Knowledge Management — a case of managing knowledge or organisational learning?
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb040767 |
| Pages | 3-4 |
| Published date | 01 April 2000 |
| Date | 01 April 2000 |
| Author | ChristineDILS Urquhart |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management |
Knowledge
Management -
a case of managing
knowledge or
organisational
learning?
by Christine Urquhart, DILS, University
of Wales Aberystwyth
As one of the contributors (Beastall) to this issue
of VINE admits, the debate about the meaning and
the enactment of knowledge management has been
going on for some time. When invited to write the
overview one of my aims was to avoid adding to
this debate, however tempting that might be. The
focus will instead be on the 'working definitions'
as considered by Birks, and to study how different
LIS sectors are putting knowledge management,
however defined, into practice.
A 'deconstruction' of knowledge management1
distinguishes between 'personal' knowledge, an
environment which encourages staff
to
learn and
share knowledge and the exploitation of company
'intelligence'. Those who claim to act as 'knowl-
edge officers' are likely to be supporting the
'learning environment' or in charge of ensuring
that the intelligence is used creatively and to a
specific purpose, in furthering the aims and objec-
tives of the organisation. Birks describes how
software tools and C&IT can be used by organisa-
tions to support a learning environment. Such
technologies concern both the communication and
collaboration tools - conferencing, computer
supported collaborative working, and also the
workflow technology. Some of these technologies
have almost contradictory aims2 as the 'bright
idea' enthusiasts are likely to welcome the collabo-
ration and chat rooms, whereas the underlying
intention of much of the document management
and workflow technology is to do with improving
the process, a push mechanism rather rather than
the pull of the collaborative working and project
work spaces.
Organisational learning is not the easy process
suggested by some management consultants.
Like much individual learning, some honesty
over mistakes made is necessary to progress.
Organisations which make a virtue of being
'knowledgeable' and where specialist knowledge
is a source of individual and group power, are
unlikely to be successful learning organisations.
As Ratcliffe-Martin et al. argue, universities often
are not 'knowledge sharing' organisations despite
being by most common definitions learning
organisations. Leeds University may be an
exception to this, and the authors go on to describe
how the Virtual Science Park at Leeds is a knowl-
edge management tool aimed at fostering
collaboration between different groups of research-
ers.
The teaching application provides a means of
'collaborative working' for students and their
tutors.
The success of such knowledge manage-
ment tools remains to be seen, and will be judged
on whether such tools genuinely help to break
down barriers, or whether they remain as sophisti-
cated tools for sharing information, rather than
knowledge.
Several articles in this issue discuss knowledge
management in the health sector. Booth sets out
the problems when knowledge is not managed
properly, and argues that the high profile cases that
have hit the press recently are examples of 'knowl-
edge deficiency' symptoms. The Health Service
Ombudsman points out, monotonously, every year,
that the cases considered often reflect a lack of
communication, rather than malpractice per se. It
is difficult for health professionals to keep up to
date and know how to interpret the latest research,
and, until the development of the Cochrane Col-
laboration, practitioners could be excused from a
lack of knowledge of
the
proper evidence for the
effectiveness of any treatment. That is less easy
now. The Cochrane Collaboration co-ordinates the
synthesis of
the
research evidence in many special-
ist areas and publishes a series of databases.
Associated with these 'evidence based resources'
comes a whole raft of new tasks and responsibili-
ties for the health librarian - a new set of
knowledge roles. Encouraging health profession-
als to incorporate such evidence in their daily
routines is a more important role than ever. White
describes how her role has changed from part-time
management of a very minimal library to a service
which is now heavily dependent on electronic
resources, ensuring that the 'Information Profiles'
of her core users are kept up to date. Her role is
far more pro-active than would have been expected
VINE 121 —
3
To continue reading
Request your trial