KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND
Research Director Harri Laihonen, PhD
ICICKM Conference 2018 Cape Town, South Africa
1. 15 years of knowledge management research in five minutes
2. Knowledge management as a dialogue
3. 1 + 2 in the context of hybrid governance
4. In search of complementing theoretical explanations
RQ1: How is knowledge turned into value?
(together with various interest groups)
RQ2: Who manages, what and how?
RQ3: How our values evolve and
change how we interpret information?
are our decisions
individuals, organizations or
Laihonen, H., Lönnqvist, A. and Metsälä, J. (2015), “Two knowledge perspectives to growth management”, VINE, 45(4), 473-494.
TWO KNOWLEDGE PERSPECTIVES
SECRET RECIPE FOR KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT
Quality of the data
Laihonen, H. and Mäntylä, S. (2018), “Strategic knowledge management and evolving local government”, Journal of Knowledge Management, 22(1) , 219-234.
KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AS A DIALOGUE
Simple, robots and AI will take care
in the future
Disagreement on 1) what to do, 2) how to
do and/or 3) how to evaluate success
Knowledge management as analytics
Knowledge management as a
Vrt. Van Dooren: Performance information in the public sector (2010)
Laihonen, H. and Mäntylä, S. (2017), “Principles of performance dialogue in public administration”, International Journal of Public Sector Management, 30(5), pp. 414-428.
“The development focus is turning from individual
organizations to horizontal service processes, meaning
that the unit of analysis needs to be changed.“
BUT, it is not that easy to forget the organizations and institutions…
Laihonen, H. and Mäntylä, S. (2018), “Strategic knowledge management and evolving local government”, Journal of Knowledge Management, 22(1), 219-234.
Project web site: http://hyper.uta.fi/ Project @Researchgate
• Two theoretical viewpoints:
• Institutional economics approaches them from the perspective of governance structures,
and sees hybrids between hierarchies and markets (e.g. Powell, 1990; Williamson, 1975;
• Public administration theory discusses hybrids as something combining private and public
interests (e.g. Skelcher and Smith, 2015; Johanson and Vakkuri, 2017).
“ambiguous types of social organizing and manifests itself in institutional settings
where public and private organizations operate according to public interest”
(Johanson and Vakkuri, 2017).
goal incongruence and competing institutional logics
mixed ownershipvarious forms of financial and
social control mechanisms
• The discussion can be summarized into three arguments that provide the
basis for a research agenda to advance our understanding of knowledge
management for hybrid governance:
1. Knowledge management for hybrid governance requires a wider theoretical standpoint than
the dominant knowledge-based view.
2. The essence of knowledge management in hybrids lies in the dialogic interaction between
actors and in the recognition of mutual benefits.
3. New methods and data are needed for understanding and modelling the networks where
hybrids create value for different shareholders. (data scientists?)
THANK YOU FOR ENABLING PARTICIPATION TO
• Research director Harri Laihonen
• University of Tampere, Faculty of Management