Description
Week 2: Second-Generation KM
Introduction
The key issue covered this week is how to establish effective communication so as to ensure appropriate knowledge transactions. You must have observed that during international summits and conferences, representatives of non-English-speaking nations communicate to the audience with the help of interpreters. The success of summits, conferences, and bilateral talks has been made possible by the use of a common language. This week, you will understand the significance of a common language for effective interaction and knowledge management (KM). You will also learn how KM affects organizational learning so as to expand its capabilities and achieve desired results.
Next, you will recognize the importance of meetings, especially as peer-assist workshops, that help establish connectivity for knowledge transfer between experts and novices. Finally, you will learn more about planning for peer-assist meetings.
Learning Outcomes
By the end of this week, you will be able to:
- Describe the differences between first- and second-generation KM.
- Analyze knowledge claims’ validity and evaluate the knowledge life cycle.
Resources
-
Access Resources
Learning ResourcesPlease read and view this week’s Learning Resources before you complete the Discussion.Reading
- Course Text: Collison, C., & Parcell, G. Learning to fly: Practical knowledge management from leading and learning organizations
- Chapter 6, “Connecting Sharers with Learners—Using Self-Assessment”
Chapter 6 explains the need of a common language that enables knowledge sharing within an organization. The chapter also describes how self-assessments can help people evaluate their level of competence. By assessing yourself, you are in a better position to set appropriate benchmarks and define your priorities in the workplace.
Focus on the river diagram and stairs diagram that explain how to analyze your assessment results.
- Chapter 6, “Connecting Sharers with Learners—Using Self-Assessment”
-
- Chapter 7, “Learning from Your Peers—Somebody Has Already Done It”
Chapter 7 explains that peer-assist meetings and workshops help in sharing knowledge and developing alternative possible approaches to achieving specific targets. The chapter also presents, in detail, 12 steps that help in planning a peer-assist workshop. In addition, the chapter discusses the type of people who should be grouped together for a successful peer-assist meeting.
Focus on the summary and the various case studies pertaining to peer-assist meetings so as to understand their importance.
- Chapter 7, “Learning from Your Peers—Somebody Has Already Done It”
- Articles
-
- McElroy, M. (2002). The new knowledge management—C omplexity, learning, and sustainable innovation. (Excerpt). Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2002. Click here to download the article (PDF format)
This article familiarizes you with first- and second-generation KM. The article suggests that unlike first-generation KM, which was technology driven, second-generation KM is more inclusive of people, processes, and social initiatives. The article also provides a description of the life cycle of KM and elaborates on the basic differences between first- and second-generation KM.
- McElroy, M. (2001, October). Second-generation knowledge management. Presentation at KMWorld 2001 Conference and Exposition, Santa Clara, CA. Click here to download the article (PDF format)
This article provides an industry-standard reference model of KM and explains the critical differences between information management and KM. In addition, some examples of common KM initiatives are cited.
- McElroy, M. (2002). The new knowledge management—C omplexity, learning, and sustainable innovation. (Excerpt). Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2002. Click here to download the article (PDF format)
1. Discussion – Week 2
- Course Text: Collison, C., & Parcell, G. Learning to fly: Practical knowledge management from leading and learning organizations
- 2. Week 2 Assignment
Welcome to the Week 2 Application Area!Post your responses to the Application based on the course requirements.Once you have completed the Application, you have completed Week 2. The course now shifts its focus to the discussion of human resources and KM. Please proceed to Week 3.
Beginning Development on a Self-Assessment Framework
In Chapter 6, you examined the essential role of building a self-assessment framework. For this week’s Application Assignment, you will evaluate an organization that you are familiar with in regards to operations.
In your response, you should begin by identifying a minimum of five common operational practices that your organization has instituted. Then, select one practice and develop a level of competency between 1 and 5 with two variables.
In your course textbook, the section “Building a Self-Assessment Framework” (pp. 78-79) provides a guide for completing this activity.
As McElroy (2002) points out, within the KM field one of the most underrated KM functions is that known
as validation. Validation simply means that workers in an organization not only use knowledge to perform
their job function but also need to be constantly evaluating whether the knowledge-in-use is effective at
achieving its intended purpose. This is important because knowledge usually is not the same as truth.
When something is always true, it becomes a valid knowledge claim. For example, one might claim that
whenever a baseball is hit into the air it inevitably falls back to earth. Because this happens 100% of the
time, we say that this claim is true and valid. For something to be true, it must work 100% of the time.
For something to be valid, it must work in achieving the intended goal as often as necessary for you to
feel that it is consistent and reliable. Thus, a particular knowledge claim may work 96% of the time and
not be completely true but also be valid. Now the most important point: in organizations, the vast majority
of knowledge claims relating to management and business strategy are not true, they are merely
knowledge claims.
Knowledge claims can fall into several categories including:
1. Validated knowledge claims that have been proven to reliable produce the desired outcome.
2. Unvalidated knowledge claims are those that have not yet been sufficiently tested to arrive at an
opinion.
3. Invalidated knowledge claims are those that have been proven to be false or invalid.
4. Inactive knowledge claims are those that have not yet been the subject of evaluation.
Knowledge claims can be evaluated in several different ways:
1. Face Validity – Do they appear through observation to have sufficient merit to give reason to
believe that they will work effectively to produce the desired outcome reliably well?
2. Performance Validity – Experience has demonstrated that the claim, when used, reliably yields
the desired outcome effectively. This is a much more powerful test of the validity of a knowledge
claim than is face validity.
3. Parallel Validity – Although the claim in question has not yet been proven or disproven to be
effective, a claim or series of claims that are essentially similar have been validated as being
effective.
When you are conducting your own knowledge claim evaluations, you will be operating mainly within the
realm of face validity, as you most likely will not have any performance data available to help support,
corroborate, or invalidate the claims.
Organizational Learning
The concept of organizational learning is an idea that grew out of the writings, during the 1970s, of
scholars at MIT, Harvard, and Carnegie-Mellon, including Chris Argyris, Donald Schon, James March,
and Herbert Simon. More recently, writers such as Peter Senge and Reg Revans have helped to
popularize this field. A basic premise of this discipline is the notion of collective, or shared learning, and
action learning.
Action learning occurs when people consciously seek to improve their ability to learn from experience.
Although many people learn from experience, some learn much more from the same experience than
other people. Action learning involves four important steps: action, reflection, conceptualization, and
experimentation, which are linked in a cycle.
If employees do not complete all steps in this cycle, they are likely to be hindered in their learning efforts.
While only individuals can learn from experience, groups, teams, and organizations (collectives) can
share common lessons learned that they rely upon for making judgments and decisions. One theory of
organizational learning holds that organizations often fail because they continue to repeat the same
mistakes over, as they have not learned the proper lessons from past experience. According to this view,
organizational performance can be improved by increasing the capacity of the individuals and teams in
the organization to learn richer, more valid lessons from experience through organizational learning.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
