Search results

The purpose of this paper is to frame organisational cybersecurity through a strategic lens, as a function of an interplay of pragmatism, inference, holism and adaptation. The authors address the hostile epistemic climate for intellectual capital management presented by the dynamics of cybersecurity as a phenomenon. The drivers of this hostility are identified and their implications for research and practice are discussed.

The philosophical foundations of cybersecurity in its relation with strategy, knowledge and intellectual capital are explored through a review of the literature as a mechanism to contribute to the emerging theoretical underpinnings of the cybersecurity domain.

This conceptual paper argues that a knowledge-based perspective can serve as the necessary platform for a phenomenon-based view of organisational cybersecurity, given its multi-disciplinary nature.

By recognising the knowledge-related vectors, mechanisms and tendencies at play, a novel perspective on the topic can be developed: cybersecurity as a “knowledge problem”. In order to facilitate such a perspective, the paper proposes an emergent epistemology, rooted in systems thinking and pragmatism.

In practice, the knowledge-problem narrative can underpin the development of new organisational support constructs and systems. These can address the distinctiveness of the strategic challenges that cybersecurity poses for the growing operational reliance on intellectual capital.

The research narrative presents a novel knowledge-based analysis of organisational cybersecurity, with significant implications for both interdisciplinary research in the field, and practice.

The purpose of this study is to propose a framework for developing standards for knowledge management education programs from primary through tertiary levels. The lack of standards for knowledge management education is a significant challenge for the advancement of the field, for the sustainability of institutional programs, the future competencies of knowledge workers and the effective growth of knowledge organizations.

The research adopts and adapts the framework and methodology used to establish educational standards in computer science. The framework is presented as a focal point for discussion across the profession. Nine strands are derived from historical treatment of the discipline. Seven levels of learning are identified. Learning goals and objectives are developed for each level.

The research suggests that a lifelong learning model is definable for the field of knowledge management, just as it has been for other disciplines. The progressive learning model may produce high school graduates who are better prepared for knowledge work, a larger population of knowledge practitioners and professionals prepared to support and lead knowledge organizations and increased quantities and improved quality of knowledge management research. Finally, the progressive learning model may generate a new and increased demand for lifelong learning opportunities in the field of knowledge management.

The research is intended as a focal point for discussion and review by knowledge management professionals and particularly educators around the globe. The research represents an important stage of development, but adoption is the final stage of this research.

While this research draws upon established theories and practices in the field, and learning frameworks from other domains, the context and the research results are unique.

The study aims to determine how the acceptance of mistakes is related to adaptability to change in a broad organizational context. Therefore, it explores how knowledge, collaboration and learning cultures (including “acceptance of mistakes”) might help organizations overcome their resistance to change.

The study used two sample groups: students aged 18–24 years (330 cases) and employees aged >24 years (326 cases), who worked in knowledge-driven organizations. Structural equation models were developed, assessed and compared.

The effect of the “learning climate” on “adaptability to change” mediated by “acceptance of mistakes” has been detected for young students aged 18–24 years; however, this relationship is not significant for business employees aged >24 years. This result indicates that organizations, unlike universities, do not use mistakes as a tool to support learning that is to lead to change.

Both samples used in the study were obtained from Poland. The business sample was in the majority represented by small and medium-sized enterprises. Therefore, the presented findings may only be applicable to Poland.

Acceptance of mistakes is vital for developing a learning culture. Mistakes help employees adapt to change. Hence, a learning culture that excludes the acceptance of mistakes is somehow artificial and may be unproductive. Paradoxically, the findings reveal that the fact that employees’ intelligence (adaptability to change) improves via mistakes does not mean that organizational intelligence will also increase. Thus, organizations that do not develop mechanisms of learning from mistakes lose the learning potential of their employees.

This study proposes a constant learning culture scale that includes the “acceptance of mistakes” and “learning climate” dimensions. Further, it empirically proves the value of mistakes for adaptability to change. Moreover, it also contributes to the existing literature by demonstrating the mechanism of the relationship between knowledge, collaboration and learning cultures in the context of adaptability to change. This study breaks with the convention of “exaggerated excellence” and promotes the acceptance of mistakes in organizations to develop organizational intelligence.