23.12.2012 Views

Preface for the Third Edition - Read

Preface for the Third Edition - Read

Preface for the Third Edition - Read

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

492 C. State of Practice<br />

Groupware and KMS, were seen as organization-wide plat<strong>for</strong>ms <strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong> quick and<br />

easy exchange of knowledge whereas in industry organizations <strong>the</strong>se plat<strong>for</strong>ms<br />

remained reserved <strong>for</strong> a much smaller portion of <strong>the</strong> employees.<br />

13.1.2 Structural organization<br />

The design of <strong>the</strong> structural organization of KM ef<strong>for</strong>ts varies greatly in practice.<br />

Indicators are <strong>the</strong> organizational positioning of <strong>the</strong> KM ef<strong>for</strong>t (level of reporting of<br />

<strong>the</strong> head of KM), <strong>the</strong> organizational design of <strong>the</strong> KM initiative or of a separate<br />

KM unit as well as <strong>the</strong> overall size of <strong>the</strong> ef<strong>for</strong>t in terms of <strong>the</strong> number of employees<br />

and <strong>the</strong> budget allocated <strong>for</strong> KM 37 .<br />

The design alternatives range from an in<strong>for</strong>mal initiative with no separate organizational<br />

unit or project over a temporary installation of KM as a project to a<br />

fixed, <strong>for</strong>mal installation in <strong>the</strong> organizational hierarchy ei<strong>the</strong>r as a service unit or<br />

as a functional unit. Thus, an ordinal variable has been defined that describes a<br />

range of design alternatives <strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong> structural organization of <strong>the</strong> KM function<br />

which ranges from a <strong>for</strong>mal, lasting approach to an in<strong>for</strong>mal, temporary approach:<br />

1. separate organizational unit (<strong>for</strong>mal, lasting),<br />

2. project (<strong>for</strong>mal, temporary),<br />

3. no separate organizational unit (in<strong>for</strong>mal).<br />

In <strong>the</strong> case of “no separate organizational unit”, KM initiatives were per<strong>for</strong>med<br />

ei<strong>the</strong>r by committees with a budget coming from each member of <strong>the</strong> committee<br />

and senior management support, or by entirely in<strong>for</strong>mal initiatives not supported<br />

by <strong>for</strong>mal authorities.<br />

Figure C-7 shows what kind of organizational design <strong>the</strong> organizations applied<br />

<strong>for</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir KM initiatives.<br />

as functional unit<br />

as service unit<br />

as project<br />

no separate organizational unit<br />

do not know<br />

FIGURE C-7. Organizational design of <strong>the</strong> KM function 38<br />

Almost three quarters of <strong>the</strong> organizations (70.4%) had established <strong>the</strong> KM<br />

function ei<strong>the</strong>r as a project (12 out of 26 organizations responding to this question,<br />

46.2%) or in<strong>for</strong>mally with no separate organizational unit (7 organizations,<br />

37. See section 15.1 - “Funding” on page 564.<br />

38. n=26.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!