Search results

This article reports on the background, the conceptual ideas and the lessons learned from over more than 20 years of IC Statements and Management with a country focus on Germany and some international developments. It calls for an integrated management approach for IC and offers case study evidence on how to accomplish this quest.

Report on the German initiative “Intellectual Capital Statement made in Germany” (ICS m.i.G.). A brief review of the literature describes the background and theoretical foundation of the German IC method. A short description of the method is followed by four detailed case studies to illustrate long-term impact of IC management in very different organizations. A discussion of Lessons Learned from more than 200 implementations and an outlook on current and future developments finalizes the article.

IC Statements made in Germany (ICS m.i.G.) was successful in providing a framework to systematically identify IC, evaluate the status quo of IC relative to the strategic requirements, visualize interdependencies of IC, business processes and business results as well as to connect IC reporting with internal management routines and external communication. However, ICS is not an insulated method but delivers the maximum benefit when integrated with strategy development, strategy implementation, business process optimization accompanied by change management routines. Strong ties to human resource management, information technology departments, quality management, research and development teams as well as business operations as the core of an organization help to yield the most for ICS m.i.G. Over time, the focus of managing IC changes and maturity leads to deutero learning.

ICS m.i.G. proved easy to apply, cost efficient for SMEs, larger corporations and networks. It helps to better accomplish their objectives and to adjust their business models. The guidelines in German and English as well as a software application released were downloaded more than 100,000 times. A certification process based on a three-tier training module is available and was successfully completed by more than 400 practitioners. ICS m.i.G. is supporting current standards of knowledge management, such as ISO 9001, ISO 30401 or DIN SPEC PAS 91443 and therefore will most likely have a continuing impact on knowledge-based value creation.

This paper reports lessons learned from the country-wide IC initiative in Germany over the last 20 years initiated and supported by the authors. Several elements of the method have been published over time, but so far no comprehensive view on Lessons Learned had been published.

This paper proposes a theory-based process model for the generation, articulation, sharing and application of managerial heuristics, from their origin as unspoken insight, to proverbialization, to formal or informal sharing, and to their adoption as optional guidelines or policy.

A conceptual paper is built using systematic and non-systematic review of literature. This paper employs a three-step approach to propose a process model for the emergence of managerial heuristics. Step one uses a systematic review of empirical studies on heuristics in order to map extant research on four key criteria and to obtain, by flicking through this sample in a moving-pictures style, the static stages of the process; step two adapts a knowledge management framework to yield the dynamic aspect; step three assembles these findings into a graphical process model and uses insights from literature to enrich its description and to synthesize four propositions.

The paper provides insights into how heuristics originate from experienced managers confronted with negative situations and are firstly expressed as an inequality with a threshold. Further articulation is done by proverbialization, refining and adapting. Sharing is done either in an informal way, through socialization, or in a formal way, through regular meetings. Soft adoption as guidelines is based on expert authority, while hard adoption as policy is based on hierarchical authority or on collective authority.

The findings are theory-based, and the model must be empirically refined.

Practical advice for managers on how to develop and share their portfolio of heuristics makes this paper valuable for practitioners.

This study addresses the less-researched aspect of heuristics creation, transforms static insights from literature into a dynamic process model, and, in a blended-theory approach, considers insights from a distant, but relevant literature – paremiology (the science of proverbs).

In further conceptualizing a novel generative knowledge management system (KM/KMS), this paper aims to focus on identifying and mitigating the risks related to its envisaged scaling from a prototype to an application with a rapidly growing user base.

It follows up on prior publications using design science research (DSR) methodologies in compliance with theory effectiveness, a principle expecting system designs to be purposeful in terms of utility and communication. The KMS perspective taken prioritizes a decentralizing agenda benefiting knowledge workers while also aiming to foster a fruitful co-evolution with conventional organizational KM approaches.

The utilization and further extension of the CKDT and a “scalable innovation” heuristic are assisting the detecting of potential scaling risks related to the logics and logistics, generative interoperability, technological capacitating, knowledge dynamics and value chain which further validates the viability of the proposed KM concept and system.

Although the prototype development is still in progress, the paper conforms to the DSR practice to report on early visions of technology impact on users, organizations and society but also reflects on expectations of viability, desirability and commitment, as well as the system’s prospect as a general-purpose-technology or disruptive innovation.

In addition to the novel KM-related perspectives, the paper’s practical emphasis on the scaling of more complex systems is rarely dealt with in the literature due to the respective projects’ often large-scale collaborative nature, broad methodological scope and diverse stakeholders’ interests. In this case, the task is eased as prior DSR outputs can be referred to.

This article aims to summarise a successful, pioneering prototyping project in Germany with IC statements, supported by the German Ministry of Labour and Economics (BMWA).

A systematic process view method has been applied. A special impact scoring method generates a map, enabling management to determine where they should give executive priority for intellectual capital investment.

Most of the participating companies would like to have a more standardized Wissensbilanz with indicators for added value in order to use the tool as a complimentary report (management report) for the purpose of external reporting as well as comparison.

The project has now inspired some 100 enterprises of different types and is now spreading outside Germany.

The article reviews major developments in the literature on knowledge management and intellectual capital management. It provides a description and visualization of the structure and content of the ISO 30401 and critically benchmarks its clauses against comprehensive taxonomies from the literature.

2018 saw the release of the ISO 30401 Knowledge Management Systems Standard, a type A regulation which may serve as a basis for certification. It builds on and integrates a broad and conceptually diverse literature on knowledge resources (e.g. intellectual capital theory, knowledge management theory). This article aims to show how the management systems standard relates to the literature it is built on and provides directions for its further operationalization by certification bodies and implementation by managers.

The ISO 30401 successfully integrates a diverse body of literature in a broadly applicable cross-industry standard. To operationalize and implement it, certification bodies and managers should build on empirical evidence of “what works,” taking into account market characteristics as well as organizational properties. Further research should support the implementation of the standard by developing KM measurement frameworks and context-specific studies of KM tools and methods.

This article is the first to systematically compare the ISO 30401 to the underlying theory. This paper uncovers avenues for research and makes suggestions for the standard's operationalization in practice.

The purpose of the paper is to explore coherence across key disciplines of knowledge management (KM) for a general model as a way to address performance dissatisfaction in the field.

Research employed an evidence‐based meta‐analysis (287 aspects of literature), triangulated through an exploratory survey (91 global respondents), to gather data on the drivers for KM. The paper attempts to demonstrate self‐similarity across six key KM disciplines using fractal theory as a data analysis tool.

Appear to demonstrate self‐affinity between key disciplines in the field of KM. This provides a strong signpost for future research in the field when attempting to address practitioner dissatisfaction in performance.

The paper cannot determine importance, or value of the factors discussed. The meta‐analysis allows us to determine the existence of the identified functions and enablers. Limited representation of literature from outside the Northern Hemisphere will not allow for an assertion as to validity outside of this area. Findings could not determine whether factors were stable through time. While outliers in the data provide signposts for further research, it could be attributed to situated variance.

This paper could influence future research and practice through support for the development of general models for the field. It signposts affinity between disciplines, which could direct theorists and practitioners to explore solutions outside of their situated discipline through a shared understanding.

The fractal theory data analysis approach appears to be unusual if not unique in the field of KM. The evidence‐based meta‐analysis provides depth and rigour with the results triangulated against an exploratory survey, which offers a richness of findings that speaks directly to the needs of the field.

This study is motivated by the question “how do organizational routines influence the three knowledge management processes of acquisition, creation, utilization and sharing?” and accordingly it seeks to address this issue.

A theoretical framework is first built by linking absorptive capacity (a routine‐based capability) with knowledge management processes. A literature search guided by the theoretical framework, and evidence from two case studies, were used to address the objective of the study.

The study elicited the organizational routines that influence the three knowledge management processes. These routines were then clustered into five key organizational themes: systemic knowledge; strategic engagement; social networking (external and internal); cultural context; process and structural context.

Several implications for research are suggested. More specifically, the study offers five propositions that can be further tested. The key limitation of this study is the use of only two case studies for empirical data, and therefore further testing is needed.

The study shows that, although leadership behavior is critical for knowledge management, its impact depends on the platform of routines and processes built for it. The identified routines and their influence on knowledge management are invaluable for knowledge management practitioners.

The paper furthers understanding of how organizational routines influence the three knowledge management processes of knowledge acquisition, creation, utilization and sharing. This aspect has been little studied and is of value to both academics and practitioners.

This study aims to examine the relevance of the term “knowledge management” (KM) in the organizational context, and deliberates whether there is a need for rebranding of this field. It also enriches the understanding regarding the appropriateness of the term “KM,” which was chosen to represent the discipline.

This study adopted a qualitative research methodology, and a case study approach was followed by conducting 19 semi-structured in-depth interviews with international KM experts working in a global consulting firm. The data were analyzed using a thematic analysis method based on the grounded theory approach.

The findings provide empirical evidence that attempts are being made to move away from the label “KM” in certain knowledge-intensive organizations. This study sheds light on the challenges associated with this term, which leads some to believe that the name of the discipline needs to change.

The present pioneering research contributes to empirical knowledge through investigation of an unexplored scientific field. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, for the first time, its uniqueness can be established by the fact that the opinions of KM professionals are being heard regarding the “KM” label, as well as the need for a rebranding of this discipline in the organizational context. From a practical and strategic perspective, this study suggests that the research community and practitioners pay attention to attempts to shift away from the existing title identified in organizational practice.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an example of how an apparently incongruent combination of organizational variables can have a positive effect on innovation through knowledge creation.

Based on previous theory, four original hypotheses were developed and later tested with empirical data collected from 125 research and development organizations in Japan, using analysis of variance and regression analysis.

Managerial influences and resources can significantly interact to generate a combined impact on the knowledge creation capability of organizations, which in turn is positively associated with their innovation performance. In particular, long‐term managerial influences were found to have a greater impact on knowledge creation when combined with knowledge‐exploitation resources. Synthesizing short‐term managerial influences with knowledge‐exploitation resources is not better than combining them with exploration resources. This holds true especially for organizations of small and medium size.

This study only evaluates one case of many possibilities of seemingly antithetical combinations that can also have a beneficial impact in organizations. A larger and diverse sample, together with enhanced dimensions of managerial influences and organizational resources can make this study's implications much more universal.

An ingenious and purposeful synthesis of organizational variables conventionally seen as incompatible and contradictory can in reality benefit organizational goals related to knowledge creation and innovation.

This study puts forward a unique framework and perspective highlighting the importance of combinatory effects and the management of duality in organizations.

Effectively handling knowledge is crucial for any organization to survive and prosper in the turbulent environments of the modern era. Leadership is a central element for knowledge creation, acquisition, utilization and integration processes. Based on these considerations, this study aims to offer an overview of the evolution of the literature regarding the knowledge management-leadership relationship published over the past 20 years.

A bibliometric analysis coupled with a systematic literature review were performed over a data set of 488 peer-reviewed articles published from 1990 to 2018.

The authors discovered the existence of four well-polarized clusters with the following thematic focusses: human and relational aspects, systematic and performance aspects, contextual and contingent aspects and cultural and learning aspects. The authors then investigated each thematic cluster by reviewing the most relevant contributions within them.

Based on the bibliometric analysis and the systematic literature review, the authors developed an interpretative framework aimed at uncovering several promising and little explored research areas, thus suggesting an agenda for future knowledge management-leadership research. Some steps of the paper selection process may have been biased by the interpretation of the researcher. The authors addressed this concern by performing a multiple human subject reading process whose reliability was confirmed by a Krippendorf’s alpha coefficient value >0.80.

To the best knowledge, this is the first study to map, systematize and discuss the literature concerned to the topic of the knowledge management-leadership relationship.