Search results

This study aims to identify and compare the knowledge and information retrieval needs from past projects and for future work among Italian and Japanese engineers. Engineering work, which is knowledge-intensive, is all the more critical as it both uses and generates knowledge for product and process innovation.

This research uses data collected from engineers in Italy and Japan from an online survey using open-ended questions in their native language. Answers were then translated into English and coded into pre-determined categories; statistical analyses including factor analysis were conducted.

For knowledge to be retrieved from past work, both Italian and Japanese engineers identified mainly experiential and systemic knowledge assets. For knowledge to be captured for future work, both groups picked experiential as well as conceptual knowledge related to the competitive environment of the firm absent from knowledge needs from past work. Finally, this research uncovered almost twice as fewer meta-categories for knowledge needs to be captured for future work compared to knowledge to be retrieved from past projects, as the former are by nature speculative and, therefore, difficult to foresee.

The study is limited to the engineering domain and to two countries. Further research should extend the scope beyond these two countries.

The study identified information and knowledge needs that could help inform the design of procedures to capture and document engineering work and the development of supporting information systems.

This research contributes to an increased understanding of the substance of information and knowledge needs in a knowledge-intensive environment such as engineering work and product/service development.

Knowledge work (KW) is a well‐researched topic. However, KW is difficult to measure and little consensus has been reached on elements that affect knowledge work productivity on a team level. The current theories neglect teams working in distributed geographical areas. The purpose of the paper is to integrate recent literature on knowledge work productivity (KWP) in distributed teams and give an overview of the elements affecting it.

The paper presents an overview of research performed in the field of knowledge work productivity. The authors integrate theories of different fields of management theory (knowledge management, intellectual capital and learning), and work and organizational psychology. This paper answers three questions: What is knowledge work? What is knowledge work productivity? Which elements hinder or enable knowledge work productivity in distributed teams of global technology companies?

The authors define the crucial elements that either hinder or enable KWP: team tasks, team structure and processes, the physical, virtual and social workspaces as well as organizational context. The paper presents an integrative model of KWP in distributed teams of global technology companies.

Distributed teams are common in global companies. By understanding the elements that affect KWP, companies can stimulate or decrease specific elements in order to improve productivity of their distributed knowledge workers.

This paper integrates theories from different disciplines in order to create an understanding about knowledge work and its productivity for further research.

Knowledge work productivity is a well-studied topic in the existing literature, but it has focussed mainly on two things. First, there are many theoretical models lacking empirical research, and second, there is a very specific research regarding how something impacts productivity. The purpose of this paper is to collect empirical data and test the conceptual model of knowledge work productivity in practice. The paper also provides information on how different drivers of knowledge work productivity have an impact on productivity.

Through the survey method, data were collected from 998 knowledge workers from Finland. Then, confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to confirm the knowledge work productivity dimensions of the conceptual model. Later, regression analysis was used to analyse the impacts of knowledge factors on productivity.

This paper increases the understanding of what matters for knowledge work productivity, with statistical analysis. The conceptual model of knowledge work productivity consists of two major elements: the knowledge worker and the work environment. The study results showed that the knowledge worker has the biggest impact on productivity through his or her well-being and work practices. The social environment was also found to be a significant driver. The results could not confirm or refute the role of the physical or virtual environment in knowledge work productivity.

The practical value of the study lies in the analysis results. The information generated about the factors impacting productivity can be used to improve knowledge work productivity. In addition, the limited resources available for organisational development will have the greatest return if they are used to increase intangible assets, i.e., management and work practices.

While it is well known that many factors are essential for knowledge work productivity, relatively few studies have examined it from as many dimensions at the same time as this study. This study adds value to the literature by providing information on which factors have the greatest influence on productivity.

The purpose of this paper is to look into the knowledge‐intensive work that entangles the use of various visual representations such as drawings, CAD images, and scale models. Rather than assuming that knowledge is exclusively residing in the human cognitive capacities, most knowledge‐intensive work integrates a variety of perceptual skills and the use of language.

A case study of a Scandinavian architect bureau, including semi‐structured interviews with architects, design engineers and managers, was conducted.

The study shows that architects mobilize and use a variety of visual representations in their day‐to‐day work. Such visual representations serve a variety of roles and purposes but actually more generally enhance communication between colleagues and external stakeholders. The paper concludes that visuality and visual representations deserve a more adequate analysis in the knowledge management literature.

The paper contributes to an understanding of how visual representations are constitutive of knowledge and central to architect work. Rather than residing in language or being embodied, knowledge is developed through the use of a variety of tools and aids.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate how the knowledge work discourse has been transformed from a celebration of those who create knowledge to one of leaden prescription to purposively separate the knowledge from the knower.

The approach takes the form of genealogical discourse analysis of the dominant and alternative knowledge work discourses.

From its earliest conceptions, knowledge work as a discourse was conceived as creating a new class of worker who was highly educated, motivated and financially aspirational. Through alignment with significant discourses from such fields of knowledge as economics, the law and technology, knowledge has become an organisational asset, to be secured by technology and protected by law even from those who created it. Discursive transformation shows that knowledge work and those who perform it – the knowledge workers – have become marginalised in the discourses until they have virtually disappeared altogether.

As a conceptual paper, the analysis does not address an empirical research frame. However, the paper illustrates how power is implicated in all aspects of the knowledge work discourse.

The paper identifies how power relations are implicit in organisational discourses of knowledge work. Knowledge is seen to be central to studies of organisations, economics and globalisation, yet human beings as creators of knowledge have been marginalised in the knowledge discourses.

This study aims to test the validity of a knowledge work typology proposed by Davenport. Although this typology has been referenced extensively in the literature, it does not appear to have been empirically validated.

The typology was tested through a questionnaire survey among knowledge workers (n=459) in a multinational company. A Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was applied to determine the knowledge work groupings arising from the survey.

The vast majority of the respondents could not be grouped into any one of Davenport's four knowledge work types. Furthermore, PCA revealed four groupings: low‐agency collaboration; low‐ agency routine work; rule‐based work; and high‐agency expert work. The results confirm only one of Davenport's typology models, the Expert model. Davenport's Collaboration model was found to have elements of the Transaction model. The Transaction and the Integration typology models were not confirmed. Instead, two further models incorporating elements of both Transaction and Integration models emerged. Finally, in contrast to Davenport's typology, the clusters that emerged from this study do not fit a matrix structure.

A follow‐up qualitative study would be required to better understand the four models that emerged from the data and to elucidate organisational factors that underpin the models.

This is the first empirical study testing the validity of Davenport's typology.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of personal resources on knowledge workers’ job engagement in the contemporary economy. Work itself and work environments are currently undergoing fundamental changes. As such, the focus of engagement research is shifting to an interest in personal resources and the psychological capital of knowledge workers.

This paper proposes a theoretical model based on a modern interpretation of the conservation of resources theory concerning the relationship between personal resources (self-efficacy, organization-based self-esteem and satisfaction with life) in relation to the three dimensions of job engagement (physical, emotional and cognitive). The proposed model is tested with structural equation modelling (LISREL).

The results from the analysis of data collected from Finnish university graduates (N = 103) show that the three dimensions of job engagement are strongly influenced by organization-based self-esteem and satisfaction with life but, surprisingly, not by self-efficacy.

Through understanding the impact of personal resources on knowledge workers’ job engagement, organizations can enhance their human relations management practices and develop better support mechanisms for their knowledge workers.

This paper provides empirical evidence for the influence of personal resources on knowledge workers’ job engagement. There is a lack of empirical studies on knowledge workers’ job engagement in the contemporary economy. The changing nature of the way work is being carried out in the contemporary economy raises the importance of personal resources as a key resource for knowledge workers’ job engagement.

Analyses, critically, the interest in “knowledge work” and the “knowledge age”. Arguing that definitions of “knowledge work” and predictions regarding the future trajectories of knowledge organizations are characterized by confusion and ambiguity, calls for a quite different form of analysis. Argues that energy should be directed away from the study of “knowledge work” ‐ the privilege of a minority élite ‐ and redirected to acknowledge the extent of working knowledge across the workforce as a whole.

Describes a case research study into how knowledge workers adopt telework as an alternative work arrangement. It reports how knowledge workers in two New Zealand organisations organise their workload to take advantage of the information and Internet technology available to them in their work and home environments. The findings of the study indicate that knowledge workers are inclined to use home‐based teleworking as an adjunct to the work done during normal business hours. Their preference is still to work at the office for most of their work time. Discusses the implications of the findings for practice and research.

Grounding in the premise that motivation in a knowledge work environment is an outcome of the existence of certain antecedents that are responsive to the dynamics of motivation in this environment, this work develops a conceptual model synthesizing motivations “what” and “how” that will bring human creativity in organizations which thrive on innovation. The presented model embodies these dynamics into five drivers of motivation practice in the knowledge work environment and then leads to three sources of motivation into which its antecedents should be loaded to motivate knowledge employees for innovation.