Ebook Knowledge leadership: The art and science of the knowledge-based organization – Part 2

Part IV Developing Pragmatic Knowledge Putting Action into Knowledge Executive Summary The field of KM has evolved with an emphasis on storing knowledge so that it can be reused at another place and time The conventional wisdom holds that in order to store or move knowledge, it needs to be reduced to its basic, atomistic elements The difficulty is that when knowledge is “atomized,” we wind up with a very different sense of what is known Moreover, this knowledge is not directly tied to action Although the information-centric view of knowledge is attractive for organizations because it is simple and easy to use, it does not assure performance improvements nor is it very useful for solving complex problems This chapter discusses how to “put action into knowledge” to create pragmatic knowledge Pragmatic knowledge is high-quality, situation-specific knowledge that helps us understand what works, why it works, how often, and under what circumstances It reveals relationships that leaders would otherwise not easily recognize Although pragmatic knowledge is generally less manageable than “atomized” knowledge, it provides the basis for continuous improvement Acts of knowing are a prerequisite to creating many kinds of knowledge that may prove to be useful at some point in the future Seven acts of knowing are discussed in this chapter Organizational knowledge is built on a shared understanding of which acts of knowing are potentially useful to improve performance Every time you take an action to achieve a goal, you gain new knowledge If your actions are successful in helping you reach your goal, you learn from that experience about what works well in prac- 157 158 Developing Pragmatic Knowledge tice If you are unsuccessful, you also learn from that experience— this time about what does not work well in practice This chapter describes how you can put action into knowledge to create highquality, pragmatic knowledge Pragmatic knowledge is situationspecific knowledge that can help you understand what works, why it works, how often, and under what circumstances, thereby providing you with new understandings and revealing relationships that you might otherwise not have recognized Examining Knowledge in a Practical Light Since the advent of KM, knowledge has progressively been defined in ways that are either academic or operational In this book, we will avoid academic definitions because they offer little potential for adding insight to the questions we pose On the other hand, KM’s operational definition of knowledge appears to have more practical relevance to business managers In fact, the field of KM has evolved with an emphasis on the importance of sharing, storing, leveraging, and cataloging knowledge so it can be reused at another place and time To achieve the necessary universality, mobility, and storability of knowledge for use in KM systems, knowledge needs to be reduced to its basic, atomistic elements, in much the same way as ultra-small pieces of physical matter are defined in quantum physics We will look to the atom, the building block of life, as an instructive metaphor for understanding the difference between information and knowledge (If you are a chemist or physicist, please forgive the technical liberties we have taken in this illustration.) Because information by itself is neutral, it can be compared to the zero-charged neutron in the atom’s center (nucleus) Knowledge enhances the nucleus of information by adding the context (the positively charged proton in the atom’s nucleus) and meaning (the outer moving/ changing part of the atom, the electron) to create a “knowledge atom.” In this metaphor, the data that make up information could be compared to the subatomic particles that compose the neutrally charged neutron of information The following example illustrates how data can contribute to information, and possibly point to knowledge Data: Market research data show that ACME Corporation’s market share was 12% during 2003 Context: Analysis reveals that ACME’s market share dropped by 2% in the first two quarters of 2004, while its closest competitor, Cajun Corporation, gained 3% Putting Action into Knowledge 159 Meaning: One possible conclusion that could be gained from combining these facts is that ACME is losing market share to Cajun However, this is only one of many possible conclusions, or meanings, that could be ascribed to the information The realization that ACME has lost ground during the past quarter may be useful information to ACME’s managers Or this information could be entirely meaningless because it does not include contextual variables that may be important for interpretation Our point is not to debunk the value of information Rather we want to emphasize that it is important not to confuse information with knowledge The information just presented is not knowledge because it did not originate in, nor is it directly tied to, action Clearly, it is better to make decisions on information plus reason, rather than on reason alone Information can be used to lead to knowledge Information can highlight potential relationships that can be explored, tested through action, and then used to form the basis for new knowledge Decisions that are based on this kind of tested through-action knowledge will be most likely to produce the goals desired However, it is also important to remember that because almost all knowledge is incomplete, it is not 100% reliable Therefore knowledge is not the same as truth Within the field of KM, the prevailing thought is that knowledge can be managed when it is atomized, and there is general acceptance of the following three principles: Data are statements of fact, measures of activity Information is data plus context Knowledge is information that is given meaning by circumstance The KM model places information at the heart of knowledge The information-centric view of knowledge is attractive for organizations because it is simple and easy to use Simplicity and ease of use are good things, but they not assure performance improvements Information has many characteristics that make it ideal for being managed, yet simultaneously it has significant limitations that may make it unsuitable for applications to knowledge-based activities To say that information is at the center of knowledge is to trivialize the role of knowledge in solving complex problems It is like saying that the quality of the paints used by Monet is at the core of his masterpieces or that effective use of color will reliably produce high-quality art Through the work of impressionist painters like 160 Developing Pragmatic Knowledge Monet, painting shifted from being an objective duplication of reality to a highly subjective and personalized interpretation of a given subject matter While the art of painting can be reduced to simple technical considerations, such as drawing, composition, style, color, and texture, it can also be much more than that Painting—like knowledge leadership—involves perception and interpretation When leaders sift through large amounts of information, they act much like artists who deliberately draw attention to certain aspects of the viewing field at the exclusion of other aspects We are not saying that managers need to be the equivalent of impressionistic artists, or that it is insufficient to be technically competent in one’s work The point we wish to make is that every way we define and operationalize knowledge has both advantages and limitations Atomizing knowledge, as is customary in most KM systems, severely limits the possible effective applications of this knowledge It is a bit like focusing only on the beautifully colored dots in an impressionist painting and never stepping back to see the meaning that is contained in the whole picture The greatest mistake that aspiring knowledge leaders can make is to apply this narrow and specific type of knowledge to complex circumstances While the KM approach is simple to learn and master, it is not effective in solving complex problems or serving as the basis of innovation The major overlooked risk of the atomized information approach is that this information is ungrounded, not directly connected to action, does not include a validation process, lacks context, and neglects critical elements that define relevant circumstances Consequently, there is a much higher probability that leaders who rely on it will reach seriously wrong conclusions Pragmatic knowledge addresses many of these limitations Much of this chapter will be devoted to explaining pragmatic knowledge, its creation, and its application in organizations Pragmatic knowledge also has its limitations It is generally less manageable, at least in the conventional sense However, when companies or their subunits are designed around pragmatic knowledge, it becomes much easier to use effectively—though it is not really accurate to say that pragmatic knowledge is “managed.” Rather, pragmatic knowledge becomes the basis for continuous improvement and self-directed activity by employees It may seem unbelievable to most managers that pragmatic knowledge systems could ever be used routinely in business The good news is that, not only are companies already using the pragmatic knowledge approach—but they are doing so with outstanding success 161 Putting Action into Knowledge When knowledge is managed from a conventional perspective, there appears to be an inversely proportional relationship between its load-bearing capacity and its manageability (see Figure 9.1) The load-bearing capacity of knowledge can be thought of as a combination of the quantity and types of knowledge elements that it contains Manageability is the ability of a KM system to share, store, and provide leaders and workers access to knowledge 100% Load-Bearing Capacity 0% Low High Figure 9.1 Manageability It is important to note that Figure 9.1 applies only to cases where knowledge is managed in a conventional sense—that is, where there are systemic efforts to share knowledge on a large scale, store, and access it When work systems are designed for high load-bearing pragmatic knowledge, the manageability tradeoffs become virtually irrelevant But before we discuss how organizations develop pragmatic knowledge systems, let’s first consider how pragmatic knowledge is created individually, by the process of learning through experience Acts of Knowing Knowing is an active process of awareness that enables individuals to mentally construct a story in their minds that explains something relevant to the present action When we know something, we pay attention to it, we recognize it—and sometimes we may actually understand it Acts of knowing are a prerequisite to creating many kinds of knowledge that may prove to be useful at some point in the future There are many ways of knowing, each of which provides 162 Developing Pragmatic Knowledge special insights and has limitations Among these ways of knowing are the following: Acts of recognition Acts of understanding how things work Acts of understanding why things work Acts of execution involving the performance of a series of sequential tasks or processes Acts of logical inference through reasoning Acts of performance—discovering things work well and reliably in certain cases Acts of intuitive knowing Acts of Recognition Upon hearing the meow of a cat, infants point to the animal and say the word “cat” or “kitty.” This is an act of recognition That is, they observe that the animal in their view meets certain standards of “catness” that define the identity of this creature Cats make different sounds than dogs, including meowing and purring They have whiskers that are more evident, frequently lick their own bodies, and scratch objects, such as furniture or trees with their claws Similarly, managers may recognize a certain situation as being a “quality problem” or a “productivity problem.” That is, they recognize the correspondence between the definition of certain kinds of problems and the facts or information they have observed This process is similar to the way physicians make the diagnosis of an illness Acts of Understanding How Things Work Understanding how things work generally involves understanding the links between causes and their effects For example, automobile mechanics understand that if the cylinders and pistons in an engine are corroded, the engine is likely to consume oil more rapidly Mechanics may not be able to explain the physics or chemistry of the corrosion process, but they would likely understand how to repair the problem Acts of Understanding Why Things Work Understanding why things work as they generally requires a level of knowing that goes beyond the simple mechanics of cause- Putting Action into Knowledge 163 and-effect relationships—to knowing the general forces or principles that underlie those mechanics Chemical engineers are likely to understand why motor oil with certain chemical properties burns more rapidly in a corroded engine With this understanding they may be able to limit the severity of the oil consumption problem They may not, however, understand how to fix the engine as well as the automobile mechanics Acts of Execution Knowing how to perform a particular task is an act of execution For example, people may know how to check the voicemail function on their cell phone and successfully reply to a message However, knowing how to respond to the cue that they have a voicemail message does not require them to understand how or why things work as they It only demands that they can precisely follow the steps to execute a particular sequence of acts to retrieve that message Acts of Inferential Reasoning There are types of knowing that arise through using accepted facts or assumptions to reach conclusions about other states of affairs through the use of deductive reasoning For example, if you know that the speed limit where you are driving is 65 miles per hour, and you know that if you are caught speeding (again) you will lose your insurance, then you can conclude that if you are arrested for speeding you will be in serious trouble This conclusion is reached through the use of deductive reasoning, which is simply applying general rules to specific circumstances Acts of Performance This type of knowing is perhaps the most pragmatic of all and deserves a more detailed explanation Let us start with a situation where you are making an effort to solve a problem or achieve a goal After diagnosing the problem or identifying the goal, you then make a decision and take action After some period of time, the action you took produces effects That is, there is some type of outcome that stems from your action 164 Developing Pragmatic Knowledge Imagine that you are trying to reduce your body weight and your action was to increase your exercise and activity levels A week later, you weigh yourself and discover that your weight has not gone down Your belief is that this difference between the actual weight and your expectation simply reflects a time delay and that it may take longer for the improvements to show After another week, much to your disappointment, you find that your weight has still not changed You conclude that your increased activity level was not sufficient to burn the necessary calories to show up on the scale as lost weight It could also be that you are not losing weight because you are increasing muscle mass, or that you need to perform other actions to lose weight—perhaps eat different kinds of foods or consume less food overall The experience you gained in your first two weeks of exercising has helped you learn how reliably certain actions produce expected outcomes (total weight loss) This type of knowing is very important because, it is not only pragmatic, in that it connects actions to goals and performance, but it also enables us to discover the level of effectiveness of our strategy This type of knowing is often critical for corporate leaders who are concerned with performance enhancement Acts of Intuitive Knowing Such acts of knowing rely on the totality of human experience, such as intuition, gut feelings, or listening to an inner voice Many great business leaders report relying heavily on their intuition (and many other leaders use their intuition quietly, but not admit doing so because they fear being thought too far out of the box) This intuitive way of knowing uses all of the human senses, in addition to the logical part of the human mind Science supports the extraordinary efficacy of this way of knowing According to research by Tor Norretranders (1991), human beings receive 11,000,000 bits of data per second from our senses, yet we cognitively process a mere 16 bits of that data A significant amount of the remaining data that has been filtered out by this screening process can be accessed intuitively—a mysterious, but highly useful knowledge process When Intel Corporation CEO Andy Grove (2003) was asked whether managers can be taught to draw on their own intuition in making decisions, he offered: You can promote intuition You can recognize the innate aptitude of people to grasp what cannot be spelled out and cannot be shown by data, to be in Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Index Page numbers with “t” denote tables; those with “f” denote figures A Action-learning cycle A priori assumptions, 234 core learning spiral vs., 320, Abduction, 190, 267, 337 321f Act(s) description of, 73, 84–85, 188 definition of, 177, 186, 335 schematic diagram of, 85f, elements of, 186 189f knowledge, 336 scientific process used in, 188 routines and, 186 stages of, 85, 85f Action(s) Acts of execution, 163 definition of, 85 Acts of inferential reasoning, 163 effectiveness of, 181 Acts of intuitive knowing, 164–165 experimentation of, 86 Acts of knowing feedback about, 217 definition of, 161–162 knowledge for, 170–172, 174, description of, 157 206–207 Acts of performance, 163 perceptual influences on, 81 Acts of recognition, 162 pragmatic knowledge and, 271 Acts of understanding how things purposeful, 85, 171, 174 work, 162 selection of, 322 Acts of understanding why things success rates based on, 127 work, 162–163 theories of, 235 Ad hoc knowledge, 82 Action leaders, 87–88 Adaptability, 229 Action learning Adaptation definition of, 187–188, 197 definition of, 228–229, 310–311 description of, 82, 153, 177 description of, 149 dualistic nature of, 197 Age of Arts and Crafts, 137–139 knowledge produced from, Ambidextrous organizations, 191–192, 198 266–267 in learning organization, 191 American managers, 111–114 organizational learning and, Apprentices, 138 198 Archetypes, 17, 45, 54 past experiences used in, 188 Artificial knowledge, 181 pragmatic knowledge and, 196 Asset(s) principles of, 197Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn hard, 201 processes involved in, 188 knowledge as, 125 345 Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an 346 leveraging of, 10 soft, 201 utilization of, Autonomous systems, 129 Autopoiesis, 129, 253 Index knowledge-based initiatives, 133 Kraft Foods, 8–9 Omega Financial Services, 165–169 Toyota, 238–241, 253–254 B Causal analysis, 184 Balanced knowledge leaders, 18, Causal claims, 216–217 290 Cause and effect, 168, 185 Barter, 138 Change Beliefs Commissar’s view of, 54 clarification of, 217 habitual patterns interrupted by, core, 53, 55t 78 description of, 45–46 leader’s role in, 314 dogmatic, 79 in thinking, 78 doubt’s effect on, 78–79 Chief knowledge officers, 40, personal, 178 223–224, 226, 281 Toyota case study of, 238–239 Chinese managers, 111–114 truthfulness of, 192 Collective knowledge, 207–208 Best practices, 170 Commissar(s) Brilliant Design strategy, 149, 151 actions by, 48 Broad-scale knowledge processing, beliefs of, 45–46 208–209 change as viewed by, 54 Business See also Organization characteristics of, 17, 45 complexity dealt with by, 207 core beliefs of, 53, 55t core identity of, 246 description of, 17, 27 creation of opportunities by, 256 disaster for, 51–52 experimental processes in, 265 examples of, 18, 102–103 sustainability of, 256 failure of, 56–57 technology cycle in, 257–258 infrared, 47–49 Business process reengineering, 66, leading styles of, 61t–62t 288 learning styles of, 61t–62t Business strategies logical reasoning as viewed by, knowledge alignment with, 47 120–121 looking styles of, 61t–62t knowledge strategies and, 206 motivation of, 66 objective-empiricist, 62–63, 64t C objectivism philosophy of, 67 Capacity for learning, 79 perceptual bias of, 57 Case, 335 perceptual styles of, 81–84 Case studies reality as viewed by, 65 Great Northeast Technologies, structuralist, 48, 69–70 246–250, 257–259 structure’s role for, 66 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn Intel, 252–253 traits of, 47–49, 55–57 knowledge creation, 338–340 utilitarian motivation of, 66 Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Index 347 ways of, 55–57 D worldview of, 54, 65–67 Data, 158–159 Yogis vs., 46, 243, 272, 278, Decision making, 310 280, 289 Deduction, 190, 336–337 Commissar leaders Deming, W Edwards, 20, as action leaders, 87–88 198–199, 234, 284 description of, 55–57 Developers, 257, 258f divergent approaches of, Development 70–71 of knowledge See Knowledge learning styles of, 86–87 development worldview of, 65–67 management and, 243 Communities of practice, 198, Dogmatic beliefs, 79 210 Double loop learning, 172 Community Experiment strategy, Doubt 152–153 beliefs affected by, 78–79 Competitive advantage feelings of, 76 knowledge and, 285 irritation of, 73, 76, 83, 321 sustainable, 8, 15, 123, 281 nonperformance and, 76 Complexity businesses and, 207 E knowledge and, 212 Economic resource utilization Conceptual models, 80 model, 226 Concurrent learning, 267 Economic utilization approach, 227 Connect function, 225 Efficiency, 268 Construction, 85 80/20 principle, 21 Context, information with, 179 Embedded knowledge, 150–151, Contextual knowledge, 270 290–291 Continuous improvement Employee(s) cycles of, 235 chronically unknowledgeable, 25 description of, 190 operational, 285 pragmatic knowledge and, Employee performance, 195–196 198–199 Enforced dependency, 36 Core learning spiral, 320–323 Engineered-ecology knowledge Corroboration, 231 strategy, 297–300 Culture Equifinality principle, 293 identity of organizations and, Execution, acts of, 163 132 Experience-based learning, 192, knowledge and, 269–270 197 organization Experimentation description of, 132, 210, description of, 86 269–270 performance and, 265 identity and, 132 Expertise profiling, 226 strategy and, 270 Explicit knowledge, 124 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn Customized knowledge, 175 Exploitation, 256 Cybernetic processes, 196 Extractive operative strategies, 200 Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an 348 Index F Functional, adaptable, sustainable, Feedback and timely knowledge-based compensating relationship of, organizations 277 criteria used by, 224, 228 knowledge and, 217 description of, 14, 203, 223, learning from, 198 269 perceptual, 80 5-Point Dynamic Mapping for pragmatic knowledge and, creating See 5-Point 184 Dynamic Mapping robust learning and, 90–91 overview of, 28–29 uses of, 185 from Yogis, 58 G Filters, perceptual, 75–76, 81 General systems theory, 212 First-generation knowledge Generative learning, 82, 215 management, 286 Generic knowledge, 82–83 Firstness, 168 Goal attainment, 172 5-Point Dynamic Mapping Great Northeast Technologies case Balance Sheet for, 308–309 study, 246–250, 257–259 definition of, 309, 313 Green knowledge management description of, 305, 312–313, strategy, 9–10 341–342 Grounding, 88 identity, 314–315 implementation of, 325 H interactions, 316 Hard assets, 201 knowledge leader benefits, High enlightenment/low grounding 327–328 learning style, 89–90 knowledge roots of, 323–324 High grounding/high enlightenment mission, 316 learning style, 90–92 original systems approach, High grounding/low enlightenment 323–324 learning style, 88–89 overview of, 313–314 High-quality knowledge, 12, 206 points of, 313–314, 342 Humanist Yogi, 69–70 power of, 309 root causes in, 317–318 I structure, 316–317 Identity blindness, 318–320 template for, 342 Identity of organizations vision, 315 confusion in, 253 Four Worlds Model of pragmatic culture and, 132 knowledge, 193–194 decision making and, 310 Functional, adaptable, sustainable, definition of, 314 and timely knowledge description of, 128–129, 132, case studies of, 325–326 314–315 creation of, 134–135 elements of, 251–252 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn definition of, 310–311 knowledge management systems description of, 14, 203 and, 133 Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Index 349 redefining of, 313 J shaping of, 252–253 Journeymen, 138–139 shifts in, 252 Induction, 190, 267, 337 K Industry-based worldviews, KBOs See Knowledge-based 105–107 organizations Inferential reasoning, acts of, 163 Know-how Information accumulation of, 173 with context, 179 description of, 139, 150, 166 data and, 158–159 limitation of, 173 knowledge vs., 3, 14–15, Knowing 158–159 acts of See Acts of knowing reason and, 159 definition of, 161 value of, 159 intuitive, 164–165 Information management, 147 pragmatic way of, 169–170 Information-based knowledge, 166, Knowledge 178, 180, 230 access to, Initiatives accumulation of, 173 knowledge life cycle, 214 for action, 170–172, 174 knowledge-based See from action learning, 191–192, Knowledge-based initiatives 198 Innovation action-oriented view of, 186, awards for, 300 187f, 206–207 barriers to, 255–256 ad hoc, 82 company examples of, 299 artificial, 181 efficiency and, 268 as asset, 125 knowledge and, 240, 267, 311 “atomized,” 157–160 in knowledge-based base of, 10 organizations, 284 business strategies aligned with, operational, 287–290 120–121 pragmatic knowledge-based characteristics of, 120 approach to, 37 collective, 207–208 route to, 145–146 competitive advantage and, 285 tinkering as source of, 290 complexity and, 212 Inquiry contextual, 270 description of, 73 culture and, 269–270 engaging in, 76–77 customized, 38, 175 performance and, 76, 77f, 265, definition of, 158, 172–173, 266f, 268 177–180, 186 Inquiry loop, 338 democratic approach to, 326 Inside-out strategy, 151 depletion of, 230 Interactions, 316 elements of, 188, 201, 234–235 Intuitive knowing, acts of, embedded, 150–151, 290–291 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn 164–165 equality of, 125 Irritation of doubt, 73, 76, 83, 321 explicit, 124 Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an 350 Index failure of, 210 role of, in organizations, feedback and, 217 149–151 fragmenting of, 170 sharing of, 170, 230, 232, 291 generic, 82–83 sponge model of, 286 harvesting of, 225 success rates associated with, 127 high-quality, 12, 206 sustainable competitive historical views of advantage from, 8, 15 in Age of Arts and Crafts, tacit, 124–125, 166 138–139 truth vs., 186 description of, 40–41 types of, 203–204, 235 in Knowledge Era, 142–148 Knowledge acts, 336 in Machine Age, 139–143 Knowledge bias profile holistic view of, 274 cross-cultural study of, 111–114 images associated with, 7–8 description of, 18, 35, 41, information systems for, 39 93–94, 306 information vs., 3, 14–15, development of, 332–333 158–159 lessons obtained from, 114–115 information-based, 166, 178, part A 180, 230 demographics of, 103–105 innovation and, 240, 267, 311 description of, 41–44, 332 learning supported by, 36–37, scores of, 98–102 148–149, 151, 269, 291 studies involving, 98–107 load-bearing capacity of, 161 part B manageability of, 161, 161f description of, 41–44, mediating role of, 171f 332–333 natural, 181 scores on, 107–109 neglect of, 286 studies of, 107–109 objective, 201–202 part C, 109–111, 333 oil well metaphor of, 10–11 purpose of, 44 organizational, 172 studies of, 94–95 peer-supported, 126 Knowledge chains, 190 for performance, 180–182 Knowledge cities, 292 performance-driven, 179, 294, Knowledge claims 297f competing, 204–205 poor-quality, 230 definition of, 202 practical, 169 efficacy of, 216 pragmatic See Pragmatic in fast-food industry, 204–205 knowledge in knowledge life cycle model, procedural, 203–204 210 as process, 178 for management education quality of, 181, 264–268, 327 methods, 209f reliability of, 11 role of, 200, 204 resource-based view of, validity testing of, 216 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn 295–296 Knowledge creation robotic approach to, 180–181 case study of, 338–340 Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Index 351 description of, 19, 21–22, 56, challenges for, 252 84 change role of, 314 elements of, 201 characteristics of, 307 employee performance and, chief knowledge officer and, 226 195–196 creation of, 330 hybrid system of, 272 data-driven approach to, 15 investments in, 122 departmental, 281 by organizations, 285 description of, 12, 84 problem solving for, 171–172 elements of, 36 as self-organizing process, 298 5-Point Dynamic Mapping for, strategy for, 296 327–328 Knowledge development functional, adaptable, definition of, 232 sustainable, and timely description of, knowledge used by, 134–135 knowledge management and, functions of, 236–237 243, 273 information systems managed personal, 223 by, 39 principles of, 232 journey to becoming, 329 workplace environments that knowledge infrastructure role of, support, 12, 121 291–294 Knowledge diagnosis, 182 knowledge processes and, 205 Knowledge entrepreneur, 144–148 leading by example, 287 Knowledge entrepreneurship, management systems and, 146–147 130–131 Knowledge Era obstacles to becoming, 16 definition of, 143 organizational identity effects description of, 137 on, 129 events in, 143 organization’s need for, 20 knowledge in, 142–148 personal reflection by, 37 Machine Age vs., 143 pragmatism by, 171, 280 organization requirements in, 24 responsibility of, 131 Knowledge greenhouse, 298 role and responsibilities of, Knowledge infrastructures 272–273, 300 description of, 283 self-awareness necessary for, designing of, 284, 293 54 elements of, 284, 292 as system designer, 272 envisioning of, 293 tasks of, 326–328 equifinality principle for, 293 Knowledge leadership ideal, 292 challenges for, 126 knowledge leaders’ role in, definition of, 127–128, 223, 291–294 232, 279, 306 parts of, 292–293 description of, 12–13 Knowledge leaders focus on, 271–273 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn as hero, 328–330 human experience reframed by, balance of, 18, 290 271–272 Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an 352 Index knowledge management and, first-generation, 286 279–280 framework for, 225f knowledge-based initiatives and, functionality of, 228 120, 126–128 functions, 224–225 in management systems, funnel approach to, 286 279–281 Green strategies, 9–10 need for, 20 knowledge as defined by, 158 operational, 273 knowledge development and, organizational effects of, 280 243, 273 pragmatic knowledge and, 120 knowledge leadership and, principles of, 294, 306 279–280 roles of, 271–272 methods of, 123 schematic diagram of, 233f oil-drilling approach to, 227f tradition of, 39–40 performance-driven approach to, Knowledge leadership life cycle 11–12 description of, 261 popularity of, goal of, 263–264 purpose of, 226 schematic diagram of, 263f supply-side, 286 Knowledge leadership style sustainable, 229–230 description of, 93 timeliness of, 231, 311 self-assessments, variations of, 231–232 Knowledge life cycle model weaknesses of, 232 definition of, 200 Knowledge mix description of, 210, 213–214 definition of, 236–237 development of, 210 description of, 119, 203 knowledge claims in, 210 design of, 121, 236–237 schematic diagram of, 211f determining of, 121–125 Knowledge life cycle system knowledge in, 237 framework, 214–215 knowledge-based activities for, implementation of, 213–214 121–122 initiatives, 214 Knowledge network, 294 targeting of, 214 Knowledge performance loop, 337 Knowledge management Knowledge process approaches to, 146, 224, 227 composition of, 206 architectures, 124 management aspects of, 231 company example of, 123–124 Knowledge processing conventional approach to, 161, broad-scale, 208–209 227, 230–231 business situations addressed corroboration, 231 using, 212 description of, 3, 280 definition of, 200, 206 development of, description of, 203 economic utilization approach goals of, 209 to, 227 organizational learning in, Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn entrepreneurial approach to, 147 215–218 evolution of, targeted Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Index 353 benefits of, 212 Knowledge-based activities definition of, 209 benefits of, 123 description of, 200 characteristics of, 122 methods of, 201, 213 functional approach to, 294 schematic diagram of, 213f in knowledge mix, 121–122 work interdependence, sustaining of, 283 212–213 targeting of, 125, 130 technology effects on, 270 Knowledge-based initiatives Knowledge quality improvement case study of, 133 process challenges to, 119 definition of, 200, 210, 279 description of, 119 description of, 210 effectiveness of, 127 organizational learning and, 212 knowledge leadership and, 120, Knowledge resource strategy, 126–128 294–296 leading of, 287 Knowledge source companies, 296 organizational identity and Knowledge source strategy, strategy aligned with, 296–297 128–129 Knowledge strategies results of, 127 Brilliant Design, 149, 151 return on investment and, 124 business strategies aligned with, success of, 131 206 Knowledge-based organizations Community Experiment, continuous processes in, 264 152–153 description of, 4–5, 14 description of, 119, 125–127, examples of, 6, 22–23, 122, 307 194–195, 233 development of, 120–121 functional, adaptable, engineered-ecology, 297–300 sustainable, and timely, 14, framework for, 127–128 22–23, 28 as functional, adaptable, increases in, 22 sustainable, and timely, innovation in, 284 135 interest in, 194 inside-out, 151 pragmatic, 240–241 Master Craft, 149–151 transformation to, 307 outside-in, 151 transition to, 16 types of, 299–300 workers in, 240 Knowledge workers, Knowledge-based support tools, Knowledgeable acts 147 classification of, 190 Koestler, Arthur, 44–45, 49, 51, 54, definition of, 177, 188–189 71, 74 description of, 189 knowledge as repository for, L 189–190 Law of requite variety, 212 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn reasoning for, 190–191 Leader(s) rule for, 190 Commissar Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an 354 Index description of, 55–57 feedback and, 90–91 divergent approaches of, foundations of, 87 70–71 high grounding/high worldview of, 65–67 enlightenment learning knowledge See Knowledge style, 90–92 leaders schematic diagram of, 174f Yogi single-loop, 74 beliefs of, 67–68 Learning arrogance, 73, 79–81 conceptual models built by, Learning arrogant, 46 80 Learning disability divergent approaches of, learning arrogance as, 73, 79–81 70–71 low grounding/low organizational development enlightenment learning style, approach, 70 89 self-understandings by, 80 Learning handicap, 232 worldview of, 67–69 Learning organization Leading, 60 definitions of, 215, 233 Leading-learning, 59 description of, 191 Lean production systems example of, 207 company example of, 285 Senge’s view of, 215 description of, 283 Learning styles mass production systems vs., of Commissar leaders, 86–87, 285 88–89 Learning description of, 80 action See Action learning high enlightenment/low capacity for, 79 grounding, 89–90 Commissarial perspective of, 65 high grounding/high concurrent, 267 enlightenment, 90–92 definition of, 60, 253 high grounding/low from experience, 192, 197 enlightenment, 88–89 from feedback, 198 perceptual traps in, 80 generative, 82, 215 of Yogi leaders, 86–87, 89–90 human instinct for, 36 Likert scale, 94 knowledge used to support, Load-bearing capacity, 161 36–37, 148, 151, 269, 291 Logical reasoning limitations on, 74 Commissar’s view of, 47 need for, 36, 62 Yogi’s view of, 49–51 observation-based, 181 Looking, 60 organizational, 191 Looking-learning-leading style, 60f perceptual limits to, 73–75 Low grounding/low enlightenment pragmatic, 83–84, 218 learning style, 89 process of, 174 robust M Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn definition of, 87 Machine Age description of, 73 collective knowledge in, 207 Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Index 355 description of, 24, 137 N improvement’s role in, 239 Natural knowledge, 181 Knowledge Era vs., 143 knowledge in, 139–143 O organizations in, 175 Objective knowledge, 201–202 productivity in, 141–143 Objective-empiricist Commissars, requirements during, 24 62–63, 64t Management Objectivism, 67 description of, 201 Observation-based learning, 181 development and, 243 Occupation-based worldviews, process of, 201 105–107 traditional approaches to, 288 Omega Financial Services case Management education, 15 study, 165–169 Management processes, 262 Open enterprise, 279 Management systems Openness, 277–279 alignment of, 279 Operational employees, 285 buffering functions of, 278 Operational innovation, 287–290 compensating functions of, Operational knowledge leadership, 278 273 definition of, 130, 243, 274 Organization See also Business driving forces, 278 adaptation by, 228, 310–311 elements of, 242–243, 261–262, ambidextrous, 266–267 274–275 assessment of, 308–309 experimental purpose of, 261 cause and effect in, 168 functions of, 275, 277–279 Commissar-led, 56–57 instrumental purpose of, 261 communities of practice in, 210 interdependencies in, 275–276 culture of, 132, 210, 269–270 knowledge leader’s involvement effectiveness of, 227 in, 130–131 environment in, 277 knowledge leadership in, envisioning new possibilities for, 279–281 74 model of, 130f, 275–277 “essence” of, 128–129 opening forces, 278 failure of, 249–250 organization identity and, function of, 283, 285, 310 133 functional, adaptable, principles of, 274 sustainable, and timely See purpose of, 261 Functional, adaptable, regulatory functions of, 278 sustainable, and timely Market capitalization value, 238 knowledge-based Master Craft strategy, 149–151 organizations Meaning, search for, 85–86 knowledge creation in, 285 Mental models, 80, 217, 235 knowledge environment of, Mission, 316 272–273 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn Most Admired Knowledge in Knowledge Era, 24 Enterprises, 237, 237t knowledge leaders in, 20 Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an 356 Index knowledge leadership effects on, knowledge processing and, 280 215–218 knowledge-based See knowledge quality improvement Knowledge-based process and, 212 organizations Outside-in strategy, 151 knowledge’s role in, 149–151 learning See Learning P organization Parallel processing, 266 in Machine Age, 142 Participative openness, 278 openness in, 277–279 PDCA cycle See Plan, do, check, operating system of, 263 act cycle parallel processing in, 266 Peer-assist programs, 123 performance of, 250–251 Peer-supported knowledge, 126 problems in, 175 Peirce, Charles Sanders, 41, 82, process-oriented, 235, 294 192, 217, 234, 265, 334 self-image of, 251–254 Perception stakeholders in, 285 actions shaped by, 81 structure of, 317 definition of, 81 sustainability of, 311 differing views of, 77–78 Organization strategy factors that influence, 186 cycles of, 131–133, 132f self-organizing structures of, 78 description of, 128–129 sources of, 186–187 Organizational engineering, 234 Perceptual biases, 74, 86 Organizational growth Perceptual block, 80 exploration and, 251 Perceptual breakthroughs, 75 strategies for, 250 Perceptual feedback, 80 Organizational identity Perceptual filters, 75–76, 81 confusion in, 253 Perceptual limits to learning, 73–75 culture and, 132 Perceptual styles decision making and, 310 of Commissars, 81–84 definition of, 253, 314 of Yogis, 81–84 description of, 128–129, 132, Perceptual traps 205, 314 definition of, 74 elements of, 251–252 learning arrogance as, 73, 79–81 knowledge management systems in learning styles, 80 and, 133 Performance redefining of, 313 acts of, 163 shaping of, 252–253 experimentation and, 265 shifts in, 252 inquiry and, 76, 77f, 265, 266f, Organizational knowledge, 172 268 Organizational learning knowledge for, 180–182, action learning as form of, 198 297f culture influences on, 269 states of, 235 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn definition of, 215 Performance outcomes, 203 description of, 191 Performance targets, 187 Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Index 357 Performance-driven pragmatic situation-specific nature of, 176, knowledge, 177 179 Personal beliefs, 178 Toyota case study of, 238–241 Personal reflection, 37 Pragmatic knowledge triad, Personality archetypes, 17, 45 182–184, 183f, 188 Plan, do, check, act cycle, 235 Pragmatic knowledge-based Policy synchronization method, organizations, 240–241 261, 273, 298 Pragmatic learning, 218 Popper’s tetradic schema, 172, Pragmatic logic, 336–338 172f, 198 Pragmatism Practical knowledge, 169 definition of, Pragmatic description of, 217–218 definition of, 171 by knowledge leaders, 171, 280 learning as viewed by, 83–84 “Principal-agent” theory, 143–144 Pragmatic knowledge Principle of equifinality, 293 action learning and, 196 Problem solving, 171–172 action taking and, 271 Problems, coping with, 83 applications of, 283–284 Procedural knowledge, 203–204 attributes of, 189 Process-oriented companies, 235, causal analysis in, 184 294 as cause and effect, 186 Productivity company example of, 238–241 extractive operative strategies continuous improvement and, for, 200 198–199 in Machine Age, 141–143 core learning spiral for Purposeful action, 85, 171, 174 development of, 320–323 corporate use of, Q creation of, 15–16, 180, 182, Quality 196, 231, 335–336 customer’s view of, 284 definition of, 14, 82, 157–158, of knowledge, 181, 264–268, 223, 231–232, 306 327 description of, 3–4, 175–176, Quantum theory, 76 233–234 elements of, 184–187 R feedback in, 184 Reality Four Worlds Model of, 193–194 experience of, 75 innovation based on, 37 systems involved in, 76 knowledge leadership and, 120 understanding of, 75 leader’s use of, 185–186 Reason, 159 limitations of, 160 Reasoning operational innovation and, forms of, 190 289–290 knowledgeable acts and, origins of, 190–191 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn performance-driven, 177, 180 Recognition, acts of, 162 quality of, 177 Recycling, 9–10 Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an 358 Index Reflection, 85, 85f Reflective openness, 278–279 Reframing, 129 Relationships, 170 Result, 336 Return on investment description of, 122 knowledge-based initiatives and, 124 studies of, 124 Reverse engineering, 273 Robust learning definition of, 87 description of, 73 feedback and, 90–91 foundations of, 87 high grounding/high enlightenment learning style, 90–92 Root causes, 317–318 Routines, 78, 186 Rule, 335–336 Soft assets, 201 Sponge model of knowledge, 286 Stagnation, 89 Stakeholders, 143, 285 Storytelling, 40 Structural couplings, 275 Structuralism, 70 Structuralist Commissar, 69–70 Structuralists, 48 Structure, 316–317 Subjectivism, 68 Supply-side knowledge management, 286 Sustainability, 311 Sustainable competitive advantage, 8, 15, 123, 281 Systems theory, 274 Systems thinking, 171, 254 T Tacit knowledge, 124–125, 166 Targeted knowledge processing S benefits of, 212 Scientific management, 234, 284 definition of, 209 Secondness, 168 description of, 200 Self-awareness, 54 methods of, 201, 213 Self-image schematic diagram of, 213f definition of, 251 work interdependence, organizational, 251–254 212–213 Self-knowledge, 329 Taylor, Frederick Winslow, 4, 141, Self-knowledge initiative, 38 234, 284 Self-limiting beliefs, 74 Technical rationality, 277 Self-organizing behavior, 274 Technology Self-understandings, 80 cycle of, 257–258 Semiosis, 182 knowledge processing affected Senge, Peter, 4–5, 148, 191, 198, by, 270 215, 235, 254, 265, 278 Theories of action, 234 Settlement-oriented activities, 256 Thirdness, 168, 192 “Shifting the burden” syndrome, Timeliness, 231, 311 254–258 Tinkering, 290 Single-loop learning, 74 Total quality management Skilled unawareness, 79 description of, 218, 283 Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn Social-constructionist Yogis, 63–65, root causes, 317–318 64t, 68 Triadic system, 334 Tai lieu Luan van Luan an Do an Stt.010.Mssv.BKD002ac.email.ninhddtt@edu.gmail.com.vn