Skip to main content
Log in

Towards a technological, organizational, and socio-technical well-balanced KM initiative strategy: a pragmatic approach to knowledge management

  • Article
  • Published:
Knowledge Management Research & Practice

Abstract

In this article, we follow a pragmatic approach of knowledge management (KM) that is deeply rooted in our experience within a large industrial company. Besides, referring to the concept of ‘commensurability of individuals' interpretative frameworks’, we argue that knowledge is not manageable as if it was data or information. That induces us to review the hierarchical view of ‘data, information, and knowledge’, and to propose a model (DITEK) that attempts to describe the transformation process from data to information and from information to tacit and explicit knowledge. Furthermore, we set forth three postulates that change the technological approach of KM, and we suggest a pragmatic definition of KM. This pragmatic vision is supported by our Model for General Knowledge Management within the Enterprise described in the article. It assists in conceiving a technological, organizational, and socio-technical well-balanced KM initiatives strategy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alavi M and Leidner DE (2001) Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly 25 (1), 107–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amin A and Cohendet P (2004) Architectures of Knowledge, Firms, Capabilities, and Communities. Oxford University Press Inc, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Argyris C and Schön DA (1996) Organizational Learning II, Theory, Method, and Practice. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baek S, Liebowitz J, Prasad SY and Granger M (1999) Intelligent agents for knowledge management, toward intelligent web-based collaboration within virtual teams. In Knowledge Management Handbook (Liebowitz J, Ed), Section IV, pp 11-1–11-23, CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker G (1999) Knowledge discovery. In Knowledge Management Handbook (Liebowitz J, Ed), Section IV, pp 13-1–13-27, CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bontis N, Dragonnetti N, Jacobsen K and Roos G (1999) The knowledge toolbox: a review of the tools available to measure and manage intangible resources. European Management Journal 17 (4), 391–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CEN-4 (2004) Guidelines for measuring KM. In European Guide to Good Practice in Knowledge Management (Part 4). Brussels: CEN, CWA 14924-4: 2004 (E). [WWW document] ftp://cenftp1.cenorm.be/PUBLIC/CWAs/e-Europe/KM/CWA14924-04-2004-Mar.pdf (accessed 19 June 2004).

  • CEN-CWA 14924-1 (2004) Knowledge management framework. In European Guide to Good Practice in Knowledge Management (Part 1). Brussels: CEN, CWA 14924-1:2004 (E). ftp://cenftp1.cenorm.be/PUBLIC/CWAs/e-Europe/KM/CWA14924-01-2004-Mar.pdf (accessed 19 June 2004).

  • Chua BB and Brennan J (2004) Enhancing collaborative knowledge management systems design. In Proceedings 5th European Conference on Knowledge Management (Remenyi D, Ed), pp 171–178, Academic Conferences Limited, Reading, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coakes E (2002) Knowledge management: a socio-technical perspective. In Knowledge Management in the Sociotechnical World (Cokes E, Willis D and Clarke S, Eds), Chapter 2, pp 4–14, Springer-Verlag, London.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen D and Prusak L (2001) In Good Company: How Social Capital Makes Organizations Work. Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport TH and Prusak L (1998) Working Knowledge. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deming WE (1992) Out of the Crisis. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grundstein M (1996) CORPUS, an approach to capitalizing on company knowledge. In Artificial Intelligence in Economics and Management (Ein-Dor P, Ed), pp 139–152, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Grundstein M (2000) From capitalizing on company's knowledge to knowledge management. In Knowledge Management, Classic and Contemporary Works (Morey D, Maybury M and Thuraisingham B, Eds), Chapter 12, pp 261–287, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grundstein M (2005) MGKME: a model for general knowledge management within the enterprise. In 2nd International Conference on Intellectual Capital, Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning, ICICKM05 Proceedings American University in Dubai, UAE, pp. 201–211, Academic Conferences Limited, Reading, UK.

  • Grundstein M (2007) Knowledge workers as an integral component in global information system design. In Information Resources Management: Global Challenges (Law WK, Ed), pp 236–261, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Grundstein M (2008) Assessing the enterprise's knowledge management maturity level. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning 4 (5), 415–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grundstein M (2011) Establishing an ad hoc infrastructure for innovative technologies deployment: the case of knowledge-based systems. In The IUP Journal of Infrastructure (Murthy EN, Ed), Vol. IX, No. 2, pp 7–20, IUP Publications, Andhra Pradesh, India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grundstein M and Rosenthal-Sabroux C (2003) Three types of data for extended company's employees: a knowledge management viewpoint. In Information Technology and Organizations: Trends, Issues, Challenges and Solutions, 2003 IRMA Proceedings (Khosrow-Pour M, Ed), pp979–983, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grundstein M and Rosenthal-Sabroux C (2004) GAMETH®, a decision support approach to identify and locate potential crucial knowledge. In Proceedings 5th European Conference on Knowledge Management (Remenyi D, Ed), pp 391–402, Academic Conferences Limited, Reading, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta JD and Sharma SK (2004) Creating Knowledge Based Organizations. Idea Group, Hershey, PA.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Haeckel SH (2000) Managing knowledge in adaptive enterprises. In Knowledge Horizons: The Present and the Promise of Knowledge Management (Despres C and Chauvel D, Eds), pp 287–305, Butterworth-Heinemann, Woburn, MA.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Huntington D (1999) Knowledge-based systems: a look at rule-based systems. In Knowledge Management Handbook (Liebowitz J, Ed), Section IV, pp 14-1–14-16, CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones NA, Ross H, Lynam T, Perez P and Leitch A (2011) Mental models: an interdisciplinary synthesis of theory and methods. Ecology and Society 16 (1), 46. [WWW document] http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art46/.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kautz K and Kjaergaard A (2008) Knowledge sharing in software development. In Software Processes & Knowledge. Beyond Conventional Software Process Improvement (Nielsen PA and Kautz K, Eds), pp 43–68, Software Innovation Publisher, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laudon KC and Laudon JP (2006) Management Information Systems; Managing the Digital Firm, 9th edn, Pearson Education, Inc, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin J (1995) The Great Transition. Using the Seven Disciplines of Enterprise Engineering to Align People, Technology, and Strategy. AMACOM, a division of American Management Association, New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore CR (1999) Performance measures for knowledge management. In Knowledge Management Handbook (Liebowitz J, Ed), pp 6.1–6.29, CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morey D, Maybury M and Thuraisingham B (2000) Knowledge Management, Classic and Contemporary Works. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller H and Maasdorp C (2011) The data, information, and knowledge hierarchy and its ability to convince. Fifth International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science, Gosier, Guadeloupe, France, RCIS Proceeding.

  • Nelson RR and Winter SG (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka I and Peltokorpi V (2007) Tacit knowledge: a source of innovation. In 15 years of Knowledge Management, Advances in Knowledge Management (Schreinemakers JF and Van Engers TM, Eds), Vol. 3, pp 68–82, ERGON Verlag, Wûrsberg, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka I and Takeuchi H (1995) The Knowledge Creating Company. Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka I and Konno N (1998) The concept of ‘ba’: building a foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review 40 (3), 40–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka I, Toyama R and Konno N (2000) SECI, ba and leadership: a unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long Range Planning 33 (1), 5–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi M (1966) The Tacit Dimension. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi M (1967) Sense-giving and sense-reading. The Journal of Royal Institute of Philosophy XLII (162), 301–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter D, Bennet A, Turner R and Wennergren D (2002) The Power of Team: The Making of a CIO. SECNAV DON CIO, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter ME (1985) Competitive Advantage: Creating and Substaining Superior Performance. The Free Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raman M, Ryan T and Olfam L (2006) Knowledge management systems for emergency preparedness: the Claremont University consortium experience. International Journal of Knowledge Management 2 (3), 33–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowley J (2007) The wisdom hierarchy: representations of the DIKW hierarchy. Journal of Information Science 33 (2), 163–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreiber A Th, Akkermans JM, Anjewierden AA, de Hoog R, Shadbolt NR, Van de Velde W and Wielinga BJ (2000) Knowledge Engineering and Management. The CommonKADS Methodology. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sena JA and Shani AB (1999) Intellectual capital and knowledge creation: towards an alternative framework. In Knowledge Management Handbook (Liebowitz J, Ed), Chapter 6, pp 6.1–6.29, CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snowden D (2000) The social ecology of knowledge management. In Knowledge Horizons: The Present and the Promise of Knowledge Management (Despres C and Chauvel D, Eds), pp 237–365, Butterworth-Heinemann, Woburn, MA.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart A (2001) The conversing company, its culture, power and potential. [WWW document] http://www.knowledgeboard.com/download/3343/conversing-company.pdf, June 2004.

  • Sylla S (2007) Etude d’instanciation du MGKME au cas présenté dans l’ouvrage ‘The Power of Team: The Making of a CIO’. Unpublished Master 2 MODO dissertation, Université Paris Dauphine, Paris, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tonchia S and Tramontano A (2004) Process Management for the Extended Enterprise. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tsuchiya S (1993) Improving knowledge creation ability through organizational learning. ISMICK’93 Proceedings, International Symposium on the Management of Industrial and Corporate Knowledge, UTC, Compiègne, France.

  • Watzlawick P, Weakland J and Fisch R (1975) Changements: paradoxes et psychothérapie. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wensley AKP and Verwijk-O’Sullivan A (2000) Tools for knowledge management. In Knowledge Horizons: The Present and the Promise of Knowledge Management (Despres C and Chauvel D, Eds), pp 113–130, Butterworth-Heinemann, Woburn, MA.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wiig K (2004) People-focused Knowledge Management: How Effective Decision Making Leads to Corporate Success. Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Burlington, MA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michel Grundstein.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Grundstein, M. Towards a technological, organizational, and socio-technical well-balanced KM initiative strategy: a pragmatic approach to knowledge management. Knowl Manage Res Pract 11, 41–52 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2012.43

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2012.43

Keywords

Navigation