What is Knowledge?

Knowledge is closely linked to doing and implies know-how and understanding. The knowledge possessed by each individual is a product of his experience, and encompasses the norms by which he evaluates new inputs from his surroundings. (Davenport & Prusak 2000). Managers concerned with implementing knowledge management in their organizations today face a number of challenges in developing sound methods for this still emerging area of management practice. Both the growing literature on knowledge management and the advice offered by various knowledge management consultants, however, seem to advocate forms of knowledge management practice that often appear incomplete, inconsistent, and even contradictory. There are different approaches to identifying and managing knowledge in organizations. These two approaches are characterized here as the tacit knowledge approach and the explicit knowledge approach. TACIT KNOWLEDGE: The tacit knowledge approach emphasizes understanding the kinds of knowledge that individuals in an organization have, moving people to transfer knowledge within an organization, and managing key individuals as knowledge creators and carriers. Tacit knowledge is technical or cognitive and is made up of mental models, values, beliefs, perceptions, insights and assumptions. Technical tacit knowledge is demonstrated when people master a specific body of knowledge or use skills like those gradually developed by master craftsmen. Tacit knowledge is also regarded as being the most valuable source of knowledge, and the most likely to lead to breakthroughs in the organization (Wellman 2009). Gamble & Blackwell (2001) link the lack of focus on tacit knowledge directly to the reduced capability for innovation and sustained competitiveness.

EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE: This type of knowledge is formalized and codified, and is sometimes referred to as knowwhat (Brown & Duguid 1998). It is therefore fairly easy to identify, store, and retrieve (Wellman 2009). This is the type of knowledge most easily handled, which are very effective at facilitating the storage, retrieval, and modification of documents and texts. The explicit knowledge approach holds that knowledge is something that can be explained by individuals -- even though some effort and even some forms of assistance may sometimes be required to help individuals articulate what they know. As a result, the explicit knowledge approach assumes that the useful knowledge of individuals in an organization can be articulated and made explicit. Explicit knowledge is found in: databases, memos, notes, documents, etc. (Botha et al. 2008) KNOWLEDGE INTENSIVE FIRM:

Knowledge Intensive Firms are services and business operations heavily reliant on professional knowledge. They are mainly concerned with providing knowledge-intensive support for the business processes of other organizations. Knowledge intensive firms need to share knowledge held by employees if they are to gain the most from their intellectual capital and compete effectively in the marketplace. Sharing and integrating knowledge within the organisation depends partly on building social capital. However, there are obstacles to this integration because knowledge is often distributed throughout the organisation.The key resource in KIFs is often referred to as human capital or the intellectual material knowledge, information, intellectual property and experience that can be put to use to create wealth (Stewart, 1997). Starbuck (1992) suggests that knowledgeintensive can be applied to firms in which knowledge has more importance than other inputs, and human capital, as opposed to physical or financial capital, dominates. The knowledge-intensive firm as an organizational category can thus be analysed from two perspectives. Firstly, in the lexical/technical sense of the term, i.e. from the point of view of classifying organizations or to classify research. This requires fulfilling certain criteria, essentially relating to the characteristics and delimitations of the category or classifications system. Secondly, by exploring the discursive effects of how the term is used. The particular words used to describe the category have implications for the meanings that are ascribed not only to the category, but also to the particular organizations under study as well as other organizations, people or institutions we relate to the category. Given the alleged importance of knowledge in management literature it is important to study how knowledge and knowledge-based concepts are used in organizational research. What are the infrastructures that guide how we as organization scholars make sense of our own research on knowledge in organizations and how we position it to the outside world? In this respect KIFs are particularly interesting as they are portrayed as contemporary organizations facing new challenges the kingpin and mainstay of the Knowledge Economy we have seemingly irrevocably entered. For Example Describing McDonald's as a firm with low technical expertise overlooks the expertise in McDonald's technology and organization. McDonald's success stems from its ability to deliver a consistent quality in diverse environments and despite high turnover of low-skilled people. To get such results, the firm operates extensive training programs and conducts research about production techniques and customers' tastes. Although training at Hamburger University may give McDonald's managers more skill than those at most restaurants, McDonald's managers may have no more skill than those in most production firms. Ceaseless expansion forces McDonald's to concentrate training on new managers. Also, McDonald's substitutes technology and routines for in-person management. Lawyers have recently begun to use a computer program, CLARA, to help them do legal research. CLARA helps small law firms compete more effectively against large firms, and helps novice lawyers produce results comparable to experienced lawyers (Laudon and Laudon, 1991, chapter 4). Although unfinished, CLARA does research nearly as well as law professors. On reading of this achievement, one practicing lawyer sniffed: 'Too bad; maybe it will get better someday.'