Knowledge management

Knowledge Management of According to Dalkir, knowledge can be tactic or explicit . Tactic knowledge is mental and difficult to be noted, but it can be put into practical use through sharing so as to become an important part of an organization management. There are three generations of knowledge management to date that reflect it‘ s revolution. In the first generation, the focus was on the source of knowledge and documentation of that knowledge borrowed from individuals within an organization. These documents were then digitalized in libraries, but unfortunately they were never used and hence contributed little to organization success. The work of decision making was left to senior management only (Dalkir 2011). The second generation of knowledge management was aimed at people rather than database and documents. This is where individuals within the organization agreed on what was important to share and the type of knowledge they needed to access and this contributed to greater employee support and greater success. The third generation is the most recent and emphasizes on knowledge content where knowledge is transformed into practical use. Each of the three generations has its own focus. The first generation placed much emphasis on storage and capture of codified and explicit information. Hence the major focus was on finding and capturing information just in case it was needed in future. The second generation shifted its focus to demand side. This was demand for knowledge to solve business problems and improve the working environment of an organization. So the inherent focus was on knowledge sources as far as the community, organization and people were concerned. It therefore added several facets in the areas of communication, organizational culture collaboration and intellectual capital. The third generation of knowledge management combines both the first and second generations. It has a direct focus on semantics of knowledge and its design. It brings about change through expansion of the intellectual capital concept beyond organization’s accounting system (Dalkir 2011). Knowledge management generations have a set of predefined roles needed for information required to make effective decisions. The first generation plays a role in enabling collection of new materials by selecting materials for inclusion in database , input data, index data, retrieve , search data and also deliver the output to the last user . It also enhances the performance of data deletion of that are redundant from the database and it also checks for the system security. The second generation has its role felt in developing of important collection of subjects and this role enables easier connection of each knowledge component with a set of experts and develops an active data base for them. More so, it captures knowledge and makes it accessible to the users. The third generation trains users how to access information and gives guide to the appropriate resource by making each specific part of knowledge on topics and subjects to be of interest to the public (Snowden 2003). Knowledge management can be modeled to transform tactic knowledge into more explicit form . The most famous model existing is “ Nonaka and Takeuchi” model which explains this model. It focuses on knowledge spirals that explain the transformation of tactic knowledge to into explicit and back again. The two are comparable in that both comprise of four steps in cyclic form as follows . Socialization which entails sharing of knowledge through social interactions. This helps in gaining knwhows, persuals personal skills and secrets that could never have been shared. Secondly is externalization . In this mode individuals are able articulate the knowledge and knowhow. Thirdly, is combination which entails improving what is already there and analyze a new database. The forth is internalization which entails integration of shared individual experiences and knowledge into an entirely individual mental model. However there exist no major differences between the two models, but the only drawback is that they are borrowed from Japan and they may not set well in Western countries. On the same note, linearity of their concept is questionable as to whether it can move anticlockwise (Dalkir 2011). However , there is a close relation between Wiig and Nokana and Takeuchi model . The two are comparable in that , Wiig defines information as facts as well as data organized so as to characterize a particular situation and knowledge as a set of beliefs , perspectives , concepts and judgments which makes information to be seen as data in a more meaningful way between actions and their probable consequences. On the other hand, Nokana and Takeuchi model identifies tactics and explicit knowledge. The two are therefore related in that they seek to transform tactic knowledge into explicit knowledge for the benefit of an organization (Elias and Awad 2004). Hence all these models are synthesized into knowledge management. In conclusion, all these models and frameworks require proper strategic approach to implement them. These implementation strategies therefore be outlined into a set of strategies; Corporate strategy which is the potential to create significant value . It may involve its existing strategic position to propagate it to the next level. The other strategy is standardization and involves use of simple sharing and communication methods which enhances communication integration in an enterprise. There is also Leadership in knowledge management . which implies that leaders are the figureheads of organizations and they should possess knowledge that will positively impact on the success of their firm and as such they should be influential to their subordinates. Benchmarking and Quo is whereby theoretical knowledge, environmental knowledge and procedural knowledge are performed in an established order to effect managerial success (Elias and Awad 2004). The last strategy; Organization knowledge asset involves knowledge in the form of experience and expertise of individual and groups which must be accelerated towards knowledge management to achieve organizational goals. References Dalkir, Kimiz. Knowledge Management in Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Mit Press, 2011. Elias, Awad, and M. Awad. Knowledge Management. Delhi: Pearson Education India, 2004. Snowden, David. ” Complex Acts of Knowing.” Journal of Knowledge Management 6, no. 2 (2003): 1-33.