Download (1157Kb) - E-Ait

Goldsmith and colleagues in “Global leadership” condemn individualistic leadership and
suggest that this kind of leadership is not viable for the success of knowledge sharing.
According to them unlike individualistic leaders today, successful leaders in the future will
strive for integration, not control. They suggest that the singular role will give rise to the
internal network of influence which alters the very foundation of an organisation. They stress
the importance for leaders to develop the social architecture that encourages bright, confident
people to work together successfully and exercise their own creativity. They will need the
capacity for personal leadership, stemming from a deep self awareness that develops from the
inside out rather than outside in. They conclude that dealing with knowledge workers, people
who know more about what they are doing than their managers knows, the old model of
leadership will not work and that future leaders will operate in a mode of asking for input and
sharing information (Goldsmith et al., 2003).
2.4.3. Technological Factors.
Information technology (IT) has blossomed simultaneously with knowledge being recognized
as the most valuable asset of the firm. The rise of distributed technology like intranets and
Lotus Notes has had major implications for knowledge managers - and not all of these
implications are positive. On the one hand, IT has reduced costs and accelerated the process
of transferring best practices and knowledge. On the other hand, in many cases IT has created
a flood of knowledge that has seriously overloaded the capacity of employees to understand
their environment (O‟Dell & Grayson, 1999).
While many people would think that IT facilities are only what they need to facilitate
knowledge sharing, they forget the danger of not balancing IT facilities to the amount of
information needed. According to Elliot and O‟ Dell, IT availability doesn‟t guarantee the
enthusiastic participation of employees in collecting and sharing knowledge. They suggest
one of two obstacles may prevail. They see the problem of employees sharing little
information or alternatively flooding the system with information. According to them,
technology cannot drive the sharing of competitive intelligence information, nor can it sort
relevant information and insist that the role of human factor is necessary to mediate (Elliot &
O‟Dell, 1999).
24