The missing link in information and records management: personal knowledge registration
| Pages | 79-98 |
| Published date | 19 March 2018 |
| Date | 19 March 2018 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-05-2017-0013 |
| Author | Ragna Kemp Haraldsdottir,Johanna Gunnlaugsdottir |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Information management & governance |
The missing link in information
and records management:
personal knowledge registration
Ragna Kemp Haraldsdottir and Johanna Gunnlaugsdottir
Department of Information Science, Faculty of Social and Human Sciences,
University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to present the findings of a research on collaborative personal
knowledge registration (PKR). It seeks to explain the interrelationship between records professionals and
human resource (HR) and training professionals,as well as the views of management and quality managers
on collaborative PKR. It aims to raise awareness of records professionals as specialists in information
management,including personal knowledge.
Design/methodology/approach –Qualitative methodologywas used to conduct the research. It was a
multiple-case study, covering 12 organizations in Iceland. In these organizations, 32 professionals were
interviewed. The research sought to understand how PKR was being facilitated, as well as how personal
knowledgewas made accessible and usable for employees.
Findings –The organizationshad not been as successful as anticipated in PKR. The role and responsibility
of records professionals was limited in the PKR process. Different professionals seemed unaware of the
possiblesynergy effect of collaborative PKR.
Originality/value –There is a lack of studies that explore the juxtaposition and collaboration of records
professionalsand HR and training professionals in organizations.The aim of this research was to bridge this
gap. Its originality lies in how it approaches diverse professions and their collaborative PKR effort. This
research providesa valuable practical and theoretical contribution to a rapidly growing interdisciplinaryfield
of informationand records management. It can lay the foundation for further researchinto the field.
Keywords Collaboration, Iceland, Information and records management,
Personal knowledge registration, Records professionals
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
In an organization of 200-300 employees, it is possible for people to know one another “well
enough to have a reliable grasp of collective organizational knowledge”but beyond this size, it
becomes impossible (Davenport and Prusak, 1998, pp. 17-18). But, is a reliable grasp reliable
enough?
Little is known about how information on employees’personal knowledge, and their
participation in trainingand development programs, is registered. It was, therefore, decided
to study the current status of personal knowledge registration (PKR) in Icelandic
organizations and to understand how this registration is accessed, used, and by whom.
Furthermore, it was of interest to examine how records professionals and human resource
(HR) and training professionals collaborated on PKR. Likewise, to study the role and
responsibilityof these records professionals in the registration process.
It may be argued that PKR has evolved from the disciplines of knowledge management
(KM) and human resource management (HRM) because the registration of employees’
education and training originatesin HRM theories on organizational performance, progress
Personal
knowledge
registration
79
Received8 May 2017
Revised12 July 2017
Accepted23 July 2017
RecordsManagement Journal
Vol.28 No. 1, 2018
pp. 79-98
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0956-5698
DOI 10.1108/RMJ-05-2017-0013
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0956-5698.htm
and prospects. Becker and Gerhart (1996) linked this strategic and economically significant
aspect of HRM to value creation in theircomparison of high performance work systems. In
it, training was categorized, measured and registered by the job descriptions and
responsibilitiesof different employees.Delaney and Huselid (1996, p. 949) acknowledged the
value of HRM practices, and systems of such practices, including the registration of
extensive employee training into HRM systems. Hislop (2003) wrote that KM and HRM
could be linked by focusing on human andsocial factors, such as how employees’levels of
commitment influence the overall performance of organizations. According to Saffady
(2016), KM incorporates the creation, storage, arrangement, retrieval and transfer of
organizational knowledge. He maintains that records management (RM) operations and
concepts promote KM and that “recorded information is an important embodiment of an
organization’s intellectual capital”(Saffady, 2016, p. 34). KM theories, in particular Nonaka
and Takeuchi (1995) studies on the knowledge creating company, highlighted individual
knowledge creation–and sharing –as a catalyst for organizational learning.
Many Icelandic organizations put an emphasis on knowledge sharing and conduct
elaborate training programsfor their employees. These programs are coordinated by the HR
divisions and partially taught by employees themselves. Yet, a large part of all training in
Icelandic organizations is conducted by external instructors. At times, the knowledge or
expertise needed for a program exists within the organization, without the HR or training
manager being aware of it. The first author of this paper has a long experience as a project
manager in the continuing educational sector. Her perception is that the registration of
employees’personalknowledge in Icelandic organizations is incoherent. Organizationswere
outsourcing their training needs to continuing education services, and the demand for
external instructors was high. In two organizations included in this research, the training
managers had requested specific programsfrom the continuing education service, unaware
of the fact that the instructors in charge were employees of their own organizations. These
training managers had no coherent database, intranet nor corporate social media where
employees’personalknowledge was adequately registered.
A discourse of knowledge registration or the registration of intellectual capital among
HR and training managers, the continuingeducational sector and employees themselves has
been ongoing in Iceland for a while. In it, the purposeof registration has been to gain better
use of valuable knowledge, such as for in-house training, building interdisciplinary teams
and for the employees’career development. The term personal knowledge registration and
the abbreviation PKR is a consequencethereof.
Three elements affect an individual’s inclination to share knowledge; positive attitude
toward sharing, perceived benefits of sharing and self-efficiency of knowledge sharing
(Henttonen et al., 2016). Thefourth element could be added which is the opportunity and the
platform to share.
The term personal knowledge (PK) is comparable to the information a person puts in a
curriculum vitae (CV). It can also be associated with the creation of corporate knowledge
directories (e.g. company yellow pages) and expert networks (Andreeva and Kianto, 2012).
PK covers employees’education; language, information technology, writing or mentoring
skills; participationin courses and conferences; teaching experience,former work experience
and communication skills. In PKR, these elements constitute a set of information that the
individual, in co-operationwith his/her workplace, selects and considers of collaborativeuse
while working for the organization. PKR refers to the registration process of the selected
information into a centrally based database, an intranet website or a corporate social
medium. The intention of PKR is to create an overview of accumulated knowledge
embedded in the employees(Macguire, 2005;Hase and Galt, 2011).
RMJ
28,1
80
To continue reading
Request your trial