Search results

Knowledge management aims to increase an organization's competitive advantage through the collective management of its employees' knowledge. In the past, knowledge management was very technologically oriented, with a focus on data mining, software, and artificial intelligence, but in recent years there has been a move toward incorporating social aspects. As knowledge management evolved into its second era, the focus shifted to defining knowledge, developing frameworks, and implementing content management systems. The current knowledge management era (third) appears to be more integrated with an organization's philosophy, goals, and day-to-day activities, and is also the “softest” with regards to a people-oriented approach (Metaxiotis, Ergazakis, & Psarras, 2005; Wiig, 2002). As knowledge management moves further into the third era, no theoretical foundation exists. As will be seen, knowledge is an unmanageable, nontransferable entity that cannot exist outside a person's brain (Abou-Zeid, 2007). As such it is not possible to define the concept of knowledge, nor even desirable, and this is in direct contrast to first generation knowledge management, which aimed to accurately define the concept of knowledge (Metaxiotis et al., 2005). The focus on frameworks (Holsapple & Joshi, 1997), systems (Hasan & Gould, 2003), and technology (Liao, 2003) that dominated second-generation knowledge management is also not compatible with the current understanding of knowledge (Abou-Zeid, 2007), suggesting that systems cannot directly manage knowledge.

This chapter explores the evolution of smart city thinking in order to have a clear understanding of what is involved in effectively and sustainably implementing a Smart City 4.0 strategy. The chapter illustrates that the concept of smart cities has evolved from the technology driven implementations to Cities as Open Innovation Platforms. These open and participatory platforms facilitate the interaction and collaboration of the city's citizens, government, industry, entrepreneurs, academia, creatives and the social sector so that they can harness their collective intelligence for innovation, experimentation and implementation of solutions that creates real transformational value for the betterment of the city's and its stakeholders. The author also identifies the key dimensions on which a smart city 4.0 concept must be built upon but highlights that depending on the composition of its stakeholder ecosystem, the City will prioritise different dimensions and so each smart city is unique. The chapter builds upon the experience of implementing a Smart City 4.0 project in Waterford, Ireland. Details of the smart city initiatives implemented are illustrates with examples.

The knowledge economy (KE) which provide for an alternative to production-based economy and brick and mortar economy has a tremendous opportunity. KE has emerged due to the advent of skill concentration in nation states. However, the traditional production economy provides individual arbitrage opportunity which acts as a sideline for growth of the economy. In the modern economy, the higher the ability to create an edge for price for the knowledge, the greater will be the ability of the nation state to create and arbitrage process. Any economy which is driven by an innovative education system, appreciates, and adopts knowledge is the one which becomes successful in the knowledge process and a developed KE. Information technology forms a major component of knowledge process but is not the entire gamete of knowledge. Hence, it should not be confused that KEs are information industry driven alone. This paper tries to develop a model to check whether KE has the ability to support arbitrage process. Here the probability rate of growth in GDP is taken as the key element for the purpose of solving the theoretical proposition. The result shows that there are positive probabilities of the KE in providing arbitrage premium for individual which can fire the growth of the economy.

This chapter addresses the question how entrepreneurial synergies can be stimulated in places by leadership and network governance in the context of the knowledge economy. The chapter not only analyses the role of leadership in a regional case in the Netherlands, but also assesses to what extend place-based characteristics play a role.

The chapter is based on a case-study-analysis of the region Brainport Eindhoven. Data were collected via 27 interviews in 2 rounds (in 2008 and in 2012), and retrieved from academic literature, case documents and governmental plans.

This chapter shows the importance of knowledge leadership in creating entrepreneurial synergies in the region Brainport Eindhoven. Entrepreneurial synergies is defined here as the creation of governance conditions and a context for effective entrepreneurial activities and regional co-operation between entrepreneurs, to enhance innovation. The socio-spatial quality of this place, path-dependency and the establishment of a regional regime explain the clustering of high-tech firms in a context of pro-active policy support, embedded in a cultural tradition of public–private co-operation. Key-persons of the private sector, science, and government enabled the development by taking initiative, co-operating, framing issues and aligning people around the agenda of Brainport.

The chapter gives insights on how leaders can enhance entrepreneurial synergies rooted in place-based assets and characteristics, by using network power, resources, ‘windows of opportunity’ and by linking ideas, inspiration and individuals from different strands of the triple-helix.

Revealing normative leadership lessons – how leadership is enacted in ‘everyday’ practice – may also allow us to explain, at least to some limited extent, why some localities are able to adapt to the ever changing social and economic conditions of the modern world, and are successful in creating entrepreneurial synergies. Beyond this, deeper critical appreciations provide us with insights into the interplay between leadership, power and resources – and shed light on the questions of why and for whom economy and society are ‘organised’, in different places and at different times.

The chapter offers new insights in the importance of place and the leadership dimension in the context of the continuing debate around the effectiveness of sub-national economic development policy for the so-called ‘knowledge era’.