Social networking and Social technology

First of all, I am going to explain what is social network, and how does it work with knowledge management. According to wikipedia, social network is a social structure made from individuals, each of them is connected and depend on others by at least one type of common category. According to Bradshaw, ‘the most valuable assets the organization having is their knowledge, in other word, to find people with the right knowledge to do the right job‘. Also, when the organization record those knowledge and it will become the organization ’s assets. The question is, how to get social network connect with organization. Through my research, I found the explanation from Brendan Tutt (2007) is making most of the scene, in terms of putting social network into organization. Following, I am going to use his presentation to explain the process. The graphic below is going to explain how does the whole process looks like. Adopt from Brendan Tutt (2007)
The process is combined by two parts.The first process is started with a person or a company who wants to do something, so that person will needs to find some sources to get it start. Therefore, they needs to connect to people, mostly importantly people with the right skills and knowledge. Normally, people just needs to talk to each other, however, the business environment become more complex nowadays. people will needs to work with better quality, therefore, they needs to find new people, who might be more critical. So, those people can be either the person or a company who has that skills or knowledge. The next thing is, what kind of knowledge those people might have, in other word, find out what do they know? What did they learned through their working life? The concept behind this action is to capture those knowledge people might having. The organization is actually building up their assets by capture those knowledge. In terms of knowledge, it can defined either the things been written down or things that people had found. For example, knowledge been written down might be people ‘s blog, not only applied their knowledge into the writing, but also, extend or combine their knowledge with others to comes up with something more valuable. On the other hand, knowledge that been found can be what they have been bookmarked, taged, or even been add to the favourites. Not only about what they have saved the bookmark, but also what do they says about what they have bookmarked and then share those bookmarks with others, this can be done by putting what they have taged on ’delicious’ or ’digg’. the next step is to profile those people with their personal details and their knowledge, skills. After the profiling been done, the person or the company can search the people as well as their knowledge. The main purpose for the first part of the process is to achieve something with other people, and people with the right skills and the right knowledge.The second process is finding the right people and knowledge to deal with current situation and the future situation. It start with finding different people with different skills then build a communities. And then, take some people from the communities to build a team in order to deal with the specific task.A report might be generated after the task is been completed. The organization can review the report and define the assets. Then they can put the assets back into the knowledgebase where they stored the different people’s profile and knowledge. By combine those two parts of the process. The social networking become knowledge management system for the organization. Because it is able to find the people and their knowledge, search the knowledge in order to complete the task in the future, and store the knowledge as assets for others to search.

Web 2.0
According to Reilly (2008), web 2.0 does not have a hard boundary, but people can visualize web 2.0 as a different set of practices which has tie together a veritable solar system of site that demonstrate some or all of those principles at a varying distance from that core.
Accordingly, AndI Gutmans from Zend (2007) said, the three key element within the web 2.0 are: RIA, SOA, and social web. The purpose for those three element is how to transfer the information from the hard disk into the Brower, and allow those information to release their functionality in order to interact with the application then share between the users. Most of the people are experienced the web 2.0 application. Such as, ‘you tube’ and ‘blogging’. I am going to discuss social technology apply to organization.

Social technology apply to organization
The problem is, Will the organization allows the social network to exist in their working environment? Do they allow their employee to use any social technology while they are working? The answer is similar to Aboubakr’s example on the class. Assuming the manager is walking down the stair, and he saw a group of employee is charting, will he going to joint the conversation or he will stop the group. The answer is quite obvious, the manager will go and stop the group charting. Most of the organization nowadays are monitoring their employee to use the internet, even their e-mail. On the other hand, there are lots of different social technology application, some of them are for the user to connect to other people, in order to make friends or charting, like ‘face book’ or ‘msn’. there are also some other application which is more professional, such as ‘linkedin’ and ‘digg’. so the solution is, the organization can select those social technology, or create their own social technology- ’blogging’. I have giving out an example of Pizza Hut customer issues during the class. But what I did not release is the concept of using social technology in the organization. Now, I am going to apply the social technology to pizza hut. Each of Pizza Hut branch has a Hut number which is also the account number for each branch. The customer complain process is work as this. Any manager received a customer complain, he or she will need to go to the Pizza Hut intranet and fill up a form describe what happened, what is the solution and how does the problem been solved and submit it to the head office. This is the company policy that manger have to report it through the intranet, otherwise it could cause suspend to that manager. When the head office received the form, they will then review the case and put the case along with the area manger ’s common on the intranet under the section of ’customer issue’. this will allow all other manager to access to it and learn from it for the similar cases in the future. By doing this, the organization can find out what they can do better, in terms of customer service, also allow the manger to explain and describe the case when the memory is still fresh. What I was thinking is, what if we use the hut number to create a blog for each branch, where everyone can access through the intranet, and most importantly leave common. Because the exist system only allows manger to learn from the case, what if others who has the better solution. However, with the ’hut blog’ system, anyone within the organization is able to give common to the case. In that way, the knowledge of dealing with customer complain will increase much faster than the existing system, also the more we know about the customer the better the service quality is going to be. The result is that the knowledge of dealing with customer complain will be shaped from other manager who might have more experience, which is means the quality of knowledge will be better. On the other hand, some might argue whether the organization will accept the social technology. In my opinion, if the organization can announce a company policy of customer complain must be reported through the intranet. That is no reason that, they can not ask each branch manager to manage their ’hut blog’, in other to avoid or clear the junk information from the blog. The reason is, the time for reporting a customer complain and clear the junk information from the blog are more or less the same.

To sum up, some argue that, some of the social technology application such as ’facebook’, ’youtube’, and ’myspace’ are used to know friend or kill some time, and they have nothing to do with professionalism. However, I think it is depend on how the user use the application. What is more, I found AndI Gutmans ’s presentation about ’what is web 2.0’ from youtube. Also some people are found some effect by using the facebook.

REF: AndI Gutmans (2007) ’what is web 2.0’ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LzQIUANnHc&feature=related access on 01-03-08
Brendan Tutt (2007) ’when social networking meets knowledge management’ http://resources.zdnet.co.uk/articles/video/0,1000002009,39290608,00.htm access on 21-02-08
Sally Whittle (2007) ’ how to use social networks for business gain’ http://resources.zdnet.co.uk/articles/features/0,1000002000,39290463,00.htm?r=9 access on 01-03-08
Wikipedia ’social network’ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_network access on 21-02-08

knowledge cafe

BIS 4410 (knowledge café)
The topic for the knowledge café is ‘what will happen if a organization is running without knowledge management’. the topic allows us to explore the knowledge from the completely opposite side, in order to, find out the must do and must don’t. in other word, considering what effect the organization most, in terms of knowledge management.Each group will comes out with three areas where affect the organization most, with out knowledge management.
Group 1No communication between peopleNot allow people to express their ideasNo document of production
Group 3
No socialisation and culture
No system
No training
Group 2
No communication
Intranet
Internet
Document
No learning and development
No identification of required knowledge
Group 4
No information flow
No improvement
No system or tools

Those are the final point comes from all the group. A part from group3, rest of the groups believed that, one of the disadvantage is the organization will be running with no communication. This is also the most common point we comes up with during the knowledge café.
In my opinion, the three point affect the organization are:
No communication
No improvement
No competitive

No communication
People who worked there will not talk to each other most of the staff would believe they will be more valuable if others can not solve the problem while they can.

No improvement
If the knowledge is not been shared, means the knowledge level fro the organization will be low. For example, the product development department can not perform a good result, lead to the organization will loss strategic advantage.
No competitive
The organization will loss their competitive when against other competitor.

I did question the effectiveness of the knowledge café on the class. As I think the range of knowledge will be wider, if we can do some research about the knowledge topic. However, I realised knowledge café is not a bad idea. Because knowledge café allows everyone express their idea, as all the ideas are focus on one knowledge point it can actually make the deeper understand of that topic.

Data, Information, Knowledge

DATA. Data is the collection of raw facts, it is normally represent as number, letter or work. Bhatt (2001)

INFORMATION. Information is any collected. Organized, or processed data, which is also can be communicable and shareable. Information can be also understand as adding the context to the data. (Bollinger and Smith) 2001.

KNOWLEDGE. Knowledge is the result of daily learning, research, practise and built up process. To transfer the information into knowledge has to gone through the process of justify, true and believe. Armstrong (2003)

During the class, we argued, information is come from the related data and understand the information will become knowledge, but it is impossible transform knowledge into data. As the graphic below.

My colleague Pavan kumar stating that, information must gone through the process of understanding, in order to transform into knowledge. Due to understand will require the justify, believe and prove it is true. Therefore, knowledge can not be transform from data.
However, I do not agree with that. In my point of view, the data , information and knowledge should be at the same level, it will transform to each other with different needs. According to Alavo and Leidner (1999), information is a different way to represent data due to the different action act on it. Also, knowledge is a different way to represent information sue due to the different action act on it. Therefore, knowledge can actually reverse to information and data.

And I used the example of learning the language. First of all, data can be transfer to knowledge. For example, learning how to spell a work will require memorising. Assuming the letter ’A’ ’B’ ‘C’ are the data, language learner can memorise the different spelling of the word. The word will become the learner ’s knowledge. On the other hand, learning grammar will need the learner ’s understanding. Therefore, to learn the language will need both of memorising and understand. Through this method, the data can be transfer either to information or knowledge. I am going to explain how can data transform either to information or knowledge. letter ’A’ ’B’ ’C’ is data. They will become information when they are alphabet. When a English student who needs them to learn how to spell, they become knowledge to that student. In other word, data, information, and knowledge are at the equal level. Because it can be transform to each other according to the different needs.

The question is, what if those data, information, knowledge are totally useless to the user, and how does the data, information and knowledge transform to each other. I am giving an example below:Pizza hut (UK) LTD is using a computer system called Yum-IT. As one of the worldwide famous restaurant brand, the customer complain is the most difficult situation to dealing with. Therefore Yum-IT intranet have a section called ’customer issues’, this section is basically run by all the manager across the country. Within this section, user can find the real case and solution of all sort of customer complain. The process is like this, when a manager received a complain from the customer, the manager will need to speak to the customer and try to solve the problem. Then, at the end of the shift he or she will need to upload the case to the intranet, and the head office will then evaluate the result of the case and give feedback to the manager within a week. But the head office will not change what that manager had uploaded to the intranet. After day to day operation, the ’customer issues’ section is the knowledgebase for the management to find out how to dealing with the customer issues. Within this example, the data is the record of the case. Then it will be transform into information when uploaded to the ‘customer issues’ section. Last, those information will transform into knowledge when any manger needs the case to deal with the current situation. Therefore, as a record, the case is a data. It become information when we added context in it. And it will become knowledge, when others needs to learn or use from it.

To sum up, in my opinion, data, information and knowledge are at the same level, and they can be transfer to each other. The problem is how valuable are those three element to the users, and what if those are completely useless to the users. I.e. the customer cases will be pointless to a kitchen member.
Reference:

Alavi, M and Leidner, D. E. (1999), “knowledge management system: issues, challenges, and benefits,” communications of the association for information system.

Armstrong .m. (2003), “A handbook of human resource management practice” Kogan Page limited.

Bhatt, G. D. (2001), “knowledge management in organizations: examining the interaction between technologies, techniques, and people”, journal of knowledge management.

Bollinger A. S. and smith R. D. (2001) “managing organizational knowledge as a strategic asset”, journal of knowledge management.

Gene Bellinger, Durval Castro, Anthony Mills (2004) “Data, Information, Knowledge and Wisdom” http://www.systems-thinking.org/dikw/dikw.htm

Anthony Liew, “understanding data, information, knowledge and their inter-relationships”. http://www.tlainc.com/articl134.htm

Model for knowledge management

Nonaka ‘s modelNonaka (1991) considering knowledge management is a knowledge creation process. According to Nonaka (1991), knowledge creation is generating new knowledge, as well as, making the existing knowledge available to others. This is the model developed by IKUJIRO NONAKA and HIROTAKA TAKEUCHI in 1991. Accordingly, Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) stated this model contained three elements: SECI, Ba, and knowledge assets. These three elements interact with each other and motivate each other during the process. First of all, the model is running in four stages, socialization, externalisation, combination, internalisation. What is more, the main purpose for this model is how to create the knowledge, then make it available to others and use those knowledge to improve the performance. Socialization, tacit knowledge is shared in this stages with day to day communication and experience. At this stage, knowledge is communicated from tacit to tacit. Externalisation, tacit knowledge is transforming into explicit knowledge at this stage. It can be either written down or recorded, this stage is also ensure that the knowledge is not missing when the individual is leaving the organization. At this stage, knowledge is communicated from tacit to explicit. In fact, Nonaka (1991) specified that knowledge creation is take place at this stage. Combination, different various of the explicit is combined at this stage, in order to make it more usable. At this stage, knowledge is communicated from explicit to explicit. Internalisation, linking the knowledge to operation at this stage. Basically, let all the individuals in the organization to learn the knowledge and use it. At this stage, knowledge is communicated from explicit back to tacit. Secondly, the concept of Ba. Ba was first introduced by Nonaka and Konno, Ba is a concept to describe how knowledge is creating, share, and utilized through the interaction. Four categories are defined by Nonaka (1998).
Originating Ba: the place, where staff can interact with each other and customer.Dialoguing Ba: through the conversation between the staff, they are able to transform the tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge.Systemizing Ba: the explicit knowledge is been tested and feedback will be given to the place where the tacit knowledge been created.Exercising Ba: along with the information of the knowledge and the feedback, the employee is able to improve their knowledge and skills. Thirdly, the knowledge assets. Those factor, which specified by the organization, in order to help the industrial while the knowledge creating process.
Critical on SECI modelCulture problemAlthough, SECI as one of the most recognised knowledge management model, it still contain some disadvantage. According to (Geytere from 12manage.com), the model is based on a study of Japanese organization, which is only suitable for certain culture background.First of all, SECI model is highly focus on the tacit knowledge. According to Nonaka (1991), the model was based on the study in Japan. Employee in Japan are mostly stays in one organization for the whole working life, and the management have the absolute power to control the subordinate, which is very similar to China. For example, the subordinate will not have argument with their manager. According to my own experience, Japanese worker believe that, loyalty is the most valuable element to their organization and there are highly respect their manager. On the other hand, we also have the different ‘off the job culture’. most of the Asia people will have off the job drinking section, due to the pressure from the work (according to time magazine 2003, research shows that people in Japan and Korea is more likely finished work after 8pm). During the drinking section, people are more relaxing and will talk to each other about their feeling, experience and so on. It is also quite normal for them having a discussion in the pub, because they will only have necessary conversation in work. Therefore, communication between tacit can be fulfil in Japan. Either, the manager order the subordinate to communicate with each other in order to complete a task, or people will talk to each other after the work. However, most of the western culture are totally opposite. People are more likely talk to each other during work and not off the work, and employee are more independent. Also people will change their career with different needs.
Working environment Internal competitive team working is very popular in Japanese working culture. People will help each other, in order to complete the task, so the manger in Japan will motivate the subordinate for better co-operation. Internal competitive only happened when there is an opportunity to get promotion. on the other hand, in western culture. People are try to hold as much knowledge as they can, because the more they know and not the others, the more valuable they are. Therefore, the management method in here is very different. I am work as a manger in Pizza Hut. Team working is highly recommended in the management training programme, however, I found it does not work. For example, most of the waiter worked in my restaurant believed that, the more table they have the more tips they are going to gain. Therefore, they will rather spend more time with their customer then helping their colleague. In order to improve the sales, I can only motivate them to have competition to each other. The result is, we might have a very impressive sales, but all the staff will never find out what others knows. In other word, socialization might never happen under this kind of management method. In my opinion, this problem can be solve, if the organization can make some change to co-operate with this model. For example, one of my lecturer Andrew Paul C Coldwell used to worked for an organization in Africa. The management strategy in the organization is very different. The strategy is focus on improving the organization performance, on the other hand, it also care about the individual. Their strategy is: “you can only get promote if all your subordinate has the same knowledge level as you”. therefore, the promotion process will also test your subordinates. In other word, if the organization can encourage their employee to share the knowledge and benefit the individual, then the Nonaka model will across the barrier of culture.
To sum up, Nonaka model might be perfectly suitable for Japanese organization. However, it is difficult to transfer to other culture background. From my point of view, what if Nonaka model combining with other theory. Such as, Wiig (1997) focuses more on explicit knowledge rather than tacit knowledge.

Ref:
Moteleb, A, A and Woodman, M. (2008) ‘Notions of knowledge management systems: a gap analysis’ BIS4410 hand out, Middlesex university Nonaka, I (1991), ’the knowledge-creating company’, Harvard business review on knowledge management, 1998.
Nonaka, I. And Takeuchi, H. (1995), ’the knowledge-creating company’ USA oxford university press
Tom De Gevere, http://www.12manage.com/methods_nonaka_seci.html access on 28-02-08
Philippe Perez http://www.knowledgeboard.com/item/380/23/5/3 access on 18-02-08
Wiig, K, M. (1997), ’knowledge management: an introduction and perspective’, journal of knowledge management.

definition of knowledge management

Week two of the BIS4410. (Definition of knowledge management)
Definition of knowledge management:“Knowledge management is the process of systematically and actively managing and leveraging the stores of knowledge in an organization, it is also the process of transforming information and intellectual assets into enduring value.” laudon (1998)
according to polyani (1967) “Knowledge can be either defined as tacit or explicit. While knowledge is difficult to record and document is called tacit knowledge. On the other hand, knowledge which is easy to documented is called explicit. In other word, explicit knowledge can be easy to communicated, while as, tacit can only be communicated by practice.

Alternatively Nonaka (1991) stated that knowledge management has three categories. Knowledge creation, knowledge dissemination and knowledge utilisation. In my opinion, knowledge management is a process for the organization to exploring and sharing knowledge, then use the assets to improve the performance. Organization wise, the most valuable function for knowledge management is how to transform the tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge and put the explicit knowledge into day to day practice, in order to get improvement in their performance.

During the class we argued that, does the knowledge management has to have‘storage’. the disagreement was coming from Tubo Azeez’s group. Rest of the class are agreed that, knowledge management is talking about the creating, storing, and distribution of the knowledge, according to Wigg (1997). However, Tubo was arguing that, storage would become pointless if the knowledge is communicated between tacit to tacit. In my opinion, knowledge management might not have the storage, if the knowledge is sharing between tacit to tacit. However, the performance of the knowledge management will be in a limited level. What is more, there is a possibility that, the knowledge will be shred with optional, if the knowledge is from tacit to tacit. I am not arguing that the knowledge management must have storage; what I try to say is, if there is a different level of knowledge management according to the performance, then the knowledge management without the storage will provide lower performance. In other word, a good knowledge management will contented a storage.

For example, Yum-IT in Pizza Hut (UK) ltd. Yum-IT is a combination of a knowledge management system and an information system. The information system part helps to the better management of the organization, and the knowledge management system helps to share the ideas and concept, in order to gain good result. Information system is installed in each store and the knowledgebase can be access from each store through intranet. The knowledgebase are called ’how to run a great restaurant’, IT department will update the knowledgebase every week. There are different section within the knowledgebase- customer issues, staff issues, legal issues, sales forecasting, product standard etc…. Sales forecasting. Provided the wrong sales forecast can directly affect the store performance. Yum-IT will store everyday sales, and cost. The system will generate a suggestion forecast. At this stage, the manager can make their decision based on the company target, system suggestion sales, and the sales of last year. The system will generate an e-mail sent to the area manager if the branch manger no accepts the suggested number. With in the e-mail, the branch manager needs to explain the reason for changing the suggested sales, (I.e. local event, new booking etc). The cost allowance. Soon as the sales forecast is been put into the system, it will automatically calculate the allowance of the cost of labour and stock. Below 20% of the sales will be the allowance of the labour cost. 25% of the sales will be the allowance of the stock cost. Another 5-8% will be used on the additional cost (gas, water). The system will not accept manage to make up the forecast above those allowance unless the manager increase the forecast of the sales. After the cost of the labour and stock been calculating. The system will generate the staff timetable and food order based on the pervious week. The branch manger can also make a change of those timetable and food order, however, an e-mail will be generate for the branch manager to explain the reason behind those changes. After the whole forecasting process completed, the system will generate two copies of report of all the data. One will be sent to the area manager, and the report will be uploading to the intranet in two weeks time along with the area manager’s note (I.e. over forecasted due to the big number of the booking cancellation). The report can be view or download from the intranet under the section of ‘how to run a good store‘. Those reports are very useful for other branch manager to avoid the same problem. What is more, the concept will not only limited to the figure but also the logically scene and experience behind it. These can be found when the manager explains the reason for changing the system suggestion and the communication between him and the area manager.

Within this example, the knowledge is created when the manager generated the forecast, and tacit knowledge will transform into explicit knowledge when the manger sent the e-mail to the area manager with all the forecast information. Last, the knowledge will be shared through the intranet

Ref: Michael Polyani, (1967) the tacit dimension, garden city, NY: anchor books.

Nonaka,I. (1991), ‘ the knowledge-Creating Company’, Harvard business review on knowledge management, 1998.

Laudon, K.C. & Laudon, J.P.( 1998) Managing Information Systems: New approaches to organisation and technology, Fifth Edition, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Wiig.K.M (1997), ‘knowledge management: an introduction and perspective’ journal of knowledge management, vol. 1, no, 1.
http://www.kmconnection.com/What%20is%20knowledge.htm