Organizations that apply knowledge management tools and techniques have a real opportunity to impact bottom-line results. By avoiding the pitfalls that frequently befall knowledge management efforts, firms can more effectively apply their knowledge to reduce costs, better serve their customers and gain a distinct competitive advantage in the marketplace : BY CHURCHIL

Challenges in managing organizational knowledge
                                                                                                     BY CHURCHIL

This article was originally published in Next Frontier by WorldatWork and IHRIM.

Knowledge management

  The ability of an organization to create, share and use the collective knowledge of its products, processes and people to increase workplace productivity and reduce activities that

 Knowledge organization

The term "knowledge organization” designates a field of study related to Library and Information Science (LIS). In this meaning KO is about activities such as document description, indexing and classification performed in libraries, databases, archives etc.

Why Don't People Share?

•"Knowledge is power”

•Not realizing how useful particular knowledge is to others

•Lack of trust

•Lack of time

Knowledge Management Challenges

•Data Accuracy

•Data Interpretation

•Data Relevancy

•Ability of the data to support

•Adoption of knowledge management solutions.

Some common pitfalls to avoid

Failure to align knowledge management efforts with the organization’s strategic objectives.

 Many firms fail to align their knowledge efforts with their most pressing business issues.

Ex:- a manufacturing company started a number of knowledge-related initiatives, but failed to align these efforts with their most critical business objective: the integration of a newly acquired subsidiary.

Creation of repositories without addressing the need to manage content. 

•For example, a consumer-products company recently created a vast array of databases to enable its employees to share critical customer knowledge. The company placed a strong emphasis on collecting every possible relevant document into the system. 

Failure to understand and connect knowledge management into individuals’ daily work activities

For example:- a large financial services company provided a series of desktop tools and repositories to its financial planners without spending the time to understand how these planners worked with clients and whether the content was relevant to their particular tasks.

An overemphasis on formal learning efforts as a mechanism for sharing knowledge

•Many organizations have invested heavily in formal learning efforts, such as classroom and online training. Although some of this training may be useful.

•A couple of common methods to counteract this situation are: 

• Communities of practice 

• Mentoring programs. 

•For example:- The IBM Institute for Knowledge-Based Organizations examined a community that was focused on enabling software developers working on similar projects to share tips and tools that could be used to more rapidly solve customer issues. This community sponsored face-to-face meetings and actively managed a Web site where individuals posted questions and answers to difficult problems.

Focusing knowledge management efforts only within organizational boundaries. 

•Most organizations begin with internal knowledge-management efforts designed to share knowledge between employees and across the organization.

•For example:- organizations such as Hallmark, SAP and Hewlett-Packard have begun to focus their knowledge efforts on building communities of customers.

Summary

  Organizations that apply knowledge management tools and techniques have a real opportunity to impact bottom-line results. By avoiding the pitfalls that frequently befall knowledge management efforts, firms can more effectively apply their knowledge to reduce costs, better serve their customers and gain a distinct competitive advantage in the marketplace. 

THANKYOU

FILTERING KNOWLEDGE : CHANGING INFORMATION INTO KNOWLEDGE ASSETS : By Charan Tej

Alain J. Godbout, Godbout Martin Godbout & associates 

FILTERING KNOWLEDGE : CHANGING INFORMATION 

INTO KNOWLEDGE ASSETS 

Journal of Systemic Knowledge Management, January 1999  

presented by: 

Charantej (PA9015) 

Over the years, various attempts at developing a 

comprehensive knowledge management framework have 

identified that one of the key functions in creating 

knowledge assets is the task of selecting or filtering public 

domain knowledge in order to make it relevant to the 

organization. This paper discusses the nature of the 

filtering step in order to define a sound knowledge 

management approach.  

ABSTRACT 

Introduction

Making Sense Out of Data and Knowledge 

Filtering

Systems

Knowledge theory, whether from the psychological, the 

biological or philosophical perspective have one element in 

common: knowledge is acquired through a selection or 

filtering process. Animals as well as person uses a filtering 

process that determines which pieces of information to 

retain. The decision to retain or to reject depends mainly on 

the perception of the relevance of the information in the 

immediate context. In the model, the receiver is described 

as the person who must decide which pieces of information 

to add to the reservoir of knowledge called «knowledge 

base». 

Authority/Creditability

of

Source

of

Information

The receiver is normally better disposed towards 

information that comes from an authoritative source. Our 

individual experience has formed different patterns of 

authority in our system of appreciation. In an organizational 

context, authority is imbedded in the structure, the division 

of work and the jurisdiction. As a result, we tend to 

associate our perception of «knowledgeability» with the 

distribution of authority within the organization.  

.  

Organizational

Biases

 The term bias implies a closed-mindedness outlook that 

prevents someone from judging the situation in an objective 

manner. The key here remains the opposition we tend to make 

between the concept of objective and the concept of 

subjectivity or bias. 

 The organizational biases translates into summary judgement 

whose function is to reinforce our beliefs. Beliefs do not have to 

be truths, they therefore do not qualify as knowledge, but they 

are an integral part of our appreciative system and act as 

filtering agents in knowledge retention 

Corporate

Historical

Context

 we will tend to accept information that reinforces our personal 

experiences. The process is essentially the same as in the case 

of beliefs. The difference lies in the past experience as opposed 

to an interpretative construct. Similarly we tend to reject 

information, regardless of the source, which contradict our 

understanding of history, even more so when it is our own.  

Receiver's

Savvy

Formal education is still a process of acquisition of large 

amounts of information and concepts 

The savvy factor can be seen as the skills of the individual or 

organizations who acts as receiver and conducts the initial 

assessment of the information. A community or a person 

who understands proper research procedures, is better able 

to assess information obtained by surveys. 

Desperation

Factor

For most managers, the reality of management is conditioned by the 

availability of factual data and measurable results.  This is true for 

most persons educated in the Western set of values. As a result, the 

same manager becomes desperate when some crucial information 

cannot be found. Under these circumstances he or she will accept 

almost anything that seems pertinent.  

Filtering

Behaviour

The discussion on human filtering above is intended to 

provide a framework for developing an approach to the 

systematic performance of filtering in knowledge 

management 

Based on observations of best practices, our contention is 

that the design of a formal filtering process will requires 

two steps:  

 The first step consisting of relevancy screening which 

will serves as a means for managing the amount of 

information which will be processed,  

 The second the knowledge appreciation which will 

serve to rank or select within the remaining «relevant» 

information which one correspond to certain quality 

factors.  

Conclusion:

Knowledge

Management

Remains

Human

One of the conclusions that can be drawn from this discussion is 

that the filtering process will continue to require a human 

intervention (at least for the time being). This requirement stems 

from the obligation to make a series of decisions to determine the 

relevance and create added value to the knowledge artefact 

Through a proper screening process, most organizations actually 

build up a knowledge base which, when combined with local 

knowledge production, will provide the competitive edge 

Storytelling in Organizations

Storytelling in Organizations: The power and traps of using

stories to share knowledge in organizations

         

                BY  

            KALYAN KUMAR.K 

Sharing experiences through stories is emerging in 

various professions as a powerfulway to exchange and 

consolidate knowledge. 

 builds trust, cultivates norms, transfers tacit knowledge, 

facilitatesunlearning, and generates emotional 

connections 

 Share norms and values 

 Develop trust and commitment 

 Share tacit knowledge 

 Facilitate unlearning 

 Generate Emotional Connection 

 The essence of a knowledge-sharing 

story is twofold: 

 A) streamlinedexperience 

 B) surrogate experience

The Traps of Knowledge-Sharing Stories

 

 Seductiveness 

 Single point of view 

 Static-ness

How Stories Stack Up

 

 Storytelling 

 Modeling 

 Simulations 

 Codified Resources 

 Symbolic Objects 

Selecting Story-moments

 Kickstarting a new idea 

 Socializing new members 

 Mending relationships 

 Sharing Wisdom. 

Leadership Tips with Stories

 be clear on why you’re sharing them 

 keep it simple and accessible 

 try using more than one medium 

 monitor how a story is received. 

 hone their story-listening skills. 

STORYTELLING By Ravi Patel

STORYTELLING 

Stories have been used to pass along 

knowledge for thousands of years 

Every culture has a history of 

storytelling 

Stories can take many forms - 

Written, Oral, Paintings, 

Architectural. 

STORIES - WHAT ARE 

THEY GOOD FOR? 

Sole and Wilson (2002)*: 

Sharing Knowledge 

Sharing Values 

Developing Trust & Commitment 

Generating Emotional Connection 

* D. Sole and D. G. Wilson, "Storytelling in Organizations: The power and traps of using stories to share knowledge in organizations," Harvard Graduate School of 

Education, 2002.

SHARING KNOWLEDGE 

Stories allow tacit knowledge to be 

shared more easily 

Stories provide context and focus 

A good story will provide laser- 

like focus on issues relevant to the 

listener 

Example: Xerox field engineers 

gathering to swap stories of their 

experiences* 

* J. S. Brown and E. S. Gray, "The People Are the Company " in Fast Company, 1995.

SHARING VALUES 

Stories help convey values, ethics 

and morals 

Example:  Many people equate the 

Boy Scouts to being helpful 

Most have heard the story of a 

Scout helping the old lady 

across the street 

Storytelling can change the 

perception of values by describing 

what future values should be

DEVELOPING TRUST & 

COMMITMENT 

Stories help describe organizational 

competencies and/or commitments. 

Stories can highlight the good (and 

bad) things that people/organizations 

do 

By building trust, you can address 

issues 

Example: The Public Conversations 

Project help people/organizations 

address issues of conflict through 

stories.

GENERATE EMOTIONAL 

CONNECTION 

Stories have the ability to connect 

with our emotions 

Unexpected twists and turns can 

grab a person’s attention and 

generate connection 

Emotional connection can generate 

‘stickiness’ 

Example: Daniel “Rudy” Ruettiger 

is well known by football players 

in the US.   Rudy is small but has 

more ‘heart’ than most.

TACIT TO EXPLICIT: AN 

INTERPLAY SHAPING 

ORGANIZATION 

KNOWLEDGE 

M. BHARDWAJ AND J. MONIN

EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE 

Explicit knowledge is the ‘know- 

what’ of an organization 

Explicit knowledge is the ‘visible’ 

knowledge 

Explicit knowledge has been 

defined by Polanyi (1967) as: 

knowledge that can be 

communicated using 

formalized language 

M. Polanyi, The Tacit Dimension. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 

1967.

TACIT KNOWLEDGE 

Tacit Knowledge is the ‘know- 

how’ of an organization. 

Tacit Knowledge is the ‘invisible’ 

knowledge 

According to Takeuchi (1998)* tacit 

knowledge is: 

deeply rooted in an 

individuals actions and 

experiences as well as in the 

ideals, values or emotions 

that the person embraces 

* H. Takeuchi, "Beyond knowledge management: lessons from Japan," 1998.

CAPTURING / SHARING 

KNOWLEDGE 

Current technology is perfect for capturing explicit knowledge 

Tacit knowledge must be transformed to explicit knowledge 

Tacit knowledge can be shared using informal social processes 

Through storytelling, tacit knowledge can be embedded in narratives and 

shared

TACIT KNOWLEDGE 

THEMES 

Literature review performed by Bhardwaj & Monin 

suggest four themes in the field: 

Overall tacit knowledge management 

Mobilization of organization tacit knowledge 

Role of tacit knowledge in problem solving 

Tacit knowledge and decision making 

These four themes were used as the basis for research 

by Bhardwaj & Monin

RESEARCH METHOD 

Bhardwaj & Monin interviewed 8 HR Professionals in 

8 different knowledge intensive organizations. 

Interviews were performed using open ended 

questions to encourage the use of narratives by the 

interviewee’s 

The resulting narratives were deconstructed to gather 

information on how the four themes are addressed

RESULTS 

Bhardwaj & Monin found that tacit knowledge 

interacts with six important subsystems of an 

organization. 

These subsystems are: 

Psychological 

Intellectual 

Knowledge 

Functional 

Social 

Cultural

RESULTS 

The management of tacit 

knowledge can be severely 

hampered by individuals 

and attitudes. 

Narcissism and self- 

aggrandizement were 

noticed in the research 

results 

The attitude of top- 

management plays a key 

role in how well tacit 

knowledge is mobilized

FUTURE RESEARCH 

How can an organization reduce the risk of 

dependency on tacit knowledge ‘maintained’ by a 

few employees? 

How can an organization activate tacit knowledge 

that resides within employees for the betterment of 

the organization?

USING MENTORING AND 

STORYTELLING TO 

TRANSFER KNOWLEDGE 

IN THE WORKPLACE 

W. SWAP, D. LEONARD, M. SHIELDS, AND L. ABRAMS

STORYTELLING & 

MENTORING 

We live in a knowledge based 

economy 

Knowledge accrues through 

experience 

Experience is earned by doing and 

takes time 

How can an organization use the 

knowledge of their experienced 

employees to help inexperienced 

employees?

EXPERTISE AND 

KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER 

Expertise is developed through 

learning by doing 

Experts use their long years of 

experience to apply their 

knowledge to problems.   

Many researchers report that 

someone must practice 10 years 

before reaching the ‘expert’ stage 

Experts recognize patterns and can 

easily call on their knowledge for 

that pattern

EXPERTISE AND 

KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER 

The two characteristics of expertise: 

Pattern recognition - patterns are used to know 

when/how to use knowledge. 

10 year rule - to be an ‘expert’, you must practice 

for 10 years (10,000 hours). 

Both characteristics are intrinsic and difficult to share 

explicitly

EXPERTISE AND 

KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER 

Two methods of sharing tacit knowledge (Nonaka & 

Takeuchi - 1995)*: 

1. Internalization - Learning by Doing. Defined as: 

“a process of embodying explicit knowledge into 

tacit knowledge” 

2. Socialization - Learning by Sharing. Defined as “a 

process of sharing experiences and thereby 

creating tacit knowledge” 

* I. Nonaka and H. Takeuchi, The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation: Oxford University Press, 1995.

METHODS 

Formal teaching methods cannot be used for tacit 

knowledge without first transforming tacit 

knowledge to explicit knowledge 

Informal methods are a better fit for tacit knowledge 

(Nonaka & Takeuchi - 1995) 

Internalization and Socialization can be addressed 

with mentoring and storytelling

MENTORING 

Swap et al. define a 

mentor as “a person 

who draws upon a deep 

knowledge-base to teach 

and guide” 

Mentors serve as 

informal teachers 

The use of mentoring 

has grown significantly 

over the last few 

decades

MENTORING 

Swap et al.’s literature review shows evidence that 

mentoring provides: 

Skills transfer 

Managerial Systems transfer 

Values transfer 

Mentoring has been shown to play a role in building 

up an organization’s capabilities 

Mentoring process provides both the socialization 

and internalization aspect of tacit knowledge transfer

STORYTELLING 

Swap et al. use the term ‘Organizational Story”. 

An organizational story is defined as: 

a narrative of past management actions, 

employee interactions or other events that are 

communicated informally within the 

organization.

STORYTELLING 

Organizational stories are generated internally and 

reflect the organizations values and culture. 

Stories must have context and focus. 

Stories must be memorable to be effective. 

STORYTELLING 

Stories are better used to share values, managerial 

systems and tacit knowledge. 

Stories are not good methods of sharing critical skills 

You wouldn’t want your doctor or pilot learning 

their job by listening to or reading stories 

LEARNING VIA STORIES 

Stories make knowledge more 

memorable via the ‘availability 

heuristic’ 

Swap et al. provide the following 

example: 

Which animal, Grizzly Bear or 

Moose, is more likely to kill a 

hiker?

LEARNING VIA STORIES 

Stories make knowledge more 

memorable via the ‘availability 

heuristic’ 

Swap et al. provide the following 

example: 

Which animal, Grizzly Bear or 

Moose, is more likely to kill a 

hiker? 

Statistically, a hiker is more 

likely to die from a moose than 

a grizzly bear

LEARNING VIA STORIES 

Stories help people remember knowledge via 

elaboration. 

People remember things easier if they can build a 

vivid image from their own experience. 

Stories can be memorable by being clear or dramatic 

and by providing context that the listener 

understands and relates to.

LEARNING VIA STORIES 

If developed and shared correctly, stories can tap into 

the episodic memory of individuals. 

Episodic memory is memory gained from direct 

experience and is more easily accessed for retrieval. 

If the story and storyteller can create a vivid account 

so that the listener can experience the story, research 

suggests that this will be stored in episodic memory.

SUMMARY 

Organizations can use mentoring and storytelling to 

share values, transfer skills and share tacit 

knowledge 

Calling someone a ‘mentor’ isn’t enough...formal 

mentoring programs must be implemented 

Stories must be memorable, be focused and have 

relevant context to be useful

SUMMARY 

Organizations & Managers must be careful to not 

devalue the concept of ‘water-cooler talk’. 

What may look like gossip to one person may be co- 

workers sharing extremely important organizational 

knowledge through the use of stories