Stop model - Knowledge sharing

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    3 Favorites

    Stop model - Knowledge sharing - Presentation Transcript

    1. The Psychological Contract of Knowledge Sharing ( KS ) in technological organizations Dr. Ora Setter Faculty of Management – Tel Aviv U
    2. Overview
      • What is a Psychological Contact
      • Knowledge Management model
      • Is KS a natural act?
      • The STOP model
      • Changing the KS psychological contract
    3. Psychological Contract
      • Perception of mutual obligations between employee and organization
      • Old contract : relationship ( loyalty for security ) - covenant
      • New contract : transactional – balance sheet
    4. The new, agile organization
      • Solutions driven ( not product or service )
      • Inside teaming – multifunctional, networked, virtual, ad - hoc teams as a structure
      • Outside alliances – coopetition
      • Ever changing and self reinventing
      • Knowledge based
    5. ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT CONTENT TECHNOLOGY PROCESSES BUSINESS STRATEGY ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AND POLITICS TECHNOLOGICAL TRANSPARENCY KM STRATEGY: REUSE OR INVENTION
    6. Is KS natural?
      • Traditional attributions about barriers to KS :
      • “ What ’ s in it for me ”
      • “ Knowledge is power ”
      • “ The culture ”
      • =
      • Knowledge hoarding is the rule
      • “ altruistic ” KS is the exception – you have to “ change ” people so as to engage in it
      • “ Sharing and using knowledge are often unnatural acts ”
      • Thomas Davenport, - Some principles of knowledge management
    7. Lets go to nature …
    8. Ks is natural - animals do it
      • KS is essential to specie survival : It is a natural act .
      • Animals communicate with each other to share information and behave in ways that benefit other members of the group at some cost or risk to themselves
    9. WHY?
      • Because they gain collectively by acquiring information about :
        • food and other resources
        • Reproductive advantages
        • Shelter and space .
        • And by Avoiding
        • physical and other small hazards
        • competitors
        • predators or other large dangers .
    10. … And people do it by
      • Teaching
      • Writing
      • Storytelling
      • Mentoring
      • Asking questions
      • Playing
      • Preaching
      • Talking
      • Gossiping
      • Criticizing
      • Modeling
      • Answering questions
      • Creating cultural artifacts
    11. Because ..
      • People like to see their knowledge and expertise used
      • People like to help their colleagues
      • People want to learn from others
      • People get good feeling from the recognition and respect they get
      • O ’ Dell & Grayson – If only we knew what we know
    12. So …
      • If it is so natural for us to share knowledge
      • And it is unnatural for us not to share …
      • How come
      • We do not do it?
      • Why do we have problem with organizational KS?
    13. Force field ( Kurt Lewin )
      • Restraining Forces
      Driving Forces
    14. The “ stop ” model
      • Restraining Forces to KS arise from four levels :
      • Social
      • Technological
      • Organizational
      • Personal
      • Focus of this presentation – on the knowledge sharer
    15. Social Barriers
      • Knowledge defines who is “ in ” and who is “ out ” : it is both cause and effect of social segmentation :
      To be “ in ” you have to be “ in the know ” To be “ in the know ” you have to be “ in ”
    16. Why?
      • Survival
      • Predictability and certainty
      • Dealing with Cognitive complexity
      • Ease and comfort
    17. Result :
      • People will share knowledge only with their “ in - group ” members .
      • Is the whole organization the “ in - group ” entity, or - departmental / hierarchical level / professional membership?
      • How to overcome mergers?
      Whole parts
    18. Research finding show that
      • In 250+ employees ’ organizations – weak holistic we - feeling
      • Proximity is essential for group identity
      • Departmental membership is the strongest “ glue ” for inclusion feeling
      • People will share with peers as a duty, with others - discretionally
    19. To Overcome the Social Barriers We Need to
      • Encourage the holistic view of the organization - news and information about mission, vision, strategy, plans, actions, and people, and by culture artifacts
      • Encourage as many different cross - organizational affiliations as possible – f2f and virtual teams and communities
      • Add translation capabilities
      • Define who is the enemy - the “ them ”
      • Encourage inside benchmarking
      • Encourage TRUST
    20. Technological Barriers
      • “ Technology reflects its ’ developers and influences its ’ users ”
      • Although the I * Net technology is the friendliest of all IT platforms – it was developed by “ techies ” is not yet “ transparent ” to most users
    21. Why?
      • The problem of “ media efficacy ”
      • People do not “ think intranet ”
      • Accessibility, Ease of use : down times, slow response time, broken links and streamlines
      • Problems of transparency and privacy
      • Overload of “ garbage ” information and not good enough search bots
    22. Results
      • KS is mediated through opaque technology, so :
      • It takes time and effort to share knowledge, the process is not natural, and it ’ s easy to back off
    23. Overcome the technological barriers
      • KISS !!!!
      • Adjust applications to bandwidth and hardware – and to computer efficacy and culture
      • Design and build KS applications with joint teams of technology, content and process professionals
      • Support systems and informal areas
      • Train, teach, promote, show, ask, cajole force, order, beg, show, tempt …
    24. Organizational Barriers
      • Culture, culture, culture …
      • No organizational Sharing Space
      • Tangible and not tangible
      Organizational Knowledge ideology : Markets Covenants
    25. Culture
      • Information or technical focused ( not people )
      • Centralistic
      • Bureaucratic, stable, inflexible
      • Hierarchic
      • Strict division of labor
      • Rational - productivity and efficiency driven
      • Structure and procedures discourage challenging paradigms
    26. Organizational space
      • “ How can an organization transfer knowledge effectively? Hire smart people and let them talk to one another ”
      • Need for emotional, physical and temporal space, legitimacy for “ sharing activity ” , contrary to “ don ’ t waste time ”
      • We are punished for doing KS
    27. Solutions :
      • Knowledge cafe
      • Talk room – actual and virtual
      • Knowledge fair
      • Open forums and chats
      • Communities of action
      • “ icq ” , “ odigo ” , “ third voice ” , “ gooey ”
      • Enlightened management
    28. University, linux, cyberculture Consultants, “ expert exchange ” microsoft example Cooperation and creation “ fountain of knowledge ” Exchange and reuse Objective of ks Trust and faith obligations Trust and rules entitlements Conditions focus Re - creation and economy of knowledge Fun and kinship Intangible payment : reciprocity, repute, altruism rewards Development of society Personal utility Value in Partners and servers of knowledge Buyer, seller, broker participants Mission, Public good Property , possession Knowledge is Covenant Market – balance sheet
    29. Problems with Market ideology
      • Incompleteness of information
      • Asymmetry of knowledge
      • Localness of knowledge
      • Monopolies
      • Artificial scarcity
      • Trade barriers
              • ( Davenport & Prusak )
    30. Problems with covenant
      • Reliance on motivation and goodwill
      • Power disguised as ideology
      • Possible abuse of the knowledge shared
      • Burnout
      • Difficulties in maintenance
    31. result :
      • Insecurity ( and hoarding )
      • Lack of trust in peers and managers ( and withholding info and knowledge )
      • Negative attitudes to the organization ( and distortion of knowledge )
      • Feeling of abuse
    32. Current Trend
      • Mix – up between covenant and market :
      • Covenant organizations ( civil service ) are getting more market oriented
      • Market organizations are getting more covenant oriented .
    33. Result
      • No clear expectations about KS :
      • what are the obligations?
      • what are the entitlements?
      • What is the contract?
    34. Adequate organizational practices
      • Rewards
      • Recognition
      • Prizes ( NIHBIDIA )
      • Exchange
      • Evaluation
      • “ Assist ” league
      • Clear definition of “ who owns the knowledge ”
    35. Personal barriers
      • Ignorance as to the extent and relevance of our knowledge
      • The problem of the cow …
    36. Problems with personal barriers
      • We don ’ t know that we know what we know, we don ’ t know how we know it
      • We don ’ t reflect on our knowledge, or it is too complex
      • We don ’ t appreciate that our knowledge is relevant and valuable
      • We don ’ t feel comfortable to “ promote ” our knowledge, we shy from criticism
      • We don ’ t push our knowledge when nobody ever asked us about it
    37. Result
      • “ Tunnel vision ” and “ silo organization ”
      • This is the main barrier
    38. What to do?
      • Open communication channels
      • Combination of f2f and virtual meetings
      • A network of expert exchange
      • Facilitation is essential
      • Mobilization of direct managers
    39. Organizational culture Personal insecurities Technological opaqueness Social boundaries
    40. Changing the psychological contract
      • Clarify mutual obligations to include explicitly knowledge sharing as part of the job
      • Clarify who owns what knowledge
      • Who owns usage rights
      • Allocation of time and space for KS
      • Clarify what are the learning duties
      • What is exchange and what is duty
    41. Changing the contract
      • Change, if not done in cooperation, is perceived as “ breach ”
      • The change of the contract should be perceived as fair, never abusive .
      • Change should be pervasive to all organization ’ s levels, not only to lower levels

    + settersetter, 2 years ago

    custom

    1211 views, 3 favs, 0 embeds more stats

    STOP model for knowledge sharing

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 1211
      • 1211 on SlideShare
      • 0 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 3
    • Downloads 78
    Most viewed embeds

    more

    All embeds

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories