DISCUSSION OF ORGANIZATIONS APPROACH TO STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT

OF KNOWLEDGE AND ORGANIZATIONAL LEARNING. EVALUATION OF ITS USE

OF STRATEGIC FRAMEWORKS AND TOOLS.

By Chino Monyatsiwa 28th May 2017

Introduction

Traditionally, corporate assets were defined in terms of financial capital and tangible assets,
organizations have come to realize that their competitive potential rests in total on the skilful
management of all its assets inclusive of intangible ones. Corporate assets can be financial,
tangible which can be structure and nonphysical (intangible) assets also known as Intellectual
Capital(IC). To be successful organizations require a mixture of both tangible and intangible
resources for success and longevity. The IC include core competencies and technologies,
management skills, culture, brand image, consumer loyalty, patents, distribution channels,
knowledge and so on. IC is difficult to be valued but organizations must look at their value
contribution to the success of the organization during the strategy formulation and
implementation, as in the case of Skandia (Edvinsson, 1997).

Knowledge as part of the IC of an organization is considered to be an important asset to maintain

the competitiveness of an organization, in an economy where the only certainty is uncertainty,
the one sure source of lasting competitive advantage is knowledge Gray (1999). Knowledge can
be identified, captured/acquired, shared, reused and it can also be unlearned, these activities are
managed through knowledge management (Nonaka 2007), who goes on to say that, the challenge
is determining how to identify the level of knowledge and evaluate the level of knowledge
management.

All organizations need deliberate strategies to manage this knowledge and the Agricultural
organization is no exception, this essay will look at how the agricultural organization values the
contribution of intangible assets and how they are effectively managed, it will show how they
treat all assets, financial, tangible and intangible as part of a total system that makes the
organization functional and the contribution of tools like the Balanced Score Card add to
strategically management of knowledge. The areas of emphasis will be on: Knowledge
Management/Environment; Intellectual Capital & Social Capital; Balanced Scorecard;
Communities of Practice and Soft Systems Thinking.

1
What is Knowledge?

Knowledge is a very important capital for any organization and gives an organization a lasting
competitive advantage over its rivals (Ragab and Arisha 2013). Knowledge is information that
has been understood, interpreted and validated through practice and it provides a convincing
platform for action (Smith 1998) and can be classified in two subsets, tacit and explicit. Tacit
knowledge being, ... personal, context specific and not easily visible and expressible, nor easy
to formalize and communicate to others, and explicit knowledge, ...being transmittable in some
systematic language such as words, numbers, diagrams or models Polanyi (1999).

An organization, has two specific aims, to generate knowledge and to apply knowledge, in this
context knowledge can be said to be the knowing how-tacit dimension and knowing about -
explicit dimension (Grant 1996). Agriculture is viewed globally as an extension delivery
environment, and its business is to generate new farming innovations and introduce them to the
farming community and this is knowledge being shared.

Managing Knowledge

ODell and Grayson (1998), give a simple definition of knowledge management as, the
conscious strategy of getting the right knowledge to the right people at the right time and
helping people share and put information into action in ways that strive to improve
organizational performance. Grant 1996, views knowledge as residing within the individual,
and the primary role of the organization being to apply it rather than creating it, therefore to
manage knowledge would be to manage people so as to ensure an environment of knowledge
sharing.

The Agricultural organization knowledge base comprises; different specialists, livestock, crops,
agricultural economists, ICT, farmers, staff with their skills, competences, education, data,
information, intuition, knowledge (know how) e.g. disease control, ploughing, understanding
(know why) e.g. soil conservation; line ploughing, drip irrigation, and wisdom, years of service ,
residing throughout the organization and in areas of overlap with partnered customers. All the
different sectors also have areas of overlap and these need a good system of knowledge
management. The success of the Agricultural organization is dependent on organizing,
developing, and exploiting its relevant knowledge base, this will guarantee how successful it is in

2
service provision. In the Ministry of Agriculture knowledge management is incorporated in
strategic plan of the organization.

Organizational learning

The bases for understanding, choice, decision and action, comes from knowledge, which is an
outcome of learning. Without continual learning, cultivation and creative use of knowledge;
people and enterprises cannot improve and innovate, Rastogi (2002). Learning can be through
doing, exploring and experimenting, adapting, designing, improving, setting up systems,
devising processes and routines, education and training, searching, sharing, and teaching. In the
Ministry of Agriculture learning is both formal through structured classes with certification for
staff, through extension services where research information or innovation is shared with the
farming community, the media and ICT like the internet through web pages are used to educate
the public on services provided by the organization this ensures that knowledge reaches the
complex system which is the agricultural organization. Extension in essence is teaching, as
defined by NIFA, Extension provides non-formal education and learning activities to people
throughout the country to farmers and other residents of rural communities as well as to
people living in urban areas. It emphasizes taking knowledge gained through research and
education and bringing it directly to the people to create positive changes.

Intellectual Capital & Social Capital

Knowledge management nexus of a firm consists of a dense, dynamic, and mutually supportive
interactive pattern of its social capital (SC), human capital (HC), and knowledge management
(KM), (Rastogi 2002). Social capital (SC) of an organization denotes the communitys
commitment and collaboration in support of its goals, an example is the introduction of the
electronic tagging of cattle introduced the Ministry of Agriculture in 2001, without the uptake
and support of the farming community the project would not have taken off and its value in
international beef marketing would not have been realized. Its strength stems from the trusting
relationships based on an ethics of help and care, and a powerful sense of shared destiny. Figure
1.

3
Fig. 1. Knowledge management nexus (KMN).Adapted from Rastogi. P.N, 2002

RICARDIS-EUR22095, (2006) as quoted by Monyatsiwa and Po Lung (2017), concurs with

Rastogi and compares the Intellectual Capital to the roots of the enterprise, if the roots are not
strong the enterprise will wilt and die.

Organization

Tangible Intellectual Financial

Capital Capital Capital

Human Capital Organizational capital Relational capital all

knowledge, skills, the R&D activities, the
experiences and organizational routines,
abilities of the procedures, systems,
employees databases and
intellectual property
rights of the company
resources linked to the
external relationships of
the firm, with
customers, suppliers,
R&D partners

Figure 2: The Intellectual Capital roots of the enterprise (Adapted from:

RICARDIS-EUR22095, (2006), from Monyatsiwa And Po Lung

Balanced Score Card

4
There are several models developed to measure and manage intangible capital, Kaufmann and
Schneider (2004), advocate that there are four schools of thought; the first is, transforming
human capital into structural capital( Edvinsson 1997); the second is, considering categories of
intangible assets; employees, competence, internal and external structures and collating the
information on growth, renewal, efficiency, stability and risk (Sveiby (1997),the third, measures
each category of intangible assets, human, customer and structure capitals, Stewart (1997) and
the forth is the Balanced Score Card (BSC) Kaplan and Norton (1992)

The BSC bases strategic organization performance measurement on four perspectives; financials,
customers, internal processes, and learning and growth. The balanced scorecard approach from
Kaplan and Norton (1996) was developed to expand the spectrum of traditional finance oriented
indicators on organizational behavior by introducing qualitative measures of performance to
include, three key measures of intangible success factors or three components of intellectual
capital, human capital (learning), structural capital (processes), and customer capital. Servin
(2005) citing from NHS National Library for Health, on discussing the advantage of BSC say,
The advantage of this approach in knowledge management terms is that it directly links learning
to process performance, which in turn is linked with overall organizational performance. The
Ministry of Agriculture uses the BSC in its planning, which is done annually and is cascaded
from top done, from the Permanent Secretary to the lowest Extension officer. This knowledge
management, which is about learning and growth, is measured as an integral and yet distinct part
of overall organizational performance. The balanced scorecard approach can be applied to
individual initiatives as well as to a whole organization.

Communities of Practice

Wenger 2002, defines Community of Practice (CoP) as groups of people who share a concern, a
set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise by
interacting on an ongoing basis. This group whose commonality may be a craft or a profession
can form naturally or it can be created deliberately to harness knowledge in a defined area. It is
essentially a learning environment where information or experience is shared and group
members learn from each other (Lave & Wenger 1991). A community conjures social setting for
gaining knowledge and fosters interactions and facilitates ideas sharing, while practice denotes a
focus through which the community develops, shares and manages its knowledge. In Agriculture

5
there are several CoPs, extension officers, Veterinary Officers, Animal scientists, Farmer
committees, Humana resources managers, suppliers and many others.

Soft Systems Thinking

Systems thinking (ST) acknowledges that a change in one area can affect another in the system,
it demonstrates that events separated by space and time can lead to substantial changes in the
complex system. ST promotes organizational communications at all levels and there by
promoting learning and knowledge sharing and dissemination. Katz & Kahn 1966

Figure 3: Systems Thinking Diagram adapted from Katz and Kahn, 1966

Katz & Kahn's open system model is defined by the following components: Inputs: are resources
taken or received from the external environment; Throughput: is the process of conversion or
transformation of resources within a system; Outputs: are the works of the system, exported
back into the environment; Feedback: is the continuing source of information concerning the
relationship with the external environment used to make the necessary changes in order to
survive and grow and the Environment: are all the elements outside the system that have the
potential to affect all or part of the system.

Discussion

I work for the public sector, a question may arise as to what value means in the context of,
Intellectual Capital adding value to the organization Edvinsson (1997), because we usually are
not seeking competitive advantage as in profit making organization. Servin (2005) citing NHS

6
National Library for Health (2005), defines knowledge as, the capacity for effective action, by
this definition, then knowledge adds value in the public sector through capacitation of
government to deliver quality service as expected by both government and the public. The
Ministry of Agricultures mandate is to promote Agricultural Development and Food Security,
this is done through provision of quality service to the farming community. The organization
succeeds through an extensive system of interactions between, policy makers, service providers,
local authorities, the general public and other stakeholders and government and non-
governmental organizations. The extensive groups share information between and within them
and their interactions impact on policies and service provision of the Ministry of Agriculture,
therefore there is a need for knowledge management strategies in the public sector.

The players that make up the environment of the Agricultural organization fulfil the description
of CoPs as advanced by Lave and Wenger 1991, and their shared goal is the development of
agriculture and ensure food security for the country. The parties have their own experiences,
skills, competences and so on but together they make up the complex system called Agriculture,
they need platforms to share these experiences and introduce each other to the relevant policies
and processes for the benefit of progress in the agricultural sector. Senge (2017), says, its not
about what an individual can achieve, but what can accomplished by all individuals of an
organization, bringing their knowledge, skills, personalities, qualifications, for the success of the
organization, this I also in agreement with Ackoff (2015).

Explicit knowledge for the Ministry of Agriculture, is knowledge that can be captured and
written down in documents or databases, these include, instruction manuals, written Standard
Operation Procedures, and research findings. These can further be classified as ether structure
(documents, databases, spread sheets etc.), this data can be retrieved in the future and
unstructured, (e-mails, images, training courses and audio /visual media) which is unreferenced
and can change. Agriculture is faced with challenges of sharing and disseminating research
knowledge and transferring technologies gained and produced as a result of these research,
through extension subsystems, especially due to diverse environment, as observed by NIAEM
Many research activities are repeated due to the lack of such mechanisms and infrastructure at
the national level.

Agriculture has a lot of tacit knowledge which is very difficult to share since it is less tangible,
this has more to do with personal knowledge and unwritten. It is more to do with knowing how

7
to do something, for example, indigenous farming knowledge, how to vaccinate, harvest, spray
etc., and some people have more knowledge than others. An extension officer may pass on the
knowledge of how to properly spray to farmers or even write instructions. Tacit knowledge is
considered more valuable in agriculture since provides context for people, places, ideas and
experiences, if it is not turned into explicit knowledge it can be lost forever once the people with
the know-how leave.

The Ministry of Agriculture has put in place programmes to retain tacit knowledge, to ensure that
members of staff feel appreciated, through such programmes as, Scarce Skill allowance; that
encourages staff to be tempted to stay in the ministry and private vaccinators; these are mostly
retired officers that are engaged on a private bases to vaccinate and teach the farming
communities certain skills like livestock disease prevention. Another source of tacit knowledge
in Agriculture is indigenous heritage, from the old to the new farmers, this is never documented,
but through farmers committees and associations farmers can share their knowledge.

In a continuous quest to improve public service performance and in order to attract and retain a
highly skilled workforce, the Ministry of Agriculture introduced several Public Service Reforms
such as the Balanced Score Card, Performance Measurement System, Performance Development
Plans just to mention a few. These reforms are part and parcel of corporate strategic planning at
both organizational and individual levels. In order to facilitate the implementation of these
strategic initiatives the government introduced Job Effectiveness Descriptions (JEDs) or
Competency Based Job Descriptions. Hence, the doing away with traditional job descriptions
and replacing them with JEDs. Each JEDs highlight what the job entails as well as what
competencies are needed for one to execute their duties and responsibilities as well. This
selection of job specific competencies gave us what we call the MA Competency Framework.
This ensures that the ministry has a pool and a data base for the skills and competences available
in the ministry (MOA 2013).

The Ministry of Agricultures Balanced Score Card adaptation looks at three themes; Knowing
the Sector, Enabling Agribusiness and Developing the Sector, these are then defined through four
perspectives as per Kaplan (2004), each perspective has its own initiatives. This is what assist the
ministry to manage knowledge. Figure 4; MOA Balanced Score Card Themes (2016).
1. Customer perspective; How do the recipients of our services see us? Are we meeting their
needs and expectations?

8
 2. Financial perspective; How do we look to our shareholders (or governing bodies)?
3. Internal processes; What do we need to do well in order to succeed? What are the critical
processes that have the greatest impact on our customers and our financial objectives?
4. Learning and growth; How can we develop our ability to learn and grow in order to meet
our objectives in the above three areas?

Figure 4; MOA Balanced Score Card Themes 2016(Adapted from Kaplan 2004)

The government through the Directorate of Public Service Management (DPSM), introduced the
E-Governance initiative, this aims to develop a knowledge base for all ministries through the
creation of a communication network specifically for knowledge sharing and management. This
is done through a creation of a government web page, each ministry will then have their own
portal that will lead to the different departments, sections and units portals. Information on
policies and procedures is posted for access by both farmers and staff, www.gov.bw leading to
www.moa.gov.bw. The E-governance team work with the Reforms and the Public Relations
Offices (PRO)s offices in all the departments. The MOA KM E- governance policy framework
builds around these identified policies and procedures for:
1. Knowledge Identification and capturing (explicit and tacit)
2. Knowledge transferring among and between its various sources and forms.
3. Organizational Knowledge Retention.
4. Efficient management of organizational knowledge base.

9
 5. Measuring and developing the governments human and social capital.
6. Promoting and supporting knowledge-based workforce between departments.
7. Facilitate mind set change on knowledge management in the working practices.
8. Promoting and supporting knowledge sharing between government and non-
governmental bodies and voluntary and community organizations etc.
This is another way of creating CoPs which are glue that create and sustain the linkage between
those who have the knowledge and those who seek to access it.

Conclusion

The theoretical essay has discussed KM in the Ministry of Agriculture as strategies and practices
used to identify, create, represent, distribute and enable adoption knowhow and know what
knowledge. It has clearly shown the tacit (individual) and explicit (processes) knowledge in the
ministry and how, with a strategic focus then ensures that the KM initiative is aligned with
broader organizational directions, for better distribution and utilization of resources,
(NIAEM).The KM strategy for the ministry of agriculture does not only just outline high-level
goals such as become a knowledge-enabled organization, but it identifies the primary needs and
challenges facing the organization and come up with tools to address the challenges. Tools such
as the Ministry of Agriculture Strategy, the balanced score Card and the Job Effectiveness
Description or JEDs (Competency based). Knowledge, for it to be useful to an organization it
must be easy to access and be available to the different stakeholders at operational, management
and decision-making levels, therefore every organization should have a knowledge management
strategy. E-governance Initiative in MOA facilitates learning and knowledge sharing.

Managing knowledge strategically ensures the organization gains a greater understanding of its
intellectual capital assets and how to deal with challenges to measure and account for them. It is
clear that knowledge is all to do with people, be it staff, customers or partners, identifying the
needs and issues of each community of practice, their activities and their initiatives will have a
measurable impact on the organizational success, Lesser & Storck (2001, p. 836). Knowledge
management in an organization focuses on strategically managing knowledge and encouraging
its sharing, this reduces redundant work and training time, helps to retain intellectual capital,
adapt to environmental changes and market requirements.

10
REFERENCES

Ackoff, R., (2015) Systems Thinking Speech. Available at:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EbLh7rZ3rhU (Accessed: 20th /05/2017).

Edvinsson, L., (1997) Developing intellectual capital at Skandia. Long range planning, 30(3),
pp.320-373

Grant, R. M., (1996) Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm, Strategic Management
Journal. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. @ http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/smj.4250171110

Gray, P., (1999) Knowledge Management, Proceedings of the Americas Conference on

Information Systems, paper 292,

Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P., (1993) The Balanced Scorecard - Measures That Drive
Performance, Harvard Business Review, January-February, 1992

Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P., (1996) Using the Balanced Scorecard As A Strategic Management
System, Harvard Business Review, January-February, 1996

Kaplan, R.S., (2004) Conceptual Foundations of the Balanced Score Card, Harvard Business
School; Working Paper- 19-074

Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L., (1966) The Social Psychology of Organizations. New York: Wiley.

Kaufmann, L. and Schneider, Y., (2004) "Intangibles: A synthesis of current research", Journal of
Intellectual Capital, Vol. 5 Issue: 3, pp.366-388, doi:
@ www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/14691930410550354

11
Lave, J. and Wenger, E., (1991) "Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation",
communities of practice

Lesser, L. and Storck, J., (2001) Communities of Practice and Organizational Performance. IBM
Systems Journal, 40, 831-841.

Ministry of Agriculture-Botswana, (2013) Implementation Of Job Effectiveness Descriptions

(JEDs), Presentation Staff workshop- In Moa 17th December 2013

Monyatsiwa, C. & Po, L.L., (2017) Case Study: Intellectual Capital at Skandia AFS: Team K,
University of South wales VLE Forum Post @http://vle.southwales-
online.com/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=109998

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION MANAGEMENT (NIAEM).,

(2017) An organization of Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, Advance Training
Program On Agriculture Knowledge Management, @ www.manage.gov.in accessed 26th May
2017

NIFA,(2017)United States Department of Agriculture; National Institute of Food and

Agriculture.@ https://nifa.usda.gov/extension accessed 20th May 2017

Nonaka, I., (2007) The Knowledge-Creating Company, Harvard Business

Review.https://hbr.org/2007/07/the-knowledge-creating-company/ar/1

Polanyi, M., (1966) The Tacit Dimension, Routledge and Kegan Paul, England.

Ragab, M. A. F. and Arisha A., (2013) Knowledge Management and Measurement: A Critical
Review, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 17, no. 6, 2013, p. 873-901

12
Rastogi, P.N., (2002) Knowledge Management and Intellectual Capital as a Paradigm of Value
Creation, Indian Institute Management, Prabandh Nagar, Lucknow 226 013, India; Human
Systems Management 21 (2002) 229240 229.IOS Press

RICARDIS-EUR22095, (2006) Encourage Corporate Measuring and Reporting on Research

and Other Forms of Intellectual Capital, Report to the Commission of the High Level Expert
Group on RICARDIS;Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European
Communities-2006 164 pp. 21.0 x 29.7 cmISBN 92-79-02149-4 .Accessed @
https://www.scribd.com/document/155731086/2006-2977-web1

Senge, P., (2003) What is Systems Thinking? Systems Thinking Approach and Principles, @:
http://www.mutualresponsibility.org/science/what-is-systems-thinking-peter-senge-explains-
systems-thinking-approach-and-principles. accessed 20/05/2017.

Servin, G. (2005). ABC of Knowledge Management. Extract from NHS National Library for
Health. From http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/knowledge/docs/ABC_of_KM.pdf [on
line on July 2012].

Smith, P.A.C., (1998) Systemic Knowledge Management: Managing Organizational Assets For
Competitive Advantage, The Leadership Alliance Inc., Ontario. Journal of Systemic Knowledge
Management, 1998 April.

Sveiby, K.E., (1997) "The Intangible Assets Monitor", Journal of Human Resource Costing &
Accounting, Vol. 2 Issue: 1, pp.73-97, doi:
@www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/eb029036.

Stewart, T.A., (1997) Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations Snippet view

Wenger, E., (2002) Cultivating communities of practice. Massachusetts: Harvard University

Press

13