The document discusses the relationship between knowledge management (KM) and Web 2.0 technologies. It notes they share common objectives like harnessing user expertise, fostering collaboration, and facilitating information diffusion. Web 2.0 tools like blogs and wikis can improve KM by enabling more efficient knowledge work and better information flow within a learning organization. However, challenges for "KM 2.0" include redefining organizational structures, leveraging external networks, providing incentives for contributions, and establishing new managerial roles. Examples show how companies have increased revenues and reduced costs by adopting Web 2.0 collaboration platforms.

1. IM & KM and Web 2.0
Giulia Miotto – 83853 Information Management
Gianmarco Piva – 83864 Åbo Akademi – 18.04.2011

2. IM & KM and Web 2.0 Miotto - Piva
Index
 Knowledge Management and Web 2.0,
 Potential uses,
 Expected improvements in KM practices,
 Challenges for KM 2.0,
 Web 2.0 applications in business settings.
2

3. IM & KM and Web 2.0 18/04/11
KM 2.0
 Common objectives of KM and Web 2.0
 Harnessing the expertise and knowledge of single users,
 Foster collaboration,
 Exploit network effects,
 Facilitate the diffusion of information.
3

4. IM & KM and Web 2.0 18/04/11
KM 2.0 - An example
 Blogs and wikis
 Easy to use and accessible to everyone,
 User participation and collaborative authoring,
 When applied to KM:
 More efficient knowledge work,
 Better information flow,
 Learning organization.
4

5. IM & KM and Web 2.0 18/04/11
KM 2.0 – Expected improvements
“Capturing their know-how and transferring it to a stable,
easily accessible, cumulative knowledge base — an
organizational memory — in order to retain and make
accessible valuable knowledge gained through the
experiences of all knowledge in a continuous and
uninterrupted manner”
Dalkir, 2010
5

6. IM & KM and Web 2.0 18/04/11
KM 2.0 - Expected improvements
 “KM 1.0”
 Channels (email or IM): everyone participate but low
commonality,
 Platforms (Web portals or Intranets): accessible to everyone but
content controlled by few.
 Problems:
 Knowledge workers did not use the tools to store their
knowledge,
 Technologies did not fit for the purpose (inefficient).
 “KM 2.0” = more effective platforms and tools able to make
visible practices and outputs of the knowledge workers.
6

7. IM & KM and Web 2.0 18/04/11
Challenges for KM 2.0 (1)
 Organizational structure redefinition
 Bottom-up push: implementation from grassroots level,
 Leverage agility and collaboration.
 External cooperation
 Harness external knowledge and social networks
(involvement of customers, suppliers).
7

8. IM & KM and Web 2.0 18/04/11
Challenges for KM 2.0 (2)
 Incentives and motivations
 Every contribution rewarded,
 No contribution = failure of the systems.
 Role of managers
 Control and monitor the discussion,
 “Invisible supervision”,
 Encourage individual contributions, but permit free
discussion.
 Atypical managerial role.
8

9. IM & KM and Web 2.0 18/04/11
Web 2.0 in business settings
 McKinsey survey (2007) on web 2.0 diffusion in companies
 Omnicom (advertising agency), increased revenue by 25%
through collaboration tools. Reduction of inefficiencies and
requirements mismatching;
 Tianping (car insurance), reduced costs, frauds and
management workload with an online platform;
 Procter&Gamble, reduced R&D costs by more than 30% and
doubled its innovation rate with a collaborative technology
platform that involves an external network of almost 10.000
researchers.
9

10. IM & KM and Web 2.0 18/04/11
Thank you!
10

11. IM & KM and Web 2.0 18/04/11
Reference
 Bughin, J. (2008) "The rise of enterprise 2.0". Journal of Direct, Data and Digital
Marketing Practice, 9, 251-259. Available at:
https://secure.palgrave-journals.com/dddmp/journal/v9/n3/pdf/4350100a.pdf
 Dalkir, K. (2009) "Knowledge Management". In: Eds. Bates & Maack, Encyclopedia
of Library and Information Sciences, 3. ed. London: Routledge (pp. 3129-3138)
 Detlor, B. (2009 "Information Management". In: Eds. Bates & Maack, Encyclopedia
of Library and Information Sciences, 3. ed. London: Routledge (pp. 2445-2451)
 McAfee, A. P. (2006) "Enterprise 2.0: the dawn of emergent collaboration". MIT
Sloan Management Review, 47(3), 21-28.
 Tredinnick, L. (2006) “Web 2.0 and business: a pointer to the intranets of the
future?. Business Information Review, 23(4), 228-234. Available at:
http://bir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/23/4/228.pdf
11