Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Knowledge ...

Kaj Suneson and Ilona Heldal
In this study we can see that many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> findings and identified knowledge barriers can also be
described in terms and concepts from NDM.
Technological knowledge barriers in this study show a link to situation awareness in <strong>the</strong> concerns
about complex interfaces detracting from <strong>the</strong> rescue task. There is also lack <strong>of</strong> mental models
containing <strong>the</strong> new ICT system and this is noticed in <strong>the</strong> problem <strong>of</strong> stating requirements related to
how to set up <strong>the</strong> systems' performance.
The study highlights organizational knowledge barriers with clear connections to sensemaking and
mental models, in <strong>the</strong> inability to present clear-cut requirements in <strong>the</strong> set-up. This is partly due to a
lack <strong>of</strong> technological knowledge <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> system but also to not being able to foresee how <strong>the</strong> use will
affect work processes. These connections also became obvious when <strong>the</strong> respondents discussed
how to maintain <strong>the</strong> competence <strong>of</strong> infrequent users. The competence is to have mental models and
sensemaking processes that take <strong>the</strong> new and more complex ICT system into consideration.
The study also highlights <strong>the</strong> fact that different levels within an organization might be affected in
different ways by <strong>the</strong> new system. A picture might improve situation awareness and facilitate
sensemaking on one level (Management) but could be a disruptive element on ano<strong>the</strong>r level
(Operational fire-fighter).
Financial questions were discussed extensively during <strong>the</strong> study but it was difficult to obtain a clear
picture. This is a sign <strong>of</strong> a financial knowledge barrier. Many <strong>of</strong> those interviewed agreed that <strong>the</strong> new
ICT system could improve efficiency in operations and that <strong>the</strong>re was an overall gain but few <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m
could state how this gain would benefit <strong>the</strong> respondents' own organization or how/what new resources
would be needed by using <strong>the</strong> new system. In many cases <strong>the</strong> introduction has led to demand for
unplanned and unfinanced resources.
Behavioural barriers have a link to situation awareness in this study. Fear <strong>of</strong> having to switch <strong>the</strong>
focus from <strong>the</strong> central task to <strong>the</strong> equipment could harm situation awareness to such degree that task
performance might be impaired or personal safety put at risk.
Inter-organizational knowledge barriers in this study have clear links to mental models and
sensemaking processes. The PSAs are governed by different regulations and have different goals.
There were obvious problems in setting up co-operation routines due to <strong>the</strong> different mental models
and sensemaking processes. These were not well known to all <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> parties and consequently each
party could not know and adjust to <strong>the</strong> needs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>rs.
Identifying and breaking down knowledge barriers into components, such as concepts from NDM, is
beneficial in examining <strong>the</strong> whole launch process, since more fine-tuned understanding <strong>of</strong> problems
can be achieved and directed. By using concepts such as sensemaking, situational awareness or
describing <strong>the</strong> mental models for system usage, certain basic obstacles can be described better for
both users and influencers. Although informative and useful to combine <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>oretical frameworks in
this study can future research reveal clearer connections between knowledge barriers and NDM
concepts which will help to understand and lowering knowledge barriers.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Vinnova (The Swedish Governmental Agency for Innovation Systems) for
funding this research and we would also like to thank all <strong>the</strong> interviewees and our colleagues Gustav
Sjöblom, Bo Norrhem and Erik Bohlin for <strong>the</strong>ir input.
References
Attewell, P. (1992) “Technology diffusion and organizational learning: The case <strong>of</strong> business computing”,
Organization Science, Vol 3, No. 1, pp. 1–19.
Berlin, J. and Carlström, E. (2009) Samverkan på olycksplatsen. Om organisatoriska barriäreffekten,
[Cooperation on accident places. Organizational barriers] Högskolan Väst, Trollhättan.
Bohlin, E., Lindmark, S., Forge, S. and Blackman, C. (2005). “Implications <strong>of</strong> Alternative Wireless Technologies
for Europe and Policy Recommendations”, Report IPTS, Luxembourg.
Burns, K., (2005) Mental Models and Normal Errors. In: Montgomery, H., Raanan, L. and Berndt B, ed. How
pr<strong>of</strong>essionals make decisions. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc,. Ch. 2.
Endsley, M.R. (1995) “Toward a Theory <strong>of</strong> Situation Awareness in Dynamic Systems”, Human Factors
Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 32-64.
974