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

Stefanie Dannemann
In modern economy, <strong>the</strong> biggest competitive advantage organization can hold is <strong>the</strong> knowledge <strong>the</strong>ir
employees generate and share, and <strong>the</strong> resulting potential for innovation and creativity. Knowledge
itself is seen as a dynamic and powerful asset with a static element that needs to be identified face-t<strong>of</strong>ace
and channeled through available tools. Generally, <strong>the</strong>re is no need to use <strong>the</strong> newest technology
in knowledge sharing, if <strong>the</strong> identified channel is properly used. Reinhild Bode (2006) concludes in a
case analysis that “<strong>the</strong> verb “knowing” is much more likely to express <strong>the</strong>se characteristics; …due to
its tacit dimension, knowledge is context and person specific and needs to be shared in order to
become (at least partially) explicit and useful for o<strong>the</strong>rs; …creating knowledge means learning and
hence inducing change, which is not free <strong>of</strong> interests and independent <strong>of</strong> power relations; …thus,
solving <strong>the</strong> problem <strong>of</strong> managing knowledge by a pure technological approach is only <strong>the</strong> tip <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>
iceberg; …as it is more likely to be a socio-organizational and cultural issue, approaches to
organizational communication and learning are required”.
Face-to-face knowledge exchange gives one <strong>the</strong> opportunity to put one’s point across while being
able to react to <strong>the</strong> feedback from <strong>the</strong> audience, to reinforce <strong>the</strong> team spirit, to capture attention, and
to inspire a positive climate to catalyze collaboration, innovation and performance. In <strong>the</strong> end, after all,
one need not depend on information systems to do this. A communication approach that is
independent <strong>of</strong> any IT platform most likely leads to a workplace which is open to sharing knowledge. It
supports in its core a culture <strong>of</strong> collegiality and teamwork. By practicing open knowledge sharing, staff
become champions <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> practice internally in <strong>the</strong> organization. In <strong>the</strong> end, this will positively impact
acceptance <strong>of</strong> any IT platforms intended to exchange information, should <strong>the</strong> company decide to
implement <strong>the</strong>m. Many KM IT platforms fail because <strong>of</strong> resistance by staff and inflexible organizational
processes. As in any launch <strong>of</strong> an IT platform, user acceptance and system promotion can become a
bigger challenge to a KM platform than <strong>the</strong> effort that had been put into its development. Successful
companies can be flexible and great business innovators because <strong>of</strong> both: having a great mechanism
for knowledge exchange and fostering collaboration, and using good tools for knowledge exchange
and business practice
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Tina Purnat, Cristian Avram and Olivia Carstocea for <strong>the</strong>ir encouragement,
guidance and support.
References
Addicott, R., McGivern, G., and Ferlie, E. (2006) ‘Networks, Organizational Learning and Knowledge
Management: NHS Cancer Networks’, Public Money & Management, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 87–94.
Bode, R. (2006) ‘Knowledge Management, Learning and Communication in Value Chains: A Case
Analysis <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> specialty c<strong>of</strong>fee Value Chain <strong>of</strong> FAPECAFES, Ecuador. (Final Report)’, GTZ-
CIAT-BMZ.
Brown Bag Seminars, [Online], Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_bag_seminars [May 20, 2011]
Dalton, B. (2009) Brown Bag Lunch Strategy, [Online], Available: http://www.slideshare.net/Loggy/brownbag-lunch-strategy
[June 03, 2011]
Davenport, T. (2008) Enterprise 2.0: The New, New Knowledge Management, [Online], Available:
http://blogs.hbr.org/davenport/2008/02/enterprise_20_<strong>the</strong>_new_new_know_1.html [June 03, 2011]
Izuzi, M. (2007) Storytelling and KM, [Online], Available: http://www.kmtalk.net/blog/?p=32 [May 18,
2011]
Knowledge Management, [Online], Available:
http://www.google.com/search?q=definition+<strong>of</strong>+knowledge+managemet#sclient=psy&q=are+<strong>the</strong>r
e+good+definitions+<strong>of</strong>+knowledge+management [May 18, 2011]
Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1996) ‘What Firms Do? Coordination, Identity, and Learning’, Organization Science,
vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 502-523.
Lakhani, K. and McAfee, R. (2007) Case study on deleting "Enterprise 2.0" article, Harvard Business
School: Courseware #9-607-712.
McAfee, A. (2006) ‘Enterprise 2.0: The Dawn <strong>of</strong> Emergent Collaboration’, Sloan Management
Review, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 21–28.
Nonaka, I. and Hedlund, G. (1993) ‘Models <strong>of</strong> Knowledge Management in <strong>the</strong> West and Japan’, in Lorange, B.,
Chakravarthy, B., Roos, J. and Van de Ven, H. (Eds) Implementing Strategic Process, Change, Learning
and Cooperation, London: Macmillan.
Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995) The Knowledge Creating Company: How Japanese companies create <strong>the</strong>
dynamics <strong>of</strong> innovation, New York: Oxford University Press.
1106