Vexing issues of knowledge sharing: The case study of the wiki initiative in a Malaysian public organization. While many organizations have benefitted from the existence of Internet-based web applications such as wikis and blogs as tools for knowledge sharing, many others have failed. In the end, wikis and … Expand. The success of corporate wiki systems: an end user perspective.
Business, Computer Science. End User Comput. View 2 excerpts, references background. Using Wikis in a Corporate Context. This paper investigates the technology of Wikis and their current and possible future role within a corporate context. It argues that the phenomenon of Wikis should be understood as not one, but two … Expand. View 1 excerpt, references background. Using wikis and blogs to improve collaboration and knowledge sharing.
Purpose — Leading business thinkers agree that knowing how to collaborate is the key to effective knowledge creation and sharing, and to future business success. But collaboration is voluntary, and … Expand. Interactive business development, capturing business knowledge and practice: A case study.
The KM phoenix. Cultural impacts on knowledge sharing: empirical data from EU project collaboration. Wiki Or Won't He? KM projects typically do not fail due to software issues, but for human reasons: lack of input, or GIGO.
Based on the features described above, wikis are a powerful replacement for conventional. Capturing information: The information is there. Maybe on. Finding information: When a user has to search a network file server,.
Consuming information: In addition to finding information more easily with. All of the above is true — yet it misses the Big Picture. The real story is not about a better tool, but being able to work differently.
The wiki becomes the primary platform to conduct work , the fabric of everyday business, where people create, collaborate, and in the process capture information. While not a Knowledge Management tool, the wiki resolves the KM-problem as a by-product. With MK, through blogs and wikis, the principle activity is sharing, driven by social incentives. Intelligence is provided by participants, both through the act of sharing and simply leaving behind breadcrumbs of attention.
We have to integrate the wiki to any of the KM tool and then have make it work as a front end application. But with the help of Wikis, its easy to capture the tacit knowledge of the organisation. Only as part of a strategic plan that includes organizational cultural guidelines which in most orgs amount to a paradigm shift and only with other IT tools can wikis become truly relevant.
I just realized the extent this article reaches in terms of the usefulness of corporate wikis. Basically, I do agree with the basic tenet of the article: once a wiki is embraced as the tool where business operations are conducted on a daily basis, KM automatically follows. The point is, embracing the wiki way in the first place is the really difficult step to take. I have been working with companies that, although they truly embrace the idea of using a wiki as the primary space where work is done, fail to effectively pursue the process to its full extent.
The cultural shift has not taken place yet, although the spread of the Web 2. Later, computer editing allowed visible modifications and comments: great, but it could lead to crazy-pavement visual results. Same with some intranets that allowed versioning, like mayeticvillage. But if they are, they are damned useful. In fact, this is even implied in the paper you reference. Wikis are really nothing more than 2nd generation hypermedia.
Vannevar Bush, right? According to [7] [19] - [21] , KM refers to processes and practices for the development of an organization that involves a systematic management of vital knowledge resources and associated processes such as creating, ac-. Figure 1. The production of knowledge workers is often intangible, and organizations struggle to remember why decisions were made or how projects were completed in the past; thus, an organization can often lose the formula to maintain and improve its strategic advantages [22].
The role of KM is not only to influence the sharing of knowledge directly but also to stimulate and create the conditions necessary for this process to occur by mitigating barriers and, above all, by creating context that enables the generation of organizational knowledge [10] [16].
For a solid KM implementation, organizations must emphasize the basis of explicit and tacit knowledge, as well as internal and external, individual and organizational knowledge [23]. The IT infrastructure includes data processing, storage, technologies, communication systems and information management [20].
Often, its role in sharing knowledge is to facilitate interaction through personal yellow pages experts , knowledge maps and social network, among others, which are considered KM tools [10]. Although the contribution of ICT to OKM is a subject of much discussion, there is general consensus that they should and can play a supporting role [10] because technologies are key elements of KM implementation, as observed by [20].
Rapid changes in the OKM field have largely been the result of dramatic progress in IT [20] and many KM tools and techniques have been discussed and employed over the years [24].
Traditional KM systems are described by [25] as IT-based systems whose functions include encoding and sharing of best practices in a repository of knowledge and the creation of corporate knowledge directories and networks. Although these technologies have certainly changed the way knowledge is shared among organizations, the technologies primarily deal with explicit knowledge rather than tacit knowledge [24]. The differentiating factor of technologies with the bias of social software is that users become publishers rather than simply being consumers of information.
This means that they can combine, edit and publish existing material; therefore, new content is created and used in association with others, thereby stimulating people with similar interests to share ideas and contribute to debate and the negotiation of differences collaboratively [11] [12]. In fact, social software would precisely have the function of assisting in the explanation process of tacit knowledge, thereby contributing to the spiral of knowledge and SECI model [4].
Nevertheless, collaborative work is interactive and non-structured; therefore, the appropriated technologies for such environments are predominantly knowledge repositories and other collaborative aids, which should be used in a voluntary form [24] [26]. These emergent behaviours reveal a trend known as the social web, whereby Internet-based technology users are involved in information sharing in a collaborative process [26].
Social software is not just a tool for the accumulation and circulation of information. It also promotes interaction, sharing, reflection and composition of new ideas [11].
According to [13] [24] [26] - [28] , the terms Social Web, Web 2. These terms represent the second generation of web-based technologies and a networking platform in which peers contribute to the development of tools that can be used to create dynamic and interactive content in communities on the Internet [13] [26].
Users, content and technology interact; thus, the Social Web is similar to some principle ideas of OKM, including the unrestricted sharing of knowledge, information and data [13] [28].
Social Web tools are defined, therefore, as a new generation of collaborative web-based tools that change the way people work as well as the information is created and shared [13] [25] [27].
To facilitate the development of OKM systems that are monolithic, centralized and controlled, the Social Web offers more interactive and collaborative framework technologies, emphasizing the social interaction of the team in order to generate a collective intelligence [27] [29]. Thus, besides the generation of individual knowledge, a Social Web platform becomes a viable channel of knowledge construction for communities in general as well as specific disciplines [26].
Reference [13] analyzed the principle of the Social Web from a KM perspective and came to a simple conclusion: the principles of the Social Web are very close to those of KM. However, there are differences, primarily in regards to the centralizing attitudes and control of KM in contrast to the decentralized and uncontrolled Social Web attitude [13].
Wiki technology exemplifies the dynamic and collaborative features of social software by expanding Internet-based computing capacity to improve communication and collaboration over time and distance [30].
In a corporate environment, wikis can promote two-way communication between users. They are useful for highly collaborative publishing efforts, such as the creation of technical documentation, policies, proceedings and knowledge bases [14]. Reference [14] claims that the wiki can capture explicit and migratory knowledge, as well as the tacit and embedded knowledge that is fundamental for intensive business knowledge.
Wikis differ from other sites because they allow users to contribute, modify and update the content automatically, i. Companies can benefit from social software applications because they allow various types of content, thereby evolving a wide range of collaborative processes [27]. Wiki technology has the potential to address some specific KM needs, including the capture of distributed knowledge, as well as unstructured and dynamic change of content [28]. With wiki technology, some executives see a way to capture institutional knowledge and attract younger workers [32].
Wikis can take advantage of collective wisdom to create an effective source of knowledge [30]. As mentioned in Section 2. According to [33] , p. Conversely, KM process-oriented models decrease the barriers to share and use knowledge, such us lack of knowledge, lack of absorptive capacity and limited social networks. Reference [34] supported by [35] claims that process-oriented KM models analyze the variables that affect the development, dissemination, modification and use of knowledge processes.
Recurring models in the literature have been explored by [5] , [36] and especially [4]. From the main theoretical models, eight similar cases with different nomenclature emerge.
Table 1. KM process models. The SECI Model is based on the conversion process of tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge, creating four modes [4] , as quoted in Section 2. The Socialization and Internalization processes are directly relate to knowledge creation and its uses, by individuals, emphasizing personal contact and dialogue. In this scenario, a field study was conducted to correlate the questions of KM and information management in order to support tools mediated by IT but with a social interactive approach that focuses on Web 2.
According to [13] [24] [26] [28] and [29] , many technologies, including wikis, web blogs, folksonomies, web- based forums, RSS and social networking sites e. Such technologies allow users to participate according to several forms and models. As the Social Web supports a personal learning process and social dynamics, this can facilitate the cycle of knowledge creation that follows the SECI model [4] whereby explicit and tacit knowledge interact in a continuous process [26].
Some technologies such as VoIP, e-mail, tagging, video conference and instant message support this process because they allow sharing of created knowledge. Some Social Web technologies such as RSS, folksonomies and mashups are good examples of combining knowledge to form new knowledge for a community. Some authors, such as [12] and [14] , argue that wikis offer more opportunities for collaboration than other Social Web tools. This collaboration is due to the unique characteristics of wiki technology, such as coherent information repository, information retrieval, collaborative authorship, instant publication, authorship simplicity, information sharing, time savings, online information, availability and culture of trust [37].
Thus, according to [38] , p. It is also where the individual is required to identify relevant knowledge for both groups and the organization. Table 2 [37] shows the relations between the stages of the SECI model, the mediation spaces ba and the main features of the wiki tool. Some wiki features are repeated in the stages of the SECI model because the wiki allows, within the same characteristic, employees to socialize, outsource, combine and internalize documentation and procedures in wiki pages.
Table 2. From the above data and an extensive literature review, we have developed a guidance questionnaire for the present survey, where methodological developments are described in the following section.
This section describes processes and methods used in bibliometric, bibliographical and field research to identify the contributions of the wiki tool to OKM models. Regarding the methods used for data processing and analysis, this was a mixed research methods, as data from both a quantitative and qualitative perspective was collected and analyzed.
A combination of methods is practical because it enables the use of both words and numbers, thus combining inductive and deductive thoughts [39] , p.
In the qualitative approach, we used mostly content analysis and in the quantitative approach we used statistical techniques commonly seen in social research. The resultant methodological tool was a questionnaire that was applied to test four statistical hypotheses to validate whether a wiki can contribute to OKM and improve the sharing activities of the company.
The hypotheses are:. Socialization process implies strong social interaction, especially face-to-face, and wiki as a software tool, especially online, does not provide this type of activity. Externalization uses several types of media and various forms of languages for sharing and the use the created knowledge. At this stage of knowledge conversion process it is presupposed that the wiki would strongly favour the interaction.
Combination, par excellence, demands different sets of explicit knowledge favoured by different ways of sharing, actual or virtual, again, proceeding on the assumption that the wiki tool would provide the stage.
By promoting the individual and collective reflection in this stage and also by favouring virtual environment. The sample was intentionally nonprobabilistic. This choice is justified because we did not have access to a minimum sample of respondents, for it was not possible to safely identify the population of IT experts from the infrastructure area in Brazil.
The inexistence of an association for this group of professionals, from which reliable data could be obtained, contributed to the definition of an intentional sample. The company chosen for the application of the questionnaire has been active in the national tertiary sector for nearly 13 years. Currently, it has 18, employees throughout Brazil. Approximately employees work in IT and , all of whom have access to the wiki, work in IT infrastructure.
Within the organization, the IT infrastructure area is responsible for the creation and maintenance of databases, servers, networks, telephony and IT infrastructure projects and processes.
The questionnaire 31 questions included closed dichotomous and multiple choice and open questions. A five-point Likert scale was used for the multiple-choice questions. Two sets of Likert values were used: 1 never, rarely, few times, sometimes, often and almost always, and 2 strongly disagree, disagree in part, neither agree or disagree, partially agree and strongly agree.
The questions used in the questionnaire were created based on those used in [40]. However, the contents seen in the literature review contributed by authors such as [27] [28] and [30] , among others, were added. The principal objective of the questions was to verify if a wiki can be incorporated into the SECI model and identify actions for the generation, maintenance, sharing and diffusion of knowledge, considering the stages of Socialization, Externalization, Combination and Internalization.
In addition to questions pertaining to the specific knowledge domain, seven socio-demographic questions were included, i. This section presents the main results of analysis of the data collected and some of the findings and inferences. The questionnaire was administered to 80 employees who worked in IT infrastructure. Of them, In terms of professional experience, some participants were recent hires less than a year , while others had 26 years of service.
The average length of employment was 9. Wiki usage time ranged from never used to five years of use, with an average of 1. By comparing the time worked in the team and the use of wiki, it is interesting to note that the participants with up to two years in the team contributed more In accordance with the SECI model, Table 3 describes the responses associated with the four conversion forms of knowledge: Socialization, Externalization, Combination and Internalization.
Table 3. Description of the questionnaire responses to the SECI model. CA is widely used to value the consistency of questionnaire respondents [42] [43].
It measures the similarity in the assessment profiles of the experts involved, indicating which of the trials were inconsistent with the rest of the expert panel. CA takes values from 0. There are different acceptable cut-off values for CA, which can vary from 0. Note that CA is strongly connected to the number of questions and may vary according to the area of study.
A satisfactory level of reliability for CA depends on how the measure is used. Reference [46] proposed a standard cut-off point greater or equal to 0. As seen in Table 4 , the CA calculation yielded values greater than 0.
The Socialization index was 0.
0コメント