Journey making group workshops as a research tool

Problem-structuring group workshops can be used in organizations as a consulting tool and as a research tool. One example of the latter is using a problem-structuring method (PSM) to help a group tackle an organizational issue; meanwhile, researchers collect the participants' initial views, discussion of divergent views, the negotiated agreement, and the reasoning for outcomes emerging. Technology can help by supporting participants in freely sharing their opinions and by logging data for post-workshop analyses. For example, computers let participants share views anonymously and without being influenced by others (as well as logging those views), and video-cameras can record discussions and intra-group dynamics. This paper evaluates whether technology-supported Journey Making workshops can be effective research tools that can capture quality research data when compared against theoretical performance benchmarks and other qualitative research tools. © 2006 Operational Research Society Ltd. All rights reserved.

Personal knowledge development in online learning:a model for measuring externalisation, combination and internalisation

This paper presents a model for measuring personal knowledge development in online learning environments. It is based on Nonaka‘s SECI model of organisational knowledge creation. It is argued that Socialisation is not a relevant mode in the context of online learning and was therefore not covered in the measurement instrument. Therefore, the remaining three of SECI‘s knowledge conversion modes, namely Externalisation, Combination, and Internalisation were used and a measurement instrument was created which also examines the interrelationships between the three modes. Data was collected using an online survey, in which online learners report on their experiences of personal knowledge development in online learning environments. In other words, the instrument measures the magnitude of online learners‘ Externalisation and combination activities as well as their level of internalisation, which is the outcome of their personal knowledge development in online learning.

Guiding schools to improved performance using data envelopment analysis:an illustration with data from a local education authority

The educational process is characterised by multiple outcomes such as the achievement of academic results of various standards and non-academic achievements. This paper shows how data envelopment analysis (DEA) can be used to guide secondary schools to improved performance through role-model identification and target setting in a way which recognises the multi-outcome nature of the education process and reflects the relative desirability of improving individual outcomes. The approach presented in the paper draws from a DEA-based assessment of the schools of a local education authority carried out by the authors. Data from that assessment are used to illustrate the approach presented in the paper. (Key words: Data envelopment analysis, education, target setting.)

Inter-organisational knowledge transfer strategies

Inter-organisational knowledge transfer is very important for SMEs. However, compared to knowledge transfer within an organisation, its ‘boundary paradox’ makes its process more complicated and difficult to understand. In order to solve the ‘paradox’, inter-organisational knowledge transfer strategies need to be developed for SMEs. Through a review of the literature on knowledge transfer, this paper proposes an inter-organisational knowledge transfer process model that contains four stages (initiation, selection, interaction and conversion). It classifies three situations in which an SME exchanges knowledge with a customer (whether a larger company or an SME). It then applies a coordinating mechanism to analyse knowledge transfer strategies for the SME when it is a knowledgegiving firm and knowledge-receiving firm respectively, in the different stages of each situation.

Editorial

This special issue of the Journal of the Operational Research Society is dedicated to papers on the related subjects of knowledge management and intellectual capital. These subjects continue to generate considerable interest amongst both practitioners and academics. This issue demonstrates that operational researchers have many contributions to offer to the area, especially by bringing multi-disciplinary, integrated and holistic perspectives. The papers included are both theoretical as well as practical, and include a number of case studies showing how knowledge management has been implemented in practice that may assist other organisations in their search for a better means of managing what is now recognised as a core organisational activity. It has been accepted by a growing number of organisations that the precise handling of information and knowledge is a significant factor in facilitating their success but that there is a challenge in how to implement a strategy and processes for this handling. It is here, in the particular area of knowledge process handling that we can see the contributions of operational researchers most clearly as is illustrated in the papers included in this journal edition. The issue comprises nine papers, contributed by authors based in eight different countries on five continents. Lind and Seigerroth describe an approach that they call team-based reconstruction, intended to help articulate knowledge in a particular organisational. context. They illustrate the use of this approach with three case studies, two in manufacturing and one in public sector health care. Different ways of carrying out reconstruction are analysed, and the benefits of team-based reconstruction are established. Edwards and Kidd, and Connell, Powell and Klein both concentrate on knowledge transfer. Edwards and Kidd discuss the issues involved in transferring knowledge across frontières (borders) of various kinds, from those borders within organisations to those between countries. They present two examples, one in distribution and the other in manufacturing. They conclude that trust and culture both play an important part in facilitating such transfers, that IT should be kept in a supporting role in knowledge management projects, and that a staged approach to this IT support may be the most effective. Connell, Powell and Klein consider the oft-quoted distinction between explicit and tacit knowledge, and argue that such a distinction is sometimes unhelpful. They suggest that knowledge should rather be regarded as a holistic systemic property. The consequences of this for knowledge transfer are examined, with a particular emphasis on what this might mean for the practice of OR Their view of OR in the context of knowledge management very much echoes Lind and Seigerroth's focus on knowledge for human action. This is an interesting convergence of views given that, broadly speaking, one set of authors comes from within the OR community, and the other from outside it. Hafeez and Abdelmeguid present the nearest to a 'hard' OR contribution of the papers in this special issue. In their paper they construct and use system dynamics models to investigate alternative ways in which an organisation might close a knowledge gap or skills gap. The methods they use have the potential to be generalised to any other quantifiable aspects of intellectual capital. The contribution by Revilla, Sarkis and Modrego is also at the 'hard' end of the spectrum. They evaluate the performance of public–private research collaborations in Spain, using an approach based on data envelopment analysis. They found that larger organisations tended to perform relatively better than smaller ones, even though the approach used takes into account scale effects. Perhaps more interesting was that many factors that might have been thought relevant, such as the organisation's existing knowledge base or how widely applicable the results of the project would be, had no significant effect on the performance. It may be that how well the partnership between the collaborators works (not a factor it was possible to take into account in this study) is more important than most other factors. Mak and Ramaprasad introduce the concept of a knowledge supply network. This builds on existing ideas of supply chain management, but also integrates the design chain and the marketing chain, to address all the intellectual property connected with the network as a whole. The authors regard the knowledge supply network as the natural focus for considering knowledge management issues. They propose seven criteria for evaluating knowledge supply network architecture, and illustrate their argument with an example from the electronics industry—integrated circuit design and fabrication. In the paper by Hasan and Crawford, their interest lies in the holistic approach to knowledge management. They demonstrate their argument—that there is no simple IT solution for organisational knowledge management efforts—through two case study investigations. These case studies, in Australian universities, are investigated through cultural historical activity theory, which focuses the study on the activities that are carried out by people in support of their interpretations of their role, the opportunities available and the organisation's purpose. Human activities, it is argued, are mediated by the available tools, including IT and IS and in this particular context, KMS. It is this argument that places the available technology into the knowledge activity process and permits the future design of KMS to be improved through the lessons learnt by studying these knowledge activity systems in practice. Wijnhoven concentrates on knowledge management at the operational level of the organisation. He is concerned with studying the transformation of certain inputs to outputs—the operations function—and the consequent realisation of organisational goals via the management of these operations. He argues that the inputs and outputs of this process in the context of knowledge management are different types of knowledge and names the operation method the knowledge logistics. The method of transformation he calls learning. This theoretical paper discusses the operational management of four types of knowledge objects—explicit understanding; information; skills; and norms and values; and shows how through the proposed framework learning can transfer these objects to clients in a logistical process without a major transformation in content. Millie Kwan continues this theme with a paper about process-oriented knowledge management. In her case study she discusses an implementation of knowledge management where the knowledge is centred around an organisational process and the mission, rationale and objectives of the process define the scope of the project. In her case they are concerned with the effective use of real estate (property and buildings) within a Fortune 100 company. In order to manage the knowledge about this property and the process by which the best 'deal' for internal customers and the overall company was reached, a KMS was devised. She argues that process knowledge is a source of core competence and thus needs to be strategically managed. Finally, you may also wish to read a related paper originally submitted for this Special Issue, 'Customer knowledge management' by Garcia-Murillo and Annabi, which was published in the August 2002 issue of the Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53(8), 875–884.

Editorial

On behalf of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan and the editorial team, I am pleased to welcome readers to this, the first issue of Knowledge Management Research & Practice (KMRP). The aim of KMRP is to provide an outlet for rigorous, high-quality, peer-reviewed articles on all aspects of managing knowledge, organisational learning, intellectual capital and knowledge economics. The Editorial Board intends that there be a particular emphasis on cross-disciplinary approaches, and on the mixing of 'hard' (e.g. technological) and 'soft' (e.g. cultural or motivational) issues. This issue features four regular papers and an editorial paper; in addition, there are two book reviews. KMRP is intended as a truly international journal. The papers in this issue feature authors based in five different countries on three continents; eight different countries and four continents if the editorial paper is included. The first of the regular papers is 'The Knowledge-Creating Theory Revisited: Knowledge Creation as Synthesizing Process', by Ikujiro Nonaka and Ryoko Toyama. There can be few readers who are unaware of the work on knowledge creation by Nonaka and his co-workers such as Takeuchi, and this paper seeks to revisit and extend some of the earlier ideas. The second paper is 'Knowledge Sharing in a Multi-Cultural Setting: A Case Study' by Dianne Ford and Yolande Chan. They present a case study that explores the extent to which knowledge sharing is dependent on national culture. The third paper is 'R&D Collaboration: The Role of bain Knowledge-creating Networks' by Malin Brännback. She also draws upon Nonaka and Takeuchi's work on knowledge creation, using the case of knowledge-creating networks in biopharmaceutical R&D involving both universities and industry as an example. The fourth regular paper is 'The Critical Role of Leadership in Nurturing a Knowledge Supporting Culture' by Vincent Ribière and Alea Saa Sitar. They examine the role of leaders in knowledge management generally, and especially in knowledge organisations, from the viewpoint of 'leading through a knowledge lens'. In addition, this issue includes an 'editorial paper', 'Knowledge Management Research & Practice: Visions and Directions' by the editorial team of John Edwards, Meliha Handzic, Sven Carlsson, and Mark Nissen. This paper presents a small survey of academics and practitioners, outlines key directions for knowledge management research and practice, and gives the editorial team's views on how KMRP can help promote scholarly inquiry in the field. We trust that you will both enjoy reading this first issue and be stimulated by it, and cordially invite you to contribute your own paper(s) to future issues of KMRP.

Knowledge based improvement:simulation and artificial intelligence for identifying and improving human decision-making in an operations systems

The performance of most operations systems is significantly affected by the interaction of human decision-makers. A methodology, based on the use of visual interactive simulation (VIS) and artificial intelligence (AI), is described that aims to identify and improve human decision-making in operations systems. The methodology, known as 'knowledge-based improvement' (KBI), elicits knowledge from a decision-maker via a VIS and then uses AI methods to represent decision-making. By linking the VIS and AI representation, it is possible to predict the performance of the operations system under different decision-making strategies and to search for improved strategies. The KBI methodology is applied to the decision-making surrounding unplanned maintenance operations at a Ford Motor Company engine assembly plant.

Knowledge management sans frontières

Knowledge management is a topic that crosses borders of various kinds, such as those between departments, between organisations or between countries. In this paper we will consider various issues relating to knowledge management, in the context where more than one department/organisation/country is involved. To do this, we place an emphasis on knowledge management as a process, rather than as an organisational system or, worse, as a piece of technology. This process involves trust, negotiation—and indeed some technological support. In this paper we wish to introduce the concept of ‘triangles of trust’, and to focus on where ‘the top meets the bottom’ in terms of knowledge management and organisational learning. Partial examples will be offered in support of our views, but no full and complete examples—knowledge management simply is not well enough understood or documented for that yet. Our overall conclusion is that there is no one best way to “do” knowledge management, but there are principles that ought to be applied.

Using DEA and simulation in guiding operating units to improved performance

The potential for the use of DEA and simulation in a mutually supporting role in guiding operating units to improved performance is presented. An analysis following a three-stage process is suggested. Stage one involves obtaining the data for the DEA analysis. This can be sourced from historical data, simulated data or a combination of the two. Stage two involves the DEA analysis that identifies benchmark operating units. In the third stage simulation can now be used in order to offer practical guidance to operating units towards improved performance. This can be achieved by the use of sensitivity analysis of the benchmark unit using a simulation model to offer direct support as to the feasibility and efficiency of any variations in operating practices to be tested. Alternatively, the simulation can be used as a mechanism to transmit the practices of the benchmark unit to weaker performing units by building a simulation model of the weaker unit to the process design of the benchmark unit. The model can then compare performance of the current and benchmark process designs. Quantifying improvement in this way provides a useful driver to any process change initiative that is required to bring the performance of weaker units up to the best in class. © 2005 Operational Research Society Ltd. All rights reserved.

Proposing a systems vision of knowledge management in emergency care

This paper makes a case for taking a systems view of knowledge management within health-care provision, concentrating on the emergency care process in the UK National Health Service. It draws upon research in two casestudy organizations (a hospital and an ambulance service). The case-study organizations appear to be approaching knowledge (and information) management in a somewhat fragmented way. They are trying to think more holistically, but (perhaps) because of the ways their organizations and their work are structured, they cannot ‘see’ the whole of the care process. The paper explores the complexity of knowledge management in emergency health care and draws the distinction for knowledge management between managing local and operational knowledge, and global and clinical knowledge.