Success or failure in knowledge management systems: a universal issue

This paper takes a sociotechnical viewpoint of knowledge management system (KMS) implementation in organizations considering issues such as stakeholder disenfranchisement, lack of communication, and the low involvement of key personnel in system design asking whether KMS designers could learn from applying sociotechnical principles to their systems. The paper discusses design elements drawn from the sociotechnical principles essential for the success of IS and makes recommendations to increase the success of KMS in organizations. It also provides guidelines derived from Clegg’s Principles (2000) for KMS designers to enhance their designs. Our data comes from the application of a plurality of analysis methods on a large comprehensive global survey conducted from 2007 to 2011 of 1034 participants from 76 countries. The survey covers a variety of organizations of all types and sizes from a comprehensive selection of economic sectors and industries. Our results showed that users were not satisfied with the information and knowledge systems that they were being offered. In addition to multiple technology and usability issues, there were human and organisational barriers that prevented the systems from being used to their full potential. We recommend that users of KMS are integrated into the design team so that these usability and other barriers can be addressed during the feasibility stage as well as the actual design and implementation phases.

The effects of conflict in driving forward innovation in shared leadership management consultant teams

It is argued in this study that current investigations of the role of conflict in shared leadership teams and, thus, teams in which all members have the opportunity to participate in its decision-making process are insufficient as they have focused on the downsides of these conflicts. This study demonstrates that task conflict is beneficial in that it can have positive effects on innovation in teams. It shows that particularly in shared leadership management consultant teams task conflict can stimulate innovation. Therefore, this research investigates the relationships among shared leadership, conflict and innovation. The research develops and empirically tests a conceptual model which demonstrates the relationships between these concepts and for which the inclusion of multiple research methods was essential. The sequential explanatory approach included a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods, the order of which can be adapted for other domains of application. The conceptual model was first tested with a sample of 329 management consultants. This was followed by 25, in-depth, face-to-face interviews conducted with individual survey respondents. In addition, weekly meetings of a management consultant team in action were video recorded over several months. This allowed for an in-depth explanation of the findings from the survey by providing an understanding of the underlying processes. The inclusion of observational methods provided a validating role and explained how and why conflicts contributed to the development of team innovation, through the analysis of subtleties and fleeting disagreements in a real-life management consultant team. The results deliver an assessment of the theoretical model and demonstrate that task conflict can allow for additional innovation in management consultant teams operating under a shared leadership structure. A practical model and guidelines for management consultant teams wanting to enhance their innovatory capacities are provided. In addition, a novel-user methodology which includes video observations is developed, with recommendations and steps aiding researchers aiming to employ a similar combination of methods. An original contribution to knowledge is made regarding the positive effects that task conflict can have towards innovation in shared leadership teams. Collaboration and trust are identified as important mediators between shared leadership and task conflict and significant regarding the development of innovation. The effectiveness of shared leadership in reducing negative relationship conflict and the benefits of both shared leadership and task conflict in enhancing innovation are demonstrated.

Diversity and Inclusion As the Key to Innovating Talent Management in Law Firms?

In this chapter we argue that there is a need to reconceptualise what we mean by talent in the legal profession beyond a view that the most valuable people are those who have the highest fee-earning potential or the best CV packed with excellent grades and exceptional experiences and extra curricula achievements. And further we need a more sophisticated understanding of how organisational decision-making may be structured to provide developmental opportunities to allow talent to be nurtured and to flourish on individual and team levels. In turn, we suggest that planning, management and accountability cycles within legal entities need to be strengthened so as to ensure creativity and success in a context in which it is possible to deliver on the promise of fair access and promotion. Consequently, this chapter explores the diversity problem within the legal profession(s), further it interrogates what is “talent”, and how and why we should seek to manage and develop it. It then evaluates how talent diversity has been managed in the legal professional context, examined through what we have categorised as three waves of diversity strategies. We interrogate why diversity initiatives have not been more successful given the efforts placed on them by professional bodies and firms themselves. We posit that by using diversity as a case study in talent management legal entities may develop a more effective approach to talent management generally within law firms that will be of benefit to all lawyers and support professionals rather than just those who are from traditionally low participation groups.