space

Collaboration space

This ‘shared information work space’ model was constructed in order to conceptualize characteristics of an intranet (Choo et al., 2000). Nevertheless we believe, the ‘shared information work space’ model can be a useful model for examining an organization’s entire ICT architecture as well. The three spaces described in the model seem to represent ICT’s various organizational functionalities. The use of email or discussion platforms can be seen as an expression of the communication space. The storage and retrieval of information in a database reflects the use of a content space, whereas the independently of space and time collectively working on texts stored on the WWW may be a representation of the collaboration space. Organizational members will be inclined to initiate communication-, storage and retrieval, and collaboration activities at the same time. Choo et al.’s model conceptualizes this interaction and interdependence by its postulation of spaces. Content So far, we have discussed the structure of ICT architecture that may stimulate and host the sharing of knowledge. In addition, in our opinion attention should be paid to the content of information available in the architecture. We think that a main condition for an elaborate and rich process of knowledge sharing is the involvement of various types of contents of organizational information. In the literature various rationales of categorizing these contents are employed. McPhee & Zaug (2000) discern organizational messages that relate to selfstructuring, activity coordination, membership negotiation and institutional positioning. According to Daniels, Spiker & Papa (1997) organizational information may have a production function, a maintenance- or an innovation function. In other literature and in our pilot study1 a taxonomy of information regarding primary task, organizational policy, personnel and motivation is employed (Koeleman, 1997; Van Selm & Nelissen, 2001). Primary task information includes information organizational members need in order to perform ‘what they are hired for’. Policy information includes those messages that reflect the organization’s strategic plans and directives. 1

This pilot study consists of an exploratory study of ICT and processes of knowledge sharing in a provincial governmental organization in the Netherlands in 2001. A survey among 447 employees was conducted. In addition qualitative interviews were carried out among 12 employees and the organizational channels for communication, in particular the intranet, were examined.

Role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations

5

Wenneker, Van Selm & Nelissen

October 14, 2002

Personnel information includes messages regarding conditions such as salary, holiday and leave regulations, and career development. Motivational information includes messages that may empower individual or groups of employees in order to increase for instance productivity. In the process of knowledge sharing knowledge with respect to these organizational themes is at stake. We expect the process of knowledge sharing to be richer and more developed in case more organizational themes are involved. In the theoretical framework, therefore, the content of organizational information will be included. Summarizing our notions on the ICT architecture so far, we explained that an ICT architecture consisting of content-, communication- and collaboration spaces facilitates and stimulates the process of knowledge sharing. In addition, we think that knowledge exchanged in the ICT architecture should reflect a variety of organizational themes.

4. Knowledge sharing perspective: Knowledge sharing in organizations and using ICT As stated in the introductory section, from a knowledge sharing perspective we will describe concepts related to processes of knowledge sharing and the contribution of ICT. We will present a theoretical model which reflects knowledge sharing in a learning organization. This model describes the way in which knowledge sharing develops in an organization and the manner by which an organization can profit from available organizational knowledge. Furthermore we will present and explain different aspects of knowledge and knowledge sharing we came across in the literature. Finally we will discuss the relationship between media use, and especially ICT use, and the way organizational members share knowledge. Knowledge In the literature about knowledge management two levels of knowledge are distinguished: the individual and the organizational level (e.g., Von Krogh, 1998; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Weggeman, 1997). We assume however the relevance of a third level reflecting the group or team level. Groups, rather than the organization as a whole, serve as the primary units for accomplishing activities in organizations (e.g., Kreps, 1990). That is why much knowledge exists on the group level. This makes that, in addition to individual and organizational knowledge, organizational members have knowledge about and share knowledge within the group or team in which they participate. Knowledge, present on these three levels, can be placed on a continuum ranging from implicit to explicit knowledge. As stated earlier, implicit knowledge can be considered as knowledge that can not be expressed in words, for instance visible and demonstrable skills and tangible culture. Because of the inclusion of the tangible culture, we assume, contrary to other authors (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995, Davenport & Prusak, 1998), that implicit knowledge does not exclusively belong to individuals or can

Role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations

6

Wenneker, Van Selm & Nelissen

October 14, 2002

not only be transmitted from one to another individual. Implicit knowledge can also circulate on the level of the organization. As a consequence of this assumption, implicit knowledge can be available on the individual level, on the team level and on the organizational level. Norms and values, beliefs, habits and assumptions (e.g., Olsthoorn & Scholten, 1997) belong to the category implicit organizational knowledge. Implicit organizational knowledge is essential for an organization which is demonstrated in the literature we reviewed (Choo, 1998; Cuilenburg, Kleinnijenhuis & De Ridder, 1988; Heijnsdijk, 1988; Sackmann, 1992; Spender, 1996; Weick, 1978) as it provides a reference frame for interpreting knowledge. Explicit knowledge is knowledge that can be expressed in words, contrary to implicit knowledge. Following Nonaka & Takeuchi (1995) this type of knowledge can be taken as codified knowledge that can be shared with others using a formal, systematic language. Similar to Weggeman (1997) we assume that explicit knowledge can be equated with information (e.g., Prencipe & Tell, 2001). In contrast with other authors (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995, Davenport & Prusak, 1998) we think that explicit knowledge is not only linked to the organizational level but can also be present on the group level or the individual level. Nonaka & Takeuchi (1995) considered implicit knowledge and explicit knowledge (information) as two separate concepts. Polanyi (1966) however conceptualized implicit and explicit knowledge as two extremes on a continuum (e.g., Dixon, 2000; Nuyten, 2000; Saviotti, 1998). We favor the latter notion. The cognitive dimension of knowledge (the know why) is more implicit whereas the technical dimension (know how) is more explicit. Different types of knowledge that are mentioned in different studies (e.g., Blackler, 1995; Collins, 1993; Dixon, 2000; Scharmer, 1999) can be placed on the continuum ranging from implicit to explicit knowledge. For easy reference we prefer an analytical distinction between implicit and explicit knowledge. Knowledge that can exist on the different levels, is more or less implicit likewise more or less explicit2. Knowledge, whether present on the individual, group or organizational level and located on the implicit – explicit continuum, can further be conceptualized in terms of ‘property’ or in terms of ‘metaknowledge’. Knowledge in terms of property or possession refers to the contents of knowledge: what knowledge does an individual, a team or an organization hold. In this case, people draw from their own source of knowledge. Meta-knowledge refers to knowledge about where to find specific knowledge or information: who holds what knowledge in an organization? To clarify the distinction between these types of knowledge an example regarding the acquisition of knowledge about house rules in the organization can be provided. In case of knowledge in terms of property, organizational members share what they actually know about rules and habits, for instance by explaining the rules to others or by asking questions. In case of knowledge in terms of meta-knowledge organizational members are guided in order to find a source of knowledge, for instance a brochure or leaflet, containing the house rules. Knowledge on the existence and the location of that brochure is meta-

2

In the literature we reviewed, implicit and explicit knowledge are conceptualized differently by several authors (e.g., Baumard, 1999; Boisot, 1995; De Carvalho & Ferreira, 2001; Collins, 1993; Davenport & Prusak, 1998; Leonard & Sensiper, 1998; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Polanyi, 1966; Prencipe & Tell, 2001; Saviotti 1998; Spender, 1996, 1998; Sveiby, 1997). We will look further into these differences in the future.

Role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations

7

Wenneker, Van Selm & Nelissen

October 14, 2002

knowledge. ICT can play an important role in sharing both types of knowledge. In our pilot study we noticed that an intranet provides databases that can be consulted, but also a ‘who-is-who-guide’ in order to guide users to sources of knowledge. Both conceptualizations of knowledge are relevant in our study. Regarding knowledge in terms of property, we differentiate between implicit and explicit knowledge, for instance demonstrable skills versus written information. With respect to knowledge in terms of meta-knowledge, implicit knowledge is for instance familiarity with a person who can show a certain skill. Explicit knowledge in this case, is for instance awareness of a book which contains procedures to fulfill a specific task. Processes of knowledge sharing Processes of knowledge sharing take place between and within the various knowledge levels, mentioned above. This process of providing and obtaining knowledge between the three levels, takes place in two directions. Individual knowledge can become group knowledge when an individual shares his knowledge with other group members. In the other direction, group knowledge becomes individual knowledge when knowledge individually acquired from the group, combined with an individual stock of knowledge, becomes new individual knowledge. In addition to these processes of knowledge sharing between various levels, knowledge is shared within the distinguished levels as well. An individual can share his knowledge with one other person, which can result in new individual knowledge for the latter. Sharing knowledge between different groups may lead to new group knowledge. On the organizational level, these processes seem less easy to conceptualize as knowledge sharing between organizations does not take place in one organization. Early on we made a distinction between implicit and explicit knowledge. Applied to the processes of knowledge sharing this distinction means that implicit or explicit knowledge can become implicit or explicit knowledge within the same level or at another higher or lower level. Between and within two levels we expect to find four different sub-processes of knowledge sharing. The following subprocesses are derived from different types of knowledge conversion, developed by Nonaka & Takeuchi (1995)3. Implicit knowledge possessed by individual A or group A can become implicit knowledge for individual B and/or group B (socialization). The same goes for explicit knowledge, becoming explicit knowledge for others (combination4). Further we assume that implicit knowledge can become explicit knowledge (explication), as well as explicit knowledge can become implicit knowledge

3

These four sub-processes of knowledge sharing are derived from four types of knowledge conversion, distinguished by Nonaka & Takeuchi (1995): socialization, combination, externalization and internalization. Nonaka &Takeuchi assume that implicit knowledge can only be found on the individual and not on the organizational level. That is why they think that socialization occurs on the individual level and combination on the organizational level. We think, however, that both implicit and explicit knowledge can be found on all levels. 4 Communication can be conceptualized as exchange of information or exchange of explicit knowledge. We conceive communication as part of a this specific sub-process of knowledge sharing, i.e. combination.

Role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations

8

Wenneker, Van Selm & Nelissen

October 14, 2002

within or between different levels (implication5). Figure 3 shows the different sub-processes of knowledge sharing. Figure 3 Four different sub-processes of knowledge sharing (inspired by Nonaka &Takeuchi, 1995) TO Implicit knowledge

Explicit knowledge

FROM Implicit knowledge

Socialization

Explication

Explicit knowledge

Implication

Combination

Explication from the individual to a group level is illustrated by individuals who share their skills and experiences with others using a Computer Supported Coordinated Work-system. Fellow workers can benefit by transforming other’s implicit knowledge into explicit knowledge possessed by themselves. The publication on an intranet of the location of a report or memorandum, written by a team, in order to make it available for the whole organization is an illustration of explication from the group to the organizational level in terms of meta-knowledge. When the availability of knowledge increases in the organization as a result of different processes of knowledge sharing, knowledge becomes increasingly common and collective within the organization as a whole. This process of growing commonality can be seen as externalization. Ideally, over time individual knowledge becomes group and organizational knowledge. Turned around, processes in which organizational knowledge becomes individual knowledge, can be seen as the process of internalization. In order to maximize the utilization of knowledge in organizations, knowledge should be exchanged within and between the three levels distinguished above. When processes of externalization and internalization flourish, knowledge is available on all levels of the organization. Following Huysman & De Wit (2000) we speak of a learning organization when different sub-processes of sharing knowledge, between and within different levels, are facilitated and stimulated. Empirical studies show that especially knowledge sharing from group to organization is rare; this step appears to be a major hurdle for organizations in their aim to accomplish organizational learning (Huysman & De Wit, 2000). Furthermore, we assume that mainly explicit knowledge is externalized from the individual level to the group and organizational level. When individual knowledge is externalized into organizational knowledge, implicit individual knowledge becomes increasingly explicit group or organizational knowledge. A reason for this is that explicit knowledge that can be expressed in a formal language, is more easily shared, in contrast to implicit knowledge. Implicit knowledge, for instance skills, can only be shared easily between individuals. That is why we think that as soon as organizational knowledge is shared, explicit knowledge is involved. On the other hand, we assume that in case individual knowledge is shared, implicit (and explicit) knowledge is more involved.

5

We already used externalization and internalization in another context. That is why we replace these concepts by explication and implication.

Role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations

9

Wenneker, Van Selm & Nelissen

October 14, 2002

We have drawn together into a model the various aspects of processes of knowledge sharing. This model represents ‘processes of sharing knowledge on behalf of organizational learning’ (see Figure 4). Figure 4 Model of ‘processes of knowledge sharing on behalf of organizational learning’ Individual knowledge

Group knowledge

Organizational knowledge

First of all the model reflects the three knowledge levels: individual, group and organizational knowledge level. On each of these levels various types of knowledge exist: implicit and explicit knowledge; knowledge in terms of property and knowledge in terms of meta-knowledge. Between these knowledge levels and within the individual and group level processes of knowledge sharing take place. In Figure 4, these processes are indicated by different arrows. Four different sub-processes as shown in Figure 3 can be found in every process of knowledge sharing. Not indicated in the model is that sharing knowledge in organizations is not isolated from the social environment. Interactions occur between different knowledge levels and the social context (e.g., Huysman & De Wit, 2000). Our model describes different ‘processes of sharing knowledge on behalf of organizational learning’ and is derived from the model of organizational learning, developed by Huysman & de Wit (2000, p. 24). Several concepts in this model are derived from the Sociology of Knowledge (Berger & Luckmann, 1966). Berger & Luckman (1966) were among the first scientists who described the creation of knowledge as a social process. They elaborated important insights into the development of the social construction of knowledge. Berger & Luckmans ideas are designed to analyze and understand knowledge sharing as a social process. Huysman & De Wit (2000) related this idea of institutionalization to the process of knowledge sharing within an organization. We more or less modified this model of organizational learning by adding sub-processes of knowledge sharing, inspired by ideas of Nonaka & Takeuchi (1995).

Role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations

10

Wenneker, Van Selm & Nelissen

October 14, 2002

Use of ICT and processes of knowledge sharing In the previous section insight was gained in processes of knowledge sharing and sub-processes of knowledge sharing. In this section we describe these processes of knowledge sharing in relation to use of organizational media in general and ICT use in particular. We distinguish four channels for organizational communication that can be used in processes of knowledge sharing (e.g., Koeleman, 1997; Van Selm & Nelissen, 2001). First of all knowledge is shared in face-to-face contacts (e.g., Harris, 2002; Koeleman, 1997). This channel is considered rich as physical closeness leaves room to two-way communication or ambiguous knowledge6. A second channel for knowledge sharing is written material, being fast and accurate but less responsive to feedback and hence less rich (e.g., Harris, 2002, Koeleman 1997). A third type of channel which is richer than written material is audiovisual material (e.g., Koeleman, 1997). Finally, knowledge can be shared by means of digital media including ICT. As stated these different channels have been related to richness and poorness of knowledge sharing they facilitate (e.g., Daft & Lengel, 1984, Huysman & De Wit, 2000; Trevino, Daft & Lengel, 1990). Rich media or channels, such as face-to-face contacts, are capable in a higher degree to share different types of knowledge than lean media can, such as written material. This means for our perspective that we assume that rich channels are suitable for the sharing of implicit knowledge. Lean media suffice for the exchange of explicit knowledge. Above we stated that processes of sharing implicit knowledge are mostly found on the individual level. This means that individual knowledge will generally be shared by means of rich media (for instance face-to-face contact). On the other hand we assumed that processes of sharing explicit knowledge are situated on the group or organizational level. Following this argument, in processes in which group or organizational knowledge is shared, lean media will suffice and hence, will be used. We assume that ICT applications facilitate and stimulate the exchange of explicit knowledge. However, in contrast with others such as Huysman & De Wit (2000), we do not exclude the possibility of employing ICT in order to share implicit knowledge. Examples of ICT applications which may facilitate the dispersion of implicit knowledge, are videoconferencing, e-learningsoftware, computer simulations and multi-media applications on the WWW or an intranet. In addition, research shows that over time ICT users develop specific symbols, codes and so called emoticons. In case implicit knowledge is shared by means of ICT, we expect individual knowledge to be involved. Processes of knowledge sharing on the group or organizational level contain explicit knowledge mostly. When ICT use is intensified and traditional channels are substituted, we may expect that sharing implicit knowledge will decrease (as ICT is most suitable for the exchange of explicit knowledge). ICT applications are often implemented and used in order to increase efficiency and effectiveness of 6

Trevino, Daft & Lengel (1990) state that ‘rich media’ have a high capacity and ‘lean media’ a low capacity to facilitate the exchange of ambiguous information and shared meaning. The capacity to facilitate shared meaning is determined by four characteristics of a medium: 1) the availability of instant feedback, 2) the capacity to transmit multiple cues, 3) the use of natural language and 4) the personal focus. They assume that a message will be conveyed more fully when personal feelings and emotions infuse the communication.

Role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations

11

Wenneker, Van Selm & Nelissen

October 14, 2002

processes of sharing knowledge. In order to achieve these objectives, messages must be understandable and comprehensible, dealing with explicit matters. Nevertheless various studies stress the importance of the sharing of implicit knowledge for a well functioning of organizational members and organization (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Polanyi, 1966). If only explicit knowledge is shared, a reference frame for interpreting this explicit knowledge is lacking (e.g., Polanyi, 1966). In this way, as a consequence of the frequent and intensive use of ICT the continuity of the organization might be in danger.

5. Discussion In the previous sections literature on ICT and knowledge sharing was discussed from an ICT perspective on the one hand and a knowledge sharing perspective on the other hand. From an ICT perspective we focused on the ICT architecture. A model of the ‘shared information work space’ for ICT applications in organizations was presented. This model sheds a light on characteristics of ICT applications for knowledge sharing while the importance of the content of information of ICT applications is also conceptualized. From a knowledge sharing perspective a model of ‘processes of knowledge sharing on behalf of organizational learning’ was constructed. This model describes the various processes of knowledge sharing and the role of media use, in particular. From this perspective knowledge and knowledge sharing were defined. It was explained that we assume that ICT facilitates and stimulates mainly the exchange of explicit knowledge. Nevertheless, we expect that ICT facilitates the exchange of implicit knowledge to a certain extent too. Hence we want to explore in which way ICT applications are able to facilitate and stimulate the exchange of explicit ánd implicit knowledge. The expectation that ICT facilitates and stimulates the exchange of explicit (information) as well as implicit knowledge, leads to a revision of the model presented at the ICT perspective, the ‘shared information work space’ model. Since ICT applications stimulate and host more than just the exchange of explicit knowledge (information), we propose to modify the name of this model in ‘shared knowledge work space’ model. In addition, this modification has consequences for both the content of information in the ‘shared knowledge work space’ model. In the preceding we explained, that it is assumed that if processes of knowledge sharing concern various types of organizational information, knowledge sharing will take place to a larger extent. To this end we deduce the assumption that optimal knowledge sharing takes place if each of the three spaces offers implicit and explicit knowledge about work and task, strategy, P&O and motivation for employees. Moving forward In the preceding we discussed ICT and knowledge sharing from an ICT perspective and a knowledge sharing perspective and constructed a ‘shared knowledge work space’ model and a model of ‘processes of knowledge sharing on behalf of organizational learning’. These two models are the starting point for an (still to be conducted) empirical research. We expect the ‘shared knowledge work

Role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations

12

Wenneker, Van Selm & Nelissen

October 14, 2002

space’ to be useful, because with the help of this model it will be possible to map the characteristics of ICT architecture. In addition the model of ‘processes of knowledge sharing on behalf of organizational learning’ presents a starting point for a detailed study of the use of ICT on behalf of various processes of knowledge sharing. In integrating both models detailed insights will be gained in organizational use of ICT architecture and processes of knowledge sharing. In order to examine the contribution of ICT to processes of knowledge sharing in depth, we want to conduct a qualitative, descriptive research. In addition, quantitative data will be collected about, among more, the availability of the ICT architecture, and the use of this architecture for processes of knowledge sharing in organizations. The concepts discussed in this paper, will be considered ‘sensitizing concepts’ (Wester, 1995). To examine in which way processes of knowledge sharing pass through the entire organization, we will examine the totality of processes of knowledge sharing contributing to organizational learning and the role of ICT in some fair-sized organizations with several work-units. In this way the research project has to be considered as a ‘multiple embedded case-study’ (Yin, 1994). We will employ a multi-method approach in which content analyses, focus groups, interviews and a diary study will be conducted. In order to draw parallels through time a number of measurements will take place overtime.

References Baumard, P. (1999). Tacit knowledge in organization (S. Wauchope, Trans.). London: Sage. Berger, P. L. & Luckmann, T. (1966). The Social construction of reality. A treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Double Day. Blackler, F. (1995). Knowledge, knowledge work and organizations. An overview and interpretation. Organization Studies, 16 (6), 1021-1046. Berger, P. L. & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New YorK: Double Day. Bolisani, E. & Scarco, E. (1999). Information technology management: a knowledge-based perspective. Technovation, 19, 209-217. Boisot, M. H. (1995). Information space. A framework for Learning in Organizations, Institutions and Culture. London: Routledge. Büchel, B. S. T. (2001). Using communication technology. Creating knowledge organizations. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Carvalho, R. B. de. & Ferreira, M. A. T. (2001). Using information technology to support knowledge conversion processes. Information Research, 7(1). [Avaiable at http://informationr.net/ir/71/paper118.html. last seen 26-06-02] Choo, C.W. (1998). The knowing organization. How organizations use information to construct meaning, create knowledge and make decisions. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Choo, C. W., Detlor, B. & Turnbull, D. (2000). Web Work. Information Seeking and Knowledge Work on the World Wide Web. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations

13

Wenneker, Van Selm & Nelissen

October 14, 2002

Collins, H. M. (1993). The structure of knowledge. Social Research, 60(1), 95-116. Cuilenburg, J. J. van., Kleinnijenhuis, J. & Ridder, J. A. de (1988). Articificial intelligence and content analysis. Problems of and strategies for computer text analysis. Quality & Quantity, 22, 65-97. Daniels, T. D., Spiker, B. K. & Papa, M. J. (1997). Perspectives om organizational communication (4th ed.). Boston: Massachusetts: McGraw Hill. Davenport, T.H. & Prusak, L. (1998). Working Knowledge How Organizations Know. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Delden, M. van & Wit, B. de (1996). Onderzoek naar interne communicatie: een praktische inleiding voor niet-ingewijden. In F. W. Kleijn e.a. (Eds.) Handboek Interne Communicatie (pp. C.4.1.3C.4.1.25). Houten: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum. Dixon, N. M. (2000). Common Knowledge. How companies thrive by sharing what they know. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School. Evers, W. J. M. & Putte, M. C. van (1995). Organisationele openbaarheid. Interne communicatie vanuit communicatiewetenschappelijk perspectief. In E. Hollander, C. van der Linden & P. Rutten (Eds.), Communication, Culture & Community. Libor Amicorum James Stappers (pp. 307319). Houten: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum. Gundlach, I., Janssen, K., Tettero, D. & Zanten, F. van (1999). Kennismanagement en ICT: ICT en het Rendement op de Productiefactor Kennis. In R. T. M. Dubbeld & R. Wieland (Eds.), Van Kennis is Macht naar Kennis is Kracht. Nijmegen: Studievereniging Synergy. Harris, T. E. (2002). Applied organizational communication. Primciples and Pragmatics for Future Practice (2 ed). Mahway, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Heijnsdijk, J. (1988). Vitale organisaties. Groningen: Wolters Noordhoff.Huysman, M. & De Wit, D. (2000). Kennis delen in de praktijk. Vergaren, uitwisselen en ontwikkelen van kennis met ICT. Assen: Van Gorcum. Huysman, M. & De Wit, D. (2000) Kennis delen in de praktijk. Vergaren, uitwisselen en ontwikkelen van kennis met ICT. Assen: Van Gorcum. Koeleman, H. (1997). Interne communicatie als management instrument. Strategieën, middelen en achtergronden. Tweede editie. Houten: Bohn Stafleu Van Loghum. Koeleman, H. (1992). Interne communicatie als management instrument. Strategieën, middelen en achtergronden. Houten: Bohn Stafleu Van Loghum. Kreps, G. L. (1990). Organizational Communication. Theory and Practice. (2 ed.). New York: Longman. Krogh, G. von (1998). Care in knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 133-153. Leonard, D. & Sensiper, S. (1998). The role of tacit knowledge in group innovation. California Management Review, 40(3), 112-132. Malhotra, Y. (1996). Organizational Learning and Learning Organizations: An Overview. Retrieved February, 15, 2001 from http://www.brint.com/papers/orglrng.htm McPhee, R. D. & Zaug, P. (2000). The communicative constitution of organizations: a framework for explanation. The Electronic Journal of Communication, 10(1-2) . Retrieved July, 25, 2000 from http://www.cios.org/getfile\McPhee_V10n1200

Role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations

14

Wenneker, Van Selm & Nelissen

October 14, 2002

Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company: how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press. Nuyten, R. (2000). Kennis delen is vermenigvuldigen! Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen. NWO, (2000). Maatschappij en de Electronische Snelweg. Brochure Stimuleringsprogramma. Den Haag: NWO. Olsthoorn, A. C. J. M. & Scholten, O. (1997). Cultuur en communicatie: een symbiotische relatie. In F. W. Kleijn e.a. (Eds.), Handboek Interne Communicatie (pp. A..7.3.3-A..7.3.20). Houten: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum. Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. New York: Anchor Day Books. Prencipe, A. & Tell, F. (2001). Inter-project learning: processes and outcomes of knowledge codification in project-based firms. Research Policy, 30(9), 1373-1394. Putte, M. C. van. (1998). Interne communicatie: Van theorie naar praktijk. Bussum: Coutinho. Reijnders, E. (1997). Interne communicatie: aanpak en achtergronden. Assen: Van Gorcum. Rice, R. E. & Gattiker, U. E. (2001). New Media and Organizational Structuring. In F. M. Jablin & L. L. Putnam (Eds.) The New Handbook of Organizational Communication. Advances in Theory, Research and Methods (pp. 544-581). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Sackmann, S. A. (1992). Culture and subcultures: an analysis of organizational knowledge. Adminstrative Science Quarterly, 37, 140-162. Saviotti, P. (1998). On the dynamics of appropriability, of tacit and of codified knowledge. Research Policy, 26(7-8), 843-856. Scharmer, C. O. (1999). Organizing around not-yet-embodied knowledge. In G. von Krogh, I. Nonaka & T. Nishiguchi (Eds.), Knowledge Creation. A Source of Value. (pp. 36-60). London: MacMillan Press LTD. Selm, M. van. & Nelissen, P. (2001). Organizational information through ICT. The exploration of the content of a hospital’s intranet. Communications, 26(3), 285-296. Senge, P.M. (1992). The Fifth Discipline. The Art & Practice of The Learning Organization. London: Century Business. Spears, R.; Postmes, T.; Wolbert, A.; Lea, M. & Rogers, P. (2001). Sociaal-psychologische efecten van ICT’s en hun beleidsimplicaties. In R. van der Ploeg & C. Veenemans (Eds.), De invloed van ICT op maatschappij en overheid. Naïef vooruitgangsgeloof of harde werkelijheid? (pp. 384). Amsterdam: Salomé, Amsterdam University Press. Spender, J.-C. (1998). The dynamics of individual and organizational knowledge. In C. Eden & J.-C. Spender (Eds.). Managerial and Organizational Cognition: Theory, methods and Research. (pp 13-39). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Spender, J.-C. (1996). Competitive advantage from tacit knowledge? Unpacking the concept and its strategic implications. In B. Monigeon & A. Edmondson (Eds.), Organizational learning competitive advantage (pp. 56-73). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Sveiby, K. E. (1997). The new organizational wealth. Managing & measuring knowledge assets. San Francisco: Berret-Koehler.

Role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations

15

Wenneker, Van Selm & Nelissen

October 14, 2002

Trevino, L. K., Daft R. L. & Lengel, R. H. (1990). Understanding managers' media choices: A symbolic interactionist perspective. In J. Fulk & C. Steinfield (Eds.) Organizations and Communication Technology (pp. 71-94). Newbury Park: Sage. Weick, K. E. (1978). The social psychology of organizing. Reading, MA: Addisson-Wesley. Weggeman, M. (1997). Kennismanagement. Inrichting en Besturing van kennisintensieve organisaties. Schiedam: Scriptum. Wenneker, M. (2001). De Binnenplaats. Ruimte voor interne communicatie en kennisdelen? Onderzoek naar de rol van het intranet bij het proces van kennisdelen bij de provincie Gelderland. Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen. Wester, F. (1995). Strategieën voor kwalitatief onderzoek. Bussum: Coutinho. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research. Design and Methods (2e ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Role of ICT in processes of knowledge sharing in organizations

16

Suggest Documents