Kelly posed an interesting question about social media that (in combination with this comment left by a classmate on my last post) helped to form my approach to this material. I chose he Yuan and Zhao article because if its concern with online "social" technology in knowledge sharing, and the Massingham because it returned to the idea of risk. The Wasko and Faraj piece deals with the idea of social capital, which I found very interesting a few posts back.
Yuan and Zhao returns to the idea that knowledge has an economic value, and that efficient knowledge sharing can have a huge impact on the potential success or failure of an organization. They address the fact that formal knowledge transmission systems often fail, and that social media has begun to fill the void of exchange in user-generated content. Of the 21 employees interviewed, 15 stated they used social media (blogs, wikis, etc. provided to them by their company) to share knowledge about their jobs. 14 used traditional KM tools like databases (but those in the R&D department seemed to find such tools outdated), and all 21 used communication tools (telephone, email, etc.). It seems that any way to reach other people is going to be used to exchange knowledge. More strikingly, users of social media reported it to be more effective than traditional KM tools.
Wasko and Faraj's piece was a breeze to read, possibly because all its cited sources and theories were things I have already read in my KM studies! I've noticed a high rate of recursion, but never more so than working on this post. I saw a lot of names I recognized and a lot of vocabulary I've picked up, too! They take the concept of social capital and break it down into parts-- reputation, the tendency to enjoy helping, ease of access by others, expertise, experience, commitment, and reciprocity. All of these factors seemed to have a positive impact on one's likelihood of advancing one's knowledge (or of collaborating with others to solve a problem). Those at the center tended to act as a hub, frequently transferring knowledge to others and receiving high ratings for helpfulness over the course of the study (if answers were deemed unhelpful, that was weighed differently from giving a helpful answer, from not answering at all, etc.)
Ultimately, Massingham's paper was the one I struggled most with, for no particular reason I can name. I think the writing was fine and clear, and the concepts on their own weren't too difficult. I guess I just wasn't in the best frame of mind when I approached it. Essentially, it exposes a hole in the tree model of problem solving, and asserts that a greater understanding of knowledge management constructs would allow for a more nuanced risk management approach. This would allow members of an organization to appropriately triage and treat problems more efficiently. A knowledge-based approach helps differentiate risks better than a risk-based system, which helps organizations deal with those different risks as their needs require.
~*~
Readings discussed:
Massingham, P. (2010). Knowledge risk management: A framework. Journal of Knowledge Management, 14(3), 464-485. doi:10.1108/13673271011050166
Wasko, M. M., & Faraj, S. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS quarterly, 29(1), 35-57. doi:http://www.jstor.org/stable/25148667
Yuan, Y. C., Zhao, X., Liao, Q., & Chi, C. (2013). The use of different information and communication technologies to support knowledge sharing in organizations: From e-mail to micro-blogging. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(8), 1659-1670. doi:10.1002/asi.22863
You are definitely on to something in your discussion of Yuan and Zhao. As you mentioned, they observed that formal KM systems often fail and that social media may be more effective than traditional knowledge management systems. Here's a link to a blog post by Peter Dorfman in which he writes, "Today... KM is an increasingly informal and an overwhelmingly social activity." He connects tech development trends with KM approaches and argues that informal, loosely managed systems are more common now and may in fact be more effective. http://blog.crowdbase.com/2014/02/25/the-inversion-of-knowledge/
ReplyDeleteI feel like the primary issue there is going where the people are! If people are on social media already, they'll use it to suit whatever their needs are, regardless of intent. Starting up new KM platforms is complicated for the converse reason-- if there aren't people already using it, it's hard to get a reliable system going smoothly. Thanks for the link!
Delete