Search results

This paper describes the organizational processes of knowledge acquisition, sharing, retention and utilisation as it affected the internal and external communication of knowledge about performance in an English police force. The research was gathered in three workshops for internal personnel, external stakeholders and chief officers, using Journey Making, a computer‐assisted method of developing shared understanding. The research concluded that there are multiple audiences for the communication of knowledge about police performance, impeded by the requirement to publish performance data. However, the intelligence‐led policing model could lead to a more focused means of communication with various stakeholder groups. Although technology investment was a preferred means of communicating knowledge about performance, without addressing cultural barriers, an investment in technology may not yield the appropriate changes in behaviour. Consequently, technology needs to be integrated with working practices in order to reduce organizational reliance on informal methods of communication.

This paper aims to clarify the need for Chief Knowledge Officers (CKOs) and explain how some recent views on competencies for educational guidelines, a Knowledge Management (KM) competency model and expansion of practice management concepts make the need for CKOs clearer.

This viewpoint was developed in response to recent publications disparaging the idea of a CKO. The method used was to extract ideas from published and in-work papers to establish the basis for and explain the postulated Unified Competency Theory of KM and its implications regarding the need for CKOs.

CKOs are needed to ensure that all organizationally relevant functions’ knowledge and KM assessments and/or audits are individually complete and collectively sufficient. A risk/opportunity management role also provides justification.

This paper mainly limits its discussion to the papers that comprise research leading to the Unified Competency Theory of KM, its implications and an updated practice management model. Other points of view that might substantiate or refute the conclusions have not been addressed.

The KM field needs to better identify KM’s risk and opportunity management role and functional imperative. Organizations may need to reevaluate their directions with regards to KM and a CKO.

It extends the concept of practice management to permit differentiating disciplines. It provides new rationale for CKOs.

A survey has investigated the challenges and competencies needed by Chief Knowledge Officers, as well as the next stage in the development curve of CKOs. The primary role of the CKO is to convert knowledge into profit by leveraging the organization’s intellectual assets. Key CKO competencies include: interpersonal communication skills; passionate, visionary leadership skills; business acumen; strategic thinking skills; champion of change and collaborative skills. What is currently missing is a set of integrative skills focusing on organizational strategy.

This paper aims to look at the practices of those who are in charge of knowledge management in corporations: the knowledge managers.

Using the activity system model, the study observes the work of four knowledge managers embedded in the same organizational context (the company Lafarge).

By exposing the contradictions inside the activity systems of knowledge managers, the paper analyzes three managerial conflicts tackled by practitioners: how to measure knowledge management practices, how to set rules and processes for managing knowledge and how to create structure to support knowledge management.

The paper presents a typology of knowledge managers and discusses the competencies needed to become a knowledge manager.

The paper provides a deep analysis of actions, discourses and artifacts of knowledge managers that allows the author to present a typology of practices of knowledge managers.

This paper aims to explore how chief executive officers (CEOs) and C-suite marketing executives (chief marketing officers [CMOs], chief customer officers [CCOs], chief branding officers [CBOs], etc.) talk about marketing concepts to better understand how marketers can more effectively articulate their value and increase their strategic influence within the firm.

Artificial intelligence-enabled computerized text analysis was used to identify and weight keywords from 266 CEO and C-suite marketing executive interviews. Custom marketing concept dictionaries were used to gauge overall marketing focus.

The analysis revealed opportunities for C-suite marketers to align specific marketing concepts with that of CEOs for increased strategic influence. Comparisons between C-suite marketing roles showed that CMOs are more focused on marketing strategy than specialized C-suite marketing positions, such as CCO and CBO. This points to a potential decrease in strategic impact for marketing executives dependent on the specialization of their position.

Using IBM Watson’s black-box artificial intelligence may limit the ability to replicate results from the content analysis; however, the results identify important ways that marketing executives can use to increase their ability to articulate their value within the firm.

C-suite marketing executives who want to increase the strategic alignment of their role with their firm must pay close attention to the marketing concepts they talk about, and how those align with their CEO’s marketing knowledge. The creation of specialized C-suite marketing roles may unintentionally limit the strategic thinking and firm-level impact of marketers.

This paper represents the first use of artificial intelligence-enabled computerized text analysis to explore and compare executive speech acts to help increase marketing’s influence in the firm. It is also the first to explore differences in marketing concept use between C-suite marketing roles.

In this conversation, Alex Bennet explores the operating principles and practices of how the Knowledge Centric Organization was developed at the US Department of the Navy. Ms Bennet served as the Chief Knowledge Officer for the US Department of the Navy from 1998 to 2002, where she pioneered and designed and led the development of the Navy’s enterprise‐wide Knowledge Centric Organization (KCO) effort. The US Department of the Navy was the only public sector organization to be recognized as a world class leader in managing knowledge to deliver superior performance in the 2002 North American Most Admired Knowledge Enterprise (MAKE) study.

Recently, the demise of the dot.com mania, coupled with slow economic growth has caused organizations to cut costs in an attempt to improve efficiency and the bottom line. Discontinuing or suspending knowledge management efforts and disbanding the chief knowledge officers' (CKOs) role is one common response from most organizations faced with these cost and efficiency pressures. The purpose of this paper is to describe why firms choose to cut knowledge management efforts and point to the deleterious long‐term effects of this course of action.

The approach is based on discussions with executives.

The paper highlights three common reasons why firms choose to cut knowledge management efforts, namely: knowledge management is seen as a luxury, not a necessity; knowledge management is subsumed under information technology methods; and investment in knowledge management does not offer immediate results. Moreover, the paper argues that cutting knowledge management efforts does more harm than good for a corporation in the long run.

The paper describes techniques that CKOs should employ to gain support of their executive peers.

What if you were suddenly promoted to chief knowledge officer‐do you know what your first step would be?

The strategic management literature emphasizes the concept of business intelligence (BI) as an essential competitive tool. Yet the sustainability of the firms’ competitive advantage provided by BI capability is not well researched. To fill this gap, this study attempts to develop a model for successful BI deployment and empirically examines the association between BI deployment and sustainable competitive advantage. Taking the telecommunications industry in Malaysia as a case example, the research particularly focuses on the influencing perceptions held by telecommunications decision makers and executives on factors that impact successful BI deployment. The research further investigates the relationship between successful BI deployment and sustainable competitive advantage of the telecommunications organizations. Another important aim of this study is to determine the effect of moderating factors such as organization culture, business strategy, and use of BI tools on BI deployment and the sustainability of firm’s competitive advantage.

This research uses combination of resource-based theory and diffusion of innovation (DOI) theory to examine BI success and its relationship with firm’s sustainability. The research adopts the positivist paradigm and a two-phase sequential mixed method consisting of qualitative and quantitative approaches are employed. A tentative research model is developed first based on extensive literature review. The chapter presents a qualitative field study to fine tune the initial research model. Findings from the qualitative method are also used to develop measures and instruments for the next phase of quantitative method. The study includes a survey study with sample of business analysts and decision makers in telecommunications firms and is analyzed by partial least square-based structural equation modeling.

The findings reveal that some internal resources of the organizations such as BI governance and the perceptions of BI’s characteristics influence the successful deployment of BI. Organizations that practice good BI governance with strong moral and financial support from upper management have an opportunity to realize the dream of having successful BI initiatives in place. The scope of BI governance includes providing sufficient support and commitment in BI funding and implementation, laying out proper BI infrastructure and staffing and establishing a corporate-wide policy and procedures regarding BI. The perceptions about the characteristics of BI such as its relative advantage, complexity, compatibility, and observability are also significant in ensuring BI success. The most important results of this study indicated that with BI successfully deployed, executives would use the knowledge provided for their necessary actions in sustaining the organizations’ competitive advantage in terms of economics, social, and environmental issues.

This study contributes significantly to the existing literature that will assist future BI researchers especially in achieving sustainable competitive advantage. In particular, the model will help practitioners to consider the resources that they are likely to consider when deploying BI. Finally, the applications of this study can be extended through further adaptation in other industries and various geographic contexts.