Knowledge Map

This link is a knowledge map in my group : 

click here

This link is a knowledge map in my class :

click here

Knowledge Management (KM) Processes in Organizations - Chapter 6 -

Chapter 6

Knowledge Management In Practice

There are three types of ‘knowledge management’ processes that are generally considered to be essential: finding or uncovering knowledge [Ehrlich, K., 2003, Learn, L., 2002, Zack,M., 1999], sharing knowledge [Ackerman et al., 2003], and the development of new knowledge [Argyris and Schon, 1978, 1996, Baumard, P., 1999, Harvard Business Review, 1998]. 

6.1 KM In Practice – Processes 

A very useful way of thinking is to conceptualize KMas the actualization of what Powell,T. [2001a] calls the “Knowledge Value Chain.” 

6.1.1 Finding Information And Knowledge 

Finding information and knowledge refers to processes that allow organizations to make sense and make use of data, information, and knowledge objects that may be present but are not codified, analyzed, nor accessible to members. 

Knowledge exists in all organizations, but all knowledge may not be explicit. Trends can be examined and analyzed so that new understandings of procurement practices and purchasing can be made explicit. The knowledge that once existed only within one person can be used (at least to some degree) by others who find it represented, codified, and organized in electronic form. 

One aspect of finding and dissemination of information is the organization of knowledge objects so that they can be found easily. 

6.1.2 Sharing Information And Knowledge 

Sharing refers to the willingness and ability of the knowledgeable to share what they know to help others expand their own learning and knowing. Chait, L. [2008] makes a very important point about the readiness of people to share knowledge. He found that the principal reason for reluctance on the part of key players to put their knowledge into a lessons learned database was a concern that the lesson learned might be misapplied if the congruence, or the lack of, between the context of the area from which the lesson was derived and the context of the intended application area was not well understood. 

6.1.3 Development Of Knowledge 

Knowledge development takes place when individuals work to create new understandings, innovations, and a synthesis of what is known already together with newly acquired information or knowledge. Although individuals can intentionally develop their own knowledge through seeking opportunities to be creative and learn, the development of knowledge is often a social process, such as meeting, teleconference, and team think tank sessions all serve to help workers develop knowledge together can encourage the development of new knowledge. 

6.2 KM In Practice - Procedures And Practices 

6.2.1 Knowledge Audit 

An audit answers the questions of what information and knowledge exists in the organization and where is it?, Who maintains it?, Who has access to it?, etc. 

Auditing as it was then defined focused primarily on what data was formally captured in documents and databases. Tacit or implicit information was not ignored, the emphasis was very much upon explicit captured data and information. 

Some of the reasons for and benefits of an information audit include: 

First of course, the elucidation of what information the organization possesses: where it is located? how is it organized? how can it be accessed? who is responsible for it? etc

In addition:

- The identification of duplicate or partially duplicated information and information gathering and maintenance, with the potential realization of cost savings.

- The identification of information being gathered and maintained that is no longer salient or necessary, with the potential realization of cost savings.

Two addition above, more persuasive in selling the need, or opportunity, for an information audit, to management than is the argument for greater and better access, which in the long run is really the most compelling reason.

Clearly, the techniques used in creating a knowledge audit or knowledge map are those borrowed from social network analysis and anthropology, and appropriately so, since Knowledge Management is interdisciplinary by nature, spanning boundaries of thought and interests. 

6.2.2 Tags,Taxonomies,And Content Management 

The tag and taxonomy stage of KM consists primarily of assembling various information resources in some sort of portal-like environment and making them available to the organization. 

This can include internally generated information, including lessons learned databases and expertise locators, as well as external information, the open web and also deep web information subscribed to by the organization. 

Increased use of social media within the organization has expanded the domain of information to be managed still further. This massive increase in information interaction, including use of digitized video and audio and the organization’s own web pages has resulted in the development of what is a major subfield within KM, that of “Content Management” or “Enterprise Content Management.” The area is also frequently labeled as CMS,Content Management Systems. 

The area of managing content is still in its early days and will clearly expand and develop as organizations see the need for preserving, organizing, and re-using knowledge objects. 

6.2.3 Lessons Learned Databases 

Lessons Learned databases are databases that attempt to capture and to make accessible knowledge that has been operationally obtained and typically would not have been captured in a fixed medium (to use copyright terminology). 

The lessons learned concept or practice is one that might be described as having been birthed by KM, as there is very little in the way of a direct antecedent.

      Best practices      --------------------->>          Lesson learned

Best practices --> seemed too restrictive and could be interpreted as meaning there was only one best practice in a situation.
Lesson learned --> was broader and more inclusive.

Most successful lessons learned implementations have concluded that such a system needs to be monitored and that there needs to be a vetting and approval mechanism before items are mounted as lessons learned. Most successful lessons learned systems have an active weeding or stratification process. Without a clearly designed process for weeding, the proportion of new and crisp items inevitably declines, the system begins to look stale, and usage and utility falls.

6.2.4 Expertise Location

The basic function of an expertise locator system is straightforward, it is to identify and locate those persons within an organization who have expertise in a particular area. Such systems were commonly known as “Yellow Page” systems in the early days of KM.
Expertise location systems are another aspect of KM that certainly predates KM thinking.
There are now 3 areas which typically supply data for an expertise locator system, employee resumes, employee self identification of areas of expertise, typically by being requested to fill out a form online, or by algorithmic analysis of electronic communications from and to the employee.

The latter approach is typically based on email traffic, but it can include other social networking electronic communications such as Twitter and Facebook.

Commercial packages to match queries with expertise are available. Most of them have load-balancing schemes so as not to overload any particular expert.


6.2.5 Communities Of Practice (COPS)

Communities of Practice (CoPs) are groups of individuals with shared interests that come together in person or virtually to tell stories, discuss best practices, and talk over lessons learned [Wenger, E., 1998a,Wenger and Snyder, 1999]. In an information society where knowledge is considered an important resource for individuals and organizations, processes to share knowledge should be considered integral to any strategic or tactical plan.


In the context of KM, CoPs are generally understood to mean electronically linked communities. The organization and maintenance of CoPs is not a simple and easy undertaking. As Durham, M. [2004] points out, there are several key roles to be filled, which she describes as manager, moderator, and thought leader.


6.3 Processes,Procedures,And Practices Matrix

Processes and Procedures & Practices Matrix


Almost everything one does in KM is designed to help find information and knowledge.However, if we assume that the main goal of KMis to share knowledge and even more importantly to develop new knowledge, then the Knowledge Audit and the Tags, Taxonomies and Content Management stages are the underpinnings and the tools. It is the knowledge sharing and knowledge creation of one on one communications enabled by expertise locators, and the communal sharing and creation of knowledge enabled by communities of practice toward which KM development should be aimed.

Knowledge Management (KM) Processes in Organizations - Chapter 5 -

Chapter 5

Knowledge "Acts"

5.1 Question Asking And Answering

Question asking and answering is a foundational process by which what people know tacitly becomes expressed, and hence, externalized as knowledge. 

Hirschheim et al. [1995] describe types of speech acts that pertain to aspects of either Knowledge Management (KM), or Information Management (IM). 

They reason that IM addresses questions such as ‘Where,’ ‘Who,’ ‘When,’ and ‘What,’ while KM targets problems involving dynamic complexity, addressing solutions to questions such as ‘How’ and ‘Why.’ 

What-if questions, primarily seen in the decision making domain, will likely call for exhaustion of all possible scenarios in order to arrive at any “best” alternative. 

Similar to decision support processes and systems, exercises in “what –if ” questions and creating possible scenarios can serve individuals to use existing knowledge and create new knowledge. 

5.2 Posting Content To Repositories 

O’Dell and Jackson [1998] point out the importance of frameworks for classifying information. For many professionals who are used to online communication and accessing databases and discussion lists, we could argue that it is quicker and easier for the professionals to make the contribution themselves. 

The task of entering content into the system should be done by specially appointed people since busy professionals rarely have the time to enter a practice into the database unless it is their job. 

Nick et al. [2001], noting the importance of learning by experience, point out that experience bases can be developed using case-based reasoning as the underlying concept. However, experience repositories require continuous maintenance and updating in order to handle continuous streams of experience. 

Selvin and Buckingham [2002] describe a tool, Compendium, that claims to support rapid knowledge construction. 

The product supports both the construction of knowledge as content, or as the collaborative, negotiated, co-constructed approach to verifying and validating content, essentially accommodating both the content and process views of knowledge construction. 

Richter et al. [2004] describe a functionally similar tool, TAGGER, designed and operationalized as allowing knowledge acquisition discussions to be “tagged” in real time with the relevant concepts so as to lessen the burden on documentation. 

Increases for the importance of making knowledge explicit, more and more products will appear to help with creating knowledge bases and decision recommendations, but it is a mindset open to using, sharing, and creating knowledge that will make a difference in creating an organizational knowledge culture. 

5.3 (Re) Using Knowledge 

Desouza et al. [2006] assert that the decision to consume knowledge can be framed as a problem of risk evaluation, with perceived complexity and relative advantage being identified as factors relating to intentions to “consume” knowledge. the knowledge consumer is able to reasonably frame his or her knowledge needs. 

Belkin et al. [1982] found that during problem articulation, users have anomalous states of knowledge, and they may not be able to specify their information needs accurately. 

McMahon et al. [2004], studying team work involving engineering design, suggest that both codification and personalization approaches to knowledge reuse are relevant. 

The notion of information value, allowing for the matching of information to the knowledge needs of the user. 

The form in which knowledge is captured has to be informed by the eventual application, or reuse of the content. 

5.4 Knowledge-Based Decision Making 

Choo, C. [2002] suggests that decision making activity requires the establishment of shared meanings and the assumption of prior knowledge. 

Shared meanings and purposes as well as new knowledge and capabilities, converge on decision making as the activity leading to the selection and initiation of action. 

Information used in one activity that results in new knowledge will, in turn, be used to guide selection of alternatives in future tasks that involve decision making. 

Support for such scenario predicting questions will demand rich context upon which to apply knowledge of the past and the present to bear on the problem or situation at hand.We would like to refocus the discussion of knowledge management strategy to the demands of complex, dynamic, contextual, and emergent decision processes.

Knowledge Management (KM) Processes in Organizations - Chapter 4 -

Chapter 4

Conceptualizing Knowledge Emergence 

4.1 Gatekeepers, Information, Stars, And Boundary Spanners

Thomas J. Allen coined the term ‘Gatekeeper’ to describe the information flow stars that he discovered, the heavily connected nodes in the information flow pattern. The reason that he chose that term was that much of the development and project work that he investigated was classified military work, where there seemed to be something of a paradox. 

Allen himself, in fact, in developing and explicating the role of gatekeepers introduces and explains his gatekeepers with the term “sociometric stars.” “Information stars” a term emerging later [Tushman and Scanlan, 1981a,b], is, however, a more apt description, one that brings to mind more of the multiple roles and functions that such persons perform. 

The “information stars” were central to information flow both within the organization at large, and within their project or projects. The characteristics that distinguished these stars were:

- extensive communication with their field outside of the organization 

- greater perusal of information sources, journals, etc., information mavens 

- a high degree of connectedness with other information stars, one can infer that their utility was not just having more information at their fingertips, but knowing to whom to turn within the organization for further information 

- an above average degree of formal education compared to their project teammates 

These characteristics of information stars were further corroborated by Mondschein, L. [1990] in a study of R&D activities across several industries. 

The information flow structure was not at all closely related to the formal organizational structure, and that the information stars did not map onto any consistent pattern of organizational placement or level. The relationship between formal organizational structure and the information flow structure also seems to be in part a function of the larger corporate culture. 

Tushman, M. [1977], Tushman and Scanlan [1981a,b] introduced and added the concept of “boundary spanning” or boundary spanner to describe verymuch the same phenomenon that Allen described as gatekeeping. He extended Allen’s work by distinguishing between two types of communication stars, “internal communication stars” and “external communication stars,” and defining boundary spanners as those who were both internal and external communication stars. The emphasis is clearly directed to projects and project management, and the “take home” theme is that boundary spanners should be recognized, utilized, and nurtured for facilitating project success. 

In the context of KM, this tradition relates very directly to the development of Communities of Practice (CoP). Given the relative non-alignment of organizational structure and information flowand sharing,CoPs can be seen as the setting up of an alternative structure to facilitate information flow and sharing. 

4.2 Research Productivity And Knowledge

The ‘Gatekeepers, Information Stars & Boundary Spanner’ tradition is very consistent with a substantial body of work studying research productivity. 

The more productive companies were characterized by: 

- A relatively egalitarian managerial structure with unobtrusive status indicators in the R&D environment, 

- Less concern with protecting proprietary information, 

- Greater openness to outside information, greater use of their libraries and information centers, specifically, greater attendance by employees at professional meetings, 

- Greater information systems development effort, 

- Greater end-user use of information systems and more encouragement of browsing and serendipity. Increased time spent browsing and keeping abreast,

- Greater technical and subject sophistication of the information services staff. 

4.3 Lack Of Recognition Of These Findings In The Business Community 

A subset of an even larger problem - the lack of recognition of or even obtuseness to the importance of information and information related managerial actions in the business community. 

The three most important characteristics are all related to the information environment and information flow – specifically: 

1) easy access to information by individuals; 

2) free flow of information both into and out of the organizations; 

3)rewards for sharing, seeking, and using “new” externally developed information sources. 

Not only did information related management behavior tend strongly to discriminate between “high-performance” and “low-performance” companies, but also that none of the non information related management behaviors measured had any discriminatory value. 

Here, given the inability to find any significance for other managerial factors, the failure to remark upon the importance of information and knowledge factors can truly be described as remarkable. 

4.4 Community-Based Models 

An abundance of KM strategies in the category of Computer Mediated Communication (CMC). While technology may provide the tools for interaction and communication, the application of technology alone may not be a sufficient condition for sustaining the creation and sharing of knowledge. 

A lack of key words,index terms, or metadata on transcriptions and other knowledge aids means that the embedded knowledge can be lost to those who wish to re-use the saved text. 

Group Decision Support Systems (GDSSs) were originally conceived of as collaborative tools where groups came together, participated in brainstorming and then, through human facilitation, voted on items and issues important to the organization. 

Advantage of Group Decision Support Systems : 

- allowed for anonymous voting that moved decisions along rapidly by prioritizing topics more easily than trying to do so without the system’s assistance. Participants’ knowledge and experience contributed to the democratic process. 

- in general, is the ability for each person to speak (through entering opinions via a keypad, or original ideas via a keyboard) anonymously without fear of being politically incorrect or worrying about speaking in opposition to the manager. 

- is able to calculate the votes and display them graphically, so that an individual attending the meeting can see if she or he were an outlier on certain issues or to determine where his or her vote stood as compared with peers. 

- work well in a face-to-face situation where immediate feedback can be given and displayed. 

The GDSS has not migrated easily to theWeb, however, some web-based systems are available and have adapted to an asynchronous situation. The ability for groups to share knowledge and make decisions using decision technology tools is a beneficial way to combine human know-how and experience with database and display systems. 

Generic Decision Support Systems (DSS) that act more like expert systems with the added feature of suggesting decision options are well suited to the Web, and they are proliferating as the Web becomes the ubiquitous information and communication platform for information storage and retrieval, and for interaction as well. 

4.5 Repository Model 

The knowledge management repository, a space to store and retrieve knowledge objects has long been a standard in KMprograms. It is a model that emphasizes the creation of quality knowledge content in online repositories with re-use as a goal. 

Financial firms, IT departments, law firms and others who depend on frequently updated information and new legislative materials are just a few types of organizations that can make good use of the repository and re-use model. 

4.6 Activity-Based Models 

There has been significant work done in terms of Information Systems support for the coordination of work [Winograd,T., 1988], the next logical progression would be to link knowledge production and capture with work processes. 

Based on such a historical-cultural perspective of activity, Hasan, H. [2003] proposed rudiments of a KM system influenced by activity-based models that would link work activities with people and content. 

Incorporating workflow support with a knowledge repository, Kwan and Balasubramanian [2003] take the notion a step further; they propose the design of a KM system they call Knowledge Scope that provides integrated workflow support to capture and retrieve knowledge as an organizational process within the context it is created and used. 

They also propose a meta-model knowledge structure called Knowledge-In-Context that specifies relationships among processes. The model was implemented with limited workflow functions at a global telecommunications company. While repositories and workflow support have largely developed with limited integration, designs such as this, grounded in case implementations, provide some empirical validity as to the appropriateness and value of incorporating activity as context for knowledge reuse.

Nuclear Crisis: Israel Attack Iran insists

The Israeli government seems to ignore the warning the UnitedStates (U.S.) and Russia not to attack Iran's nuclear facilities.

Minister of Foreign Affairs (Foreign Minister) Avigdor Lieberman as Israel decision to say to strike Iranian nuclear facilities is the responsibility to protect citizens of Israel. "The safety of citizens of the State of Israel, the future of Israel is the responsibility of the government of Israel," Lieberman said.

Israeli officials recently more intensively with their war rhetoric. The Jewish state has threatened to launch an attack against Iran, if sanctions are imposed against the Islamic Republic failed to make it stop its nuclear program.

Besides the U.S. and Russia, China also has warned Israel not to attack Iran. Therefore, the move would lead to severe consequences not only for the Middle East, but for the whole world.

Meanwhile, the U.S. warned of military action against Iran caused great instability that could threaten the safety of American citizens in Afghanistan and Iraq. "Any military action in the region, the risk of greater instability in the region," said White House spokesman JayCarney.


The warning was delivered several days ahead of a meeting between U.S. President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

reference:
http://lampungpost.com/internasional/26448-krisis-nuklir--israel-bersikukuh-serang-iran.html

Iran's Nuclear Issue

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, accused Western countries of using the issue of Iran's nuclear program as a pretext tooverthrow the regime in Tehran.

Putin stated this after the International Atomic Energy Agency,IAEA, remains a possible concern in the military aspects of Iran's nuclear program.
Putin did not mention the Western countries which he called trying to overthrow the Iranian regime, but tudingannya likely to lead to the U.S., Britain, and France, which has been most harshly criticizedIran's nuclear program, which led to the state's imposition of sanctions.
Russia supported a UN resolution that Iran stop enriching uranium,but oppose further sanctions on Iran.

Iran insists its nuclear program for civilian purposes, and continueddevelopment.
"Iran wants to continue holding talks with the IAEA to prove that its nuclear activities were peaceful," said the Iranian envoy to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh.
Previously, the IAEA expressed concern that Iran improve its military capabilities with the help of a 'foreign expert' in the Parchin, south of Tehran.
U.S. says IAEA report showed Iran has failed to convince the international community about the peaceful intentions of its nuclear program.
The report also said Iran increases the number of machines used toenrich uranium and uranium production increase 20% higher.
Iran is also preparing for the work mentioned Uranium enrichmentplant at Natanz and a hidden place in Fordo, near the holy city ofQom.
But Iran rejected UN demands to visit the place and deniedconcerns that "based on allegations that are not there."


I think the outstanding issues that Iran make a nuclear enrichment,possibly from Iran's own country was intending to develop theirnuclear program to peaceful purposes. reaction may be differentfrom other countries. from Western countries accuse Iran of tryingthat the technology to build a nuclear bomb. so, in my opinion, Iran fail to convince the international community that the purpose of its nuclear program is peaceful.


reference:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/indonesia/dunia/2012/02/120225_putinaccusedwestern.shtml

Earth Day

Earth Day is a day early each year on which events are held worldwide to increase awareness and appreciation of the Earth's natural environment. Earth Day is now coordinated globally by theEarth Day Network and is celebrated in more than 175 countries every year. In 2009, the United Nations designated April 22 International Mother Earth Day. Earth Day is planned for April 22 in all years at least through 2015.

An international non-profit institutions have created a campaign video that Earth Day can be seen below:

The earth's population from various nationalities and backgroundsare expected to voice their aspirations for the sake of our planetand preserve this land where we stand. Together we will unite to welcome a brighter future, let's invite our brother, our organization'sshelter, and government to participate.

Some simple things we can do to welcome Earth Day include:

1. Cleaning the bedroom and the house
2. Planting and spruce trees and plants and flowers in your neighborhood
3. Aktfitas perform community service in a residential neighborhoodwith neighbors
4. Avoid the use of a motor vehicle or personal car for a full day.



reference :
http://sidomi.com/87577/earth-day/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Day

Kartini's Day

Kartini's Day and the true meaning - Raden Kartini Adjeng is a National Hero of Indonesia as a pioneer of women's struggle,symbol of gender equality, women's emancipation.

Raden Kartini Adjeng is the daughter of the Javanese nobility Raden Mas Sosroningrat Duke Ario, a Regent of Jepara. Kartini was born in Jepara, on April 21, 1879 and died on 17 September1904 in Apex.

Light After Dark (Door Duisternis Lich tot) is a book of Kartini's letters are being sent to his friends in the Netherlands. The book isa testament to so great a desire to release his people from theKartini discrimination is already entrenched in his day.

In honor of his services as a pioneer of women's resurrection,President Sukarno set April 21 as the birthday of Kartini and also set Adjeng Raden Kartini as a National Hero of the commemorated every year. And now known as the Kartini Day.

reference:
http://www.bloginfonews.com/2012/04/hari-kartini-2012-dan-maknanya.html

Knowledge Management (KM) Processes in Organizations - Chapter 3 -

Chapter 3

Theorizing Knowledge in Organizations

To better understand the notion of “managing” knowledge, there is a need to better understand what it is about knowledge flow in organizations that lends itself to any form of management.

The literature has discussed organizational knowledge both as a resource [Grant, R., 1996] and a process of learning [Argyris and Schon, 1978, Senge, P., 1990], often emphasizing one aspect over the other.

In the resource view, knowledge is conceptualized as an object that exists largely in formal documents or online artifacts amenable to organizing and manipulation.

The process view, on the other hand, largely emphasizes the emergent nature of knowledge that is often embedded within a person or within organizational routines, activities, and outcomes, or arises from the interplay of persons and existing information or knowledge.

While both perspectives may vary significantly in terms of the scope for the “management” of knowledge, it is still worth exploring the issues and debate surrounding the practice of creating, gathering, and sharing knowledge within organizations.

KNOWLEDGE AS RESOURCE AND PROCESS

The knowledge that the firm possesses is a source of sustainable competitive advantage, and is, accordingly, regarded as a strategic resource of the firm in need of management attention.

Through the process view, organizations are thought of as information processing and knowledge generating systems [Grant, R., 1996].

Baumard, P. [1999] proposes looking at knowledge in organizations along two dimensions: tacit-explicit versus individual-collective. He defines four quadrants in which knowledge types are situated:

- tacit-individual (intuitiveness),

- tacit-collective (social practice),

- explicit-individual (expertise), and

- explicit-collective (rules).

INTERACTIONS FORKNOWLEDGE CREATION

While knowledge itself may be perceived as a resource, its creation occurs through human interactions, whether physical or virtual.

A communication and interaction perspective have argued that through discourse and dialectics, individuals shape and re-shape the thought processes of others, eventually leading to a situation of negotiated ormutually co-constructed reasoning for action and knowledge [von Krogh et al.,1998]

Sense-making [Weick, K.,1995] is then seen as an activity that reaffirms whether the decisions and actions taken are rational in hindsight, constituting the “knowledge” that is created.

Nonaka and Takeuchi [1995] in their seminal work have also alluded to knowledge creation as a process of socialization that is predicated on the need for direct social interactions. Nonaka and Takeuchi are the most prominent theorists in the knowledge management domain. Their SECI (Socialization, Externalization, Combination, Internalization) model posits a spiral-type process in which knowledge goes from within a person’s own knowledge store to a more explicit state that can be shared socially with others.

ACTIVITY AS CONTEXT

Blackler, F. [1995] and others propose that attention should focus on systems through which knowing and doing are achieved. By suggesting an alternative stance of knowing as mediated, situated, provisional, pragmatic, and contested, as opposed to a more classic viewof knowledge as embodied, embrained, encultured, and encoded, he recognizes that knowledge permeates activity systems within the organization.

Blackler, F. proposes that knowledge can be observed as emerging out of the tensions that arise within an organization’s activity systems, that is, among individuals and their communities, their environment (rules and regulations), and the instruments and resources that mediate their activities.

Through immersion in joint activity, individuals in organizations gain tacit knowledge, the sharing of which occurs as a result of the mutual participation [Tsoukas, H., 1996].

Knowledge Management (KM) Processes in Organizations - Chapter 2 -

Chapter 2

Background Bibliographic Analysis

Articles about KM were and are being published in the fields of computer science, information systems, management, engineering, communication, and library and information science.

Ponzi and Koenig [2002] were able to project early on that KM was either an unusually broad-shouldered business enthusiasm or a rather permanent development.

In the early years of KM, it was probably a very safe assumption that almost all KMarticles would have the phrase “knowledge management” in the title, but as the KM field has grown, that almost certainly is no longer a safe assumption. There are now numerous articles about “communities of practice” or “enterprise content management” or “lessons learned” that clearly are KM focused, but they do not use the phrase “knowledge management” in the title.

The significance of the KM growth pattern becomesmuch more apparent when one compares it with the pattern of other major business enthusiasms of recent years.

Quality Circles, Business Process Engineering, and Total Quality Management all show an almost identical pattern of approximately five years of dramatic, exponential, growth, then they peak and fall off to near nothing almost as quickly. All the hallmarks are here of a rather permanent development.

There has also been substantial interest in the academic world concerning KM. The database ‘Dissertations and Theses’ includes bibliographic information about theses published by graduate Students at accredited North American institutions from 1861, and from 50 European universities since 1988. A search of the database showed that all of the dissertations and theses with ‘knowledge management’ in the title or in the key word fields have been published since 1996.

‘Knowledge management’ may have been commonly used in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s, scholars have adopted terms such as ‘knowledge sharing,’ ‘communities of practice,’ and ‘learning organizations’ as knowledge management processes became more mainstream in organizations. As the twenty-first century has progressed, searches on ‘knowledge management’ have revealed that scholarly works on knowledge sharing have increasingly been combined with research on social networking and social media.

The data seem to indicate that there continues to be a lively interest in research and writing about knowledge management, and presumably that scholars and ordinary people are interested in reading about KM as well. The specific departments and disciplines in which the dissertations were written range from mathematics to mass communication, with business administration being strongly represented.

An interesting observation is that there was a very brief spurt of articles about KM in journals  devoted to education, but that interest soon waned. This is likely a function of the fact that KM, as mentioned previously has a very corporatist and organizational emphasis, while for most academic principals, the faculty, their commitment to their field, their discipline and sub-discipline, their “invisible college” comes first.

Knowledge Management (KM) Processes in Organizations - Chapter 1 -

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

WHAT IS KM?

1.      Davenport,T. (1994) tells about KM movement :

“Knowledge management is the process of capturing, distributing, and effectively using knowledge” 

( This definition has the virtue of being simple, stark, and to the point )

2. The Gartner Group created the second definition of KM, which is perhaps the most frequently cited one (Duhon, 1998):

A discipline that promotes an integrated approach to identifying, capturing, evaluating, retrieving, and sharing all of an enterprise’s information assets. These assets may include databases, documents, policies, procedures, and previously uncaptured expertise and experience in individual workers.

( This definition is a bit more specific and informative, and it is illuminating because it makes explicit not just conventional information and knowledge units, but also “tacit knowledge,” or implicit knowledge, that which is known, but not captured in any formal or explicit fashion ).

3. McInerney, C. [2002] is that “KM is an effort to increase useful knowledge within the organization. Ways to do this include encouraging communication, offering opportunities to learn, and promoting the sharing of appropriate knowledge objects or artifacts.”

( This definition emphasizes the interactive aspect of KM, that is, knowledge sharing by people rather than the common understanding of knowledge management as a system used to organize what we might call ‘knowledge objects.’ )

Upon being asked at a cocktail party to define Knowledge Management, one may offer an apt

definition, comprised of primarily 3 distinct parts:

1) Classic Library and Information Science and Information Retrieval.

2) ICT, Information and Communication Technology.

3) HR,HumanRelations,changing the culture of the organization to facilitate knowledge sharing and use.

Another way to understand KM may be to examine its history and development.

THE HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF KM

In the article entitled “Where Did Knowledge Management Come From” written in 1999, Prusak states that KM first appeared “about seven years ago,” i.e., in 1992, and describes a conference in Boston in 1993 as “a good milestone to mark the beginning of the knowledge management time-line” [Prusak, L., 1999]

The earliest instances of KM, as the term is understood today, derive from the consulting world, from which the principles of KM eventually spread to other disciplines. The consulting firms quickly realized the potential of the Intranet flavor of the Internet for linking together their own geographically dispersed knowledge based organizations. They then understood that the expertise they had gained was a product that could be sold to other organizations. That product needed a name, and the name chosen, or at least arrived at, was Knowledge Management.

In his article the origins of KM, Prusak in fact, felt it appropriate to say “some skeptics may believe that consultants developed knowledge management to replace declining revenues from the waning re-engineering movement” [Prusak, L., 1999]. The two enthusiasms, KM and re-engineering, are related in that both were driven by increased ICT (Information and Communication Technologies) capabilities. However, the timing, though convenient for the consulting firms, was driven not by their convenience, but by the straightforward dynamics of ICT capability growth.

KM was dependent upon the appearance of the Internet, while pre internet, ICT already enabled the major restructuring of an organization’s work flows and processes. In a sense, KM also has roots in the implementation of Supply Chain Management (SCM) software and business process reengineering (BPR) as well as the more recent development of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP). IT development has always displayed a pattern, of growth from more structured data to less tractable, less well structured, or comparatively unstructured data.  SCM & BPR & ERP to KM, represent a logical and predictable progression toward unstructured information and knowledge.

Leistner says that knowledge must be connected with people to be a viable term Koenig,M, KM has two parents, the enthusiasm for and the appreciation of intellectual capital, and the development of the Internet and its offspring, intranets and extranets.

“Intellectual Capital” representing the awareness that as PeterDrucker [Hibbard, J., 1997, p. 46] put it:

We now know that the source of wealth is something, specifically human knowledge. If we apply knowledge to tasks that we obviously know how to do, we call it productivity.

If we apply knowledge to tasks that are new and different, we call it innovation. Only knowledge allows us to achieve those two goals.

INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL DEVELOPS AND DECLINES

A pioneer in the Intellectual Capital (IC) field was Karl-Eric Sveiby [Sveiby, K., 1989, 1997, 2001], whose book The Invisible Balance Sheet was a key work in the development of thinking about Intellectual Capital.From this early writing, Sveiby’s ideas developed smoothly and rapidly into KM.

The work of Buckman, R. [2004] at BuckmanLaboratories and Hubert St.Onge [Chatzkel, J.,2000] at the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce and Clarica Insurance were key implementations in operationalizing the concept and in popularizing IC. Also very important was the Stewart,T. [1994] article in Fortune magazine, “Intellectual Capital, Your Company’s Most Valuable Asset.”

THE INTERNET EMERGES

As the Internet emerged, the business world realized that the Internet could be used to link an

organization together. This was the take off point for large scale recognition of KMas an important innovation, and it was the stimulus for its development [Koenig,M., 1996, 1998].

THE STAGES OF KM DEVELOPMENT

The Three Stages of KM

STAGE I “By the Internet out of Intellectual Capital”

Information Technology

Intellectual Capital

The Internet (including intranets, extranets, etc.)

Key Phrases: “best practices,” later replaced by the more politic “lessons learned”

STAGE II Human and cultural dimensions, the HR, Human Relations stage

Communities of Practice

Organizational Culture

The Learning Organization (Senge), and

Tacit Knowledge (Nonaka) incorporated into KM

Key Phrase: “communities of practice”

STAGE III Content and Retrievability

Structuring content and assigning descriptors (index terms)

Key Phrases: “ content management” and “taxonomies”

STAGE IV ? Access to External Information

Emphases upon External Information and the recognition of the Importance of Context

Key Terms: “context” and “extranet”

SUPPLEMENTARY WAYS OF LOOKING AT KM

THE FOREST AND THE TREES

A forest of information and knowledge management, whose scope and importance we are still coming to recognize. Furthermore, it is beginning to appear that KM is graduating from being just one of many names on that list, to now becoming the name for that forest of all the trees of information and knowledge management.

The more likely explanation is that of the forests and the trees, the forest being that community of trees listed above that all deal significantly with information and knowledge management. The forest is certainly not going away, nor will it remain static, new trees will emerge, but KM is morphing and expanding in scope to be the name of that forest. We have always had trouble defining KM, and now we have another definition, or more exactly a new metaphor, KM is the name for that newly recognized forest of all the trees of information and knowledge management.

KM AS THE EXTENSION OF THE SUCCESSFUL R&D ENVIRONMENT

A final way to view KM is to observe KM as the movement to replicate the information environment known to be conducive to successful R&D- rich, deep, and open communication and information access - and deploy it broadly across the firm.

The principles and practices of KM have developed in a very conducive environment, given that in this post-industrial information age, an increasingly larger proportion of the population consists of information workers.

Do You Know??

Dou you know that actually, the virus is considered dofollow blog.



Viruses are small programs that can attach itself to other programs.When another program is executed, the virus also runs, and can copy itself to more programs. In this way, they spread like a biological virus and it can take quite a lot of memory to turn off the computer.

Viruses are written by people. Some virus writers are hackers who seek information or the power of a larger computer network. Many are also working with perpetrators of spam; others are just aiming to earn the respect of the programming community or simply to leave a mark.

nofollow:
blogs are nofollow, if we comment on its news, blogs do not provide any backlink
doFollow:
is the opposite, if the comment is dofollow blog post is like planting an abundance of fruit backlink, and we stuck to link automatically continue on the blog, and means the machine will google street also to our blog.

There are several ways you can do to find out our blog nofollow or dofollow:

1.  First, in a way which is commonly used and can be applied in any browser, with display source page.

Here's how:

The first way, right-click the page, then click the "view page source".

The second way, select the menu "view" at the top of the browser, click the "page source".
The third way, press Ctrl + U.
Customize your web browser to mate, each browser may be slightly different.
After that, find your desired link. Then, look like the code below :

rel = "dofollow"> or without the attribute "rel"
The above code indicates that the link is dofollow, dofollow while not (nofollow) as shown below.
rel = 'nofollow'>

2.  The second way, using firefox browser. There are three quick ways can my friend do with firefox.

The first way, the block / selection link, then right click and click on "view selection source".
This is the same as the above, but can speed up the time my friend.
The second way, right click, then click "properties" and see a display like the following.

Look for a dofollow link :

Look for the link that is not DoFollow (nofollow) :

reference:

http://help.yahoo.com/l/id/yahoo/mail/classic/abuse/spamguard-02.html;_ylt=AvMae5yHhLfprJ0cEJN7Cp6npiV4

http://kumpulanmakalahdanartikelpendidikan.blogspot.com/2011/02/info-terbaru-dari-yahoo-sebenarnya-blog.html

National Museum of Indonesia

In January 2012, exactly on 14, me and my friends visited the National Museum of Indonesia. The museum is located in Central Jakarta, precisely in the "Jalan Medan Merdeka Barat 12". I went there to use the busway.

in busway, trip to National Museum

the ticket for busway and the museum

The National Museum also known as the "Museum Gajah". It has many different collecting ancient artifacts from around the archipelago, such as statues, inscriptions, and objects other ancient crafts.

National Museum of Indonesia

But many of us get to know and choose to visit the National Monument (Monas) than the National Museum. However, in this museum there are also many relics of the Indies- the Netherlands.

Collection of ceramics and ethnographic collections in museums Indonesia is the largest and most comprehensive in the world. This museum is the first and largest museum in Southeast Asia.

For example of past heritage museum located in this instance, there is the jewelry worn by people at that time.

The pictures below is my photos in the National Museum :)

I am very pleased to be able to visit this museum with my friends and i want to share this to all. I hope more and more young people who can appreciate the historyand culture of Indonesia.

reference: http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Museum_Nasional_Indonesia 

Data, Information, and Knowledge

Differences between data, information, and knowledge:

Data is a collection of facts that represent an event. Data can also be interpreted as the very small / basic of human work. Data is rigid/ static.

Information is the result of processing / processing the data collected and have a picture or a clear sense of a particular context.information is dynamic. Everyone has a different response to the information.

Knowledge is the result of processing the information so useful. in addition, knowledge can also be regarded as information that is integrated and interpreted. Knowledge derived from information which is absorbed in one's reasoning, as well as transcendent.

For example:

Data: 200 motor vehicles were passing lane Parung this morning.
Information: Parung lane of traffic congestion experienced in the morning.
Knowledge: motorists should take alternate routes, such as Sawangan.



reference: http://blogs.unpad.ac.id/eddynurmanto/2007/06/20/data-informasi-dan-pengetahuan/

Why Are Gas Prices Going Up Right Now?

What's the Real Reason Behind High Oil Prices?

Oil prices are set by commodities traders who buy and sell futures contracts on the commodities exchanges.These are agreements to buy or sell oil at a specific date in the future at a specific price. Commodities traders can create a self-fulfilling prophecy by bidding up oil futures prices. Once this starts, it can create an asset bubble. Unfortunately, the one who pays for this bubble is you!

Like most of the things you buy, oil prices are affected by supply and demand. However, oil prices are also affected by oil price futures, which are traded on the commodities futures exchange. These prices fluctuate daily, depending on what investors think the price of oil will be in the future. When traders think oil will be high, they bid it up even higher. This soon causes rising gas prices.

What Makes High Gas Prices Go Down?

The summertime vacation driving season usually increases gas prices by an average of ten cents per gallon. This price increase is despite the increased use of ethanol. Gas prices usually go down in the winter, since transportation needs are lower. This even offsets an increase in oil usage for winter heating in the Northeast U.S.

What Can We Do About Rising Gas Prices?

The most immediate thing we can do is reduce our usage of gas, either through driving less or increasing fuel efficiency. Surprisingly, the best way to increase fuel efficiency is to keep tires inflated.

Another reason for rising oil prices is the declining dollar. Since oil is denominated in dollars, the 40% decline in the dollar in the last six years puts upward pressure on oil prices. (Source: BBC, Oil Price May Hit $200 a Barrel, May 7, 2008)

Sometimes commodities traders drive up the price of oil, even when supply increases and demand falls. The EIA cited an increased flow of investment money into commodities markets. In other words, money that used to be invested in real estate or the global stock market is now being invested in oil futures. For more on the factors commodities traders use, see How Are Oil Prices Determined? (Source: EIA Short-Term Energy Outlook)

Longer term, we can change our need for oil and gas by switching to alternative fuel vehicles, using public transit and moving closer to work to reduce commuting time. This will reduce the impact of gas prices on each of us individually by reducing use.

Could this reduction in itself reduce gas prices? It could, if it could reduce demand for oil enough to lower oil prices. It would have to happen on a sustained basis over a long period of time. That's because gasoline accounts for only 20% of each barrel of oil. Oil companies would still profit from the non-gasoline parts of their business. Therefore, even if consumers could conceivably stop 100% of gasoline use, oil prices might only decline 20%.

http://useconomy.about.com/od/commoditiesmarketfaq/p/high_gas_prices.htm