Leadership and Organisational Learning by Richard Lalleman

Leadership, Organisational Learning and Complexity Theory: A qualitative research on the discovery of crucial leadership behaviour and evidence of how leadership behaviour enhances organisational learning processes

by Richard Lalleman (07002773) LONDON Metropolitan University

September 2008

CMPP28N Information and Knowledge Management Project

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This research acknowledges that knowledge management is a cross-disciplinary practice with strong links to organisational learning and complexity theory. Organisational learning is the process that enables an organisation to adapt to change and move forward by acquiring new knowledge. Complexity theory is the theory that argues that acquiring new knowledge evolves through the cognition in human organisations. Thus, to compete and be innovative in fast-moving environment organisations should enhance organisational learning by understanding the strength of cognition. Managing this cross-disciplinary practice requires a new form of leadership and therefore this research discovered crucial leadership behaviour and generated evidence of how leadership behaviour enhances organisational learning. The research consists of three research techniques. Firstly, an extended literature review to chart the body of knowledge, to identify gaps, and to develop a proposed new theoretical model. Secondly, the analysis of a published case-study to test the outcomes derived from the extended literature review. Thirdly, three interviews to test the proposed new theoretical model derived from the extended literature review and the published case study and to identify new leadershipâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s characteristics. The data gathered from the published case-study and interviews are from leaders working for international organisations consisting of different management structures. The main conclusion is that leaders are enhancing organisational learning by promoting effective communication. Effective communication increases the participation of staff members in the process of sense and decision making regarding problems or opportunities faced by an organisation. This will eventually lead to an increase of innovation. Where the tools applied by leaders to improve the effectiveness of communication are different, they have in common that, except for one organisation, they document tacit knowledge on a Wiki in order to enhance organisational learning. This raises the question whether it is recommended to invest time in adding content to a Wiki while the fast-moving environments of organisations are requiring speedy sense and decision making in order to compete. Therefore it has been recommended to further investigate a best practice organisation in organisational learning through direct communication (i.e. face-to-face conversations) and a best practice organisation in organisational learning through indirect communication (i.e. Wiki).

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ ii TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................................................... iii LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................. v LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................................... v ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................................................. vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...................................................................................................................... vii STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY ............................................................................................................ vii RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES .................................................................................................................. 8 1.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 9 1.1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE RESEARCH .......................................................................................... 9 1.1.2 RESEARCH PROBLEM AND JUSTIFICATION ............................................................................. 9 SUB-QUESTION 1: ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT ....................................................................... 10 SUB-QUESTION 2: TYPES OF KNOWLEDGE ............................................................................... 10 SUB-QUESTION 3: CONCEPTS OF EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP STRATEGIES ................................... 10 SUB-QUESTION 4: ACTION STEPS TO CREATE EFFECTIVE OL PROCESSES ................................. 11 1.2 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN .................................................................................................................. 11 1.2.1 MAPPING LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOUR IN SOCIAL CONTEXT: ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT ..... 11 1.2.2 MODELLING THE TYPE OF KNOWLEDGE............................................................................... 12 1.3 RESEARCH METHODS................................................................................................................... 13 1.3.1 THE EXTENDED LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................. 13 1.3.2 THE ANALYSIS OF A PUBLISHED CASE-STUDY ..................................................................... 14 1.3.3 INTERVIEWS ......................................................................................................................... 15 1.4 DATA ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................... 17 1.5 IMPORTANCE AND LIMITATIONS.................................................................................................. 18 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH: EXTENDED LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................................................................................. 20 2.1 THE HISTORY OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT .......................................................................... 21 2.1.1 DEFINING KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT ............................................................................... 21 2.1.2 POST-INDUSTRIAL GENERATIONS OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT.................................... 22 2.1.3 THE CURRENT TREND OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT ...................................................... 23 2.2 THE FUTURE OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT ............................................................................ 23 2.2.1 COMPLEXITY OF CONTEMPORARY ORGANISATIONS ............................................................ 23 2.2.2 LEADERSHIP IN CONTEMPORARY ORGANISATIONS .............................................................. 25 2.2.3 LEADERSHIP FRAMEWORKS IN CONTEMPORARY ORGANISATIONS ...................................... 27 2.2.4 HOW SUSTAINABLE ARE THE LEADERSHIP FRAMEWORKS? ................................................. 28 2.2.5 ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING IN THE CONTEMPORARY ORGANISATION .............................. 29 2.2.5.1 PUTTING OL IN ITS SOCIAL CONTEXT: THE TYPES OF KNOWLEDGE ............................. 30 2.2.5.2 PUTTING OL IN ITS SOCIAL CONTEXT: ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT ............................ 31 2.2.5.3 OL AND THE CONCEPTS OF EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP STRATEGY................................... 32 Communication.................................................................................................................... 32 Hierarchy.............................................................................................................................. 32 Trust ..................................................................................................................................... 32 2.3 SUMMARY CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH .................. 33

iv PRACTICAL FRAMEWORK OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH: THE ANALYSIS OF THE PUBLISHED CASE-STUDY ...................................................................................................................... 36 3.1 HEWLETT-PACKARD’S CASE ....................................................................................................... 37 3.1.1 INTRODUCTION TO HEWLETT-PACKARD ............................................................................. 37 3.1.2 THE ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT OF INCREASING CONNECTIVITY ...................................... 37 3.1.3 THE CONCEPTS OF INCREASING CONNECTIVITY .................................................................. 38 3.1.4 KNOWLEDGE TYPES OF INCREASING CONNECTIVITY........................................................... 39 3.1.5 ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING PROCESSES FOR INCREASING CONNECTIVITY ....................... 39 PRACTICAL FRAMEWORK OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH: THE ANALYSIS OF THE INTERVIEW CASE-STUDIES .................................................................................................................... 41 4.1 ALPHA’S CASE: A PARTNERSHIP MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE ..................................................... 42 4.1.1 INTRODUCTION TO ALPHA ................................................................................................... 42 4.1.2 THE ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT OF SECONDMENTS OF INFORMATION OFFICERS .............. 42 4.1.3 THE CONCEPTS OF SECONDMENTS OF INFORMATION OFFICERS........................................... 43 4.1.4 KNOWLEDGE TYPES OF SECONDMENTS OF INFORMATION OFFICERS ................................... 43 4.1.5 ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING PROCESSES FOR SECONDMENTS OF INFORMATION OFFICERS 44 4.2 BRAVO’S CASE: A FLAT MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE .................................................................. 46 4.2.1 INTRODUCTION TO BRAVO................................................................................................... 46 4.2.2 THE ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT OF THE DIVERSIFICATION STRATEGY .............................. 46 4.2.3 THE CONCEPTS OF THE DIVERSIFICATION STRATEGY .......................................................... 47 4.2.4 KNOWLEDGE TYPES OF THE DIVERSIFICATION STRATEGY .................................................. 47 4.2.5 ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING PROCESSES FOR THE DIVERSIFICATION STRATEGY............... 48 4.3 CHARLIE’S CASE: A HIERARCHICAL MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE ............................................... 50 4.3.1 INTRODUCTION TO CHARLIE ................................................................................................ 50 4.3.2 THE ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT OF REDEFINING INTERNAL PROCEDURES ........................ 50 4.3.3 THE CONCEPTS OF REDEFINING INTERNAL PROCEDURES..................................................... 51 4.3.4 KNOWLEDGE TYPES OF REDEFINING INTERNAL PROCEDURES ............................................. 51 4.3.5 ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING PROCESSES FOR REDEFINING INTERNAL PROCEDURES ......... 52 4.4 SUMMARY PRACTICAL FRAMEWORK OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH ...................... 53 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................... 54 5.1 RESEARCH SUMMARY.................................................................................................................. 55 5.2 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................. 55 5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................... 57 5.3.1 IDENTIFYING LEADERSHIP’S CHARACTERISTICS IN ALL ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXTS ....... 57 5.3.2 FURTHER RESEARCH ON WIKIS DYNAMICS TO ENHANCE ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING ..... 57 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 58 APPENDIX A – CYNEFIN: HOW TO MAKE DECISIONS IN MULTIPLE ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXTS? ...... 63 APPENDIX B – LIST OF RECOGNISED EXPERTS ...................................................................................... 64 APPENDIX C – FULL LIST OF FREQUENTLY USED SECONDARY RESOURCES .......................................... 65 APPENDIX D – BACKGROUND ARTICLE TO HEWLETT-PACKARD CASE-STUDY ................................... 66 APPENDIX E – TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH ALPHA ..................................................................... 80 APPENDIX F – TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH BRAVO ..................................................................... 88 APPENDIX G – TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH CHARLIE .................................................................. 98

LIST OF FIGURES F.1

Organisational contexts derived from Cynefin framework

F.2

Organisational contexts derived from four modes framework

F.3

Different types of knowledge in organisational context

F.4

Theoretical sampling through polygon circle-graph

F.5

Example of leadership’s problem or opportunity mapped in polygon circle-graph

F.6

Example of action steps to create effective learning process mapped in cross-graph

F.7

Matrix of an organisation’s IC

F.8

Adding knowing to knowledge

F.9

Four modes of organisational decision making

F.10

Leader’s framework for decision making

F.11

The social context of increasing connectivity in HP’s case

F.12

Action steps to create effective learning processes as proposed by HP in cross-graph

F.13

The social context of information officers secondments in Alpha’s case

F.14

Action steps to create effective learning processes as proposed by Alpha in cross-graph

F.15

The social context of the diversification strategy in Bravo’s case

F.16

Action steps to create effective learning processes as proposed by Bravo in cross-graph

F.17

The social context of the redefinition of internal procedures in Charlie’s case

F.18

Action steps to create effective learning processes as proposed by Charlie in cross-graph

LIST OF TABLES T.1

Overview of interviewees

T.2

Measures to quantify qualitative findings

T.3

Measures to map actions steps in cross-graph

T.4

Five interpretive dimensions of complexity by Tsoukas and Hatch (2001)

T.5

Characteristics of a complex context as outlined in the Cynefin framework

T.6

Measures for mapping HP’s action steps in cross-graph

T.7

Characteristics of a complicated context as outlined in the Cynefin framework

T.8

Measures for mapping Alpha’s action steps in cross-graph

T.9

Characteristics of a complicated context as outlined in the Cynefin framework

T.10

Measures for mapping Bravo’s action steps in cross-graph

T.11

Characteristics of a complicated context as outlined in the Cynefin framework

T.12

Measures for mapping Charlie’s action steps in cross-graph

ABBREVIATIONS BPI

Best Practice Institute

CAS

Complex Adaptive System

CEO

Chief Executive Officer

DLL

Double Loop Learning

DMS

Document Management System

ECKM

European Conference on Knowledge Management

Hewlett-Packard

Intellectual Capital

Knowledge Management

KMCI

Knowledge Management Consortium International

Organisational Learning

SLL

Single Loop Learning

WDOE Workforce Development and Organization Effectiveness

vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation report is a result of an information and knowledge management project as part of the completion of a Master in Science in Information and Knowledge Management.

My first

acknowledgement is to the financial support of the Arts and Humanities Research Council in the United Kingdom for enabling this research to be conducted. Equal thanks are due of course to all the persons who offered me their time for interviews in the course of the project. Also, I would like to thank Catherine Kelly at the London Metropolitan University for her support with this project.

STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY I certify that this dissertation, and the research to which it refers, are the product of my, Richard Lalleman, work, and that any ideas or quotations from the work of other people, published or otherwise, are fully acknowledged in accordance with the standard referencing practices required by the London Metropolitan University. This research has been completed solely in fulfilment of the dissertation for the Master in Science in Information and Knowledge Management at the London Metropolitan University.

part one

RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES MOVING CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS INTO PRACTICE

1.1 INTRODUCTION 1.1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE RESEARCH This chapter examines the inductive approaches used in this study to cover the central question about what the leadership’s characteristics are to enhance organisational learning (OL) processes. It enables, on one hand, the development of a model of understanding leadership behaviour for promoting OL processes and, on the other hand, the testing and identification of leadership characteristics on the basis of the same model. In the former case, a qualitative approach using an extended literature review is being implemented for developing a new proposed theoretical model; in the latter case, qualitative approaches using an analysis of a published case-study and interviews are being implemented for testing the new proposed theoretical model and identifying the leadership’s characteristics. Based on these qualitative approaches, the research aims to elicit rich descriptive data about the best way to identify leadership’s characteristics and, additionally, generate measurable descriptive findings for the application of the leadership’s characteristics in the everyday context of organisations.

1.1.2 RESEARCH PROBLEM AND JUSTIFICATION This research rests on the assumption that good leadership is required in contemporary organisations to make fast decisions in a fast changing environment. Leadership is a crucial link between the performance of an organisation and the management of knowledge because a leader needs to encourage ways in which staff members enhance their knowledge and, consequently, decisions will be made faster. It is proposed that fast decision making lets organisations compete better because organisations are continuously learning and, therefore, generating innovation.

Thereupon,

organisations should create techniques to out-learn, out-innovate and out-perform their competitors (McElroy, 2001). Leaders should encourage staff members to learn from each other, which is the cross-discipline of KM and OL. In recent years KM shifted from a capture, codify, and distribution strategy to an educative and innovative strategy for creating and capturing individual knowledge; whereas, OL is concerned with what individuals know and what knowledge is held collectively by groups and individuals. Thus, leaders are crucial in managing knowledge by facilitating OL processes. This is a trend of recent years and best practice organisations have shown the value of leaders who are promoting OL processes. However, in a minor way contemporary literature answers the question of what make these leaders unique in KM practices. Thereupon, the research question reads as follows: WHAT ARE THE LEADERSHIP’S CHARACTERISTICS TO ENHANCE ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING PROCESSES?

This research question consists of four sub-questions. By linking the sub-questions to the research question, it seeks to place the leadership’s characteristics in a social context, which make the outcomes of the research applicable to real-life organisations.

SUB-QUESTION 1: ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT By identifying the organisational context in which the leader is operating, the identified leadership’s characteristics maintain its social context. Through this, the identified leadership’s characteristics are useful for other leaders managing OL processes in the same organisational contexts. From a very static to an extreme dynamic organisational context, the various contexts are simple, complicated, complex, and chaotic. Consequently, the identification of the organisational context results in the subquestion: What are the characteristics of new opportunities or problems that the organisation is facing?

SUB-QUESTION 2: TYPES OF KNOWLEDGE By exploring which types of knowledge are moving through the identified organisational contexts, leaders will understand which type of knowledge works in managing OL processes in the specific organisational context. From a very static to an extreme dynamic type of knowledge, the types of knowledge are explicit knowledge, tacit knowledge and actions. Consequently, the identification of the type of knowledge within the specific organisational context results in the sub-questions that cover the exploration and exploitation of knowledge: Exploration Which type or types of knowledge is / are available to make sense of and decide over new opportunities or problems? Exploitation Which new type or types of knowledge is / are generated after making sense of and deciding over new opportunities or problems?

SUB-QUESTION 3: CONCEPTS OF EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP STRATEGIES By identifying the different concepts of the leadership’s characteristics that enhance OL processes, this research describes the generic concepts, such as trust and hierarchy, that affect the specific OL processes linked with the identified organisational context and type(s) of knowledge. Consequently,

11 the identification of the concepts of effective leadership strategies that are being implemented by the leader to enhance OL processes results in the sub-question: Which concepts of effective leadership strategies are being exploited by the leader to enhance organisational learning processes?

SUB-QUESTION 4: ACTION STEPS TO CREATE EFFECTIVE ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING PROCESSES By linking the concepts of effective leadership strategies with the action steps to create effective OL processes, this research gives examples of specific and practical OL processes within the identified organisational context and type(s) of knowledge. By doing this, the research will discover not only the leadership’s characteristics, but also tangible OL processes based on these characteristics. Consequently, the linkage of leadership’s characteristics with OL processes results in the subquestion: What are the specific organisational learning processes deployed by the leader to improve the management of new opportunities and problems?

1.2 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN 1.2.1 MAPPING LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOUR IN SOCIAL CONTEXT: ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT The organisational context is being modelled through two existing frameworks: the Cynefin framework (Kurtz and Snowden, 2003) and the four modes framework of decision making (Choo, 2002). This research has adopted two frameworks because both frameworks sort the issues faced by leaders in four organisational contexts that “require leaders to diagnose situations and to act in contextually appropriate ways” (Snowden and Boone, 2007; p. 70). The Cynefin framework is, among other things, a sense making tool for leaders. Sense making is the ability to make sense of a new situation. Through this, new situational knowledge is created where there is high complexity and uncertainty in order to make decisions. The Cynefin framework shapes four organisational contexts – simple, complicated, complex and chaotic context – in which leaders act and make decisions. Per organisational context the Cynefin framework summarises the characteristics of each of the organisational contexts, the danger signals and the preferred responses to the danger signals by the leaders (see appendix A). Consequently, this summary of each organisational context will be used to decide in which organisational context the leader is operating.

12 The four modes framework of decision making (Choo, 2002) consists of the boundedly rational mode, political mode, process mode, and anarchic mode, which correspondent to simple, complex, complicated, and chaotic contexts respectively. By adding Choo’s (2002) four modes, there are more contextual characteristics available to decide in which organisational context the leader is operating. As a result, the research selects the organisational contexts through the application of two frameworks because both frameworks summarise an extended list of contextual characteristics. Figures F.1 and F.2 illustrate the Cynefin framework and the four modes framework respectively. The simple context is a very static organisational context where there is low uncertainty. The more uncertainty there is in an organisational context, the more dynamically a leader should act. Within this research the names of the organisational contexts derived from the Cynefin framework are being used and, additionally, the extra characteristics of the similar organisational contexts from the four modes framework are also being used to get more clarity on the identified organisational context.

F.1 – Organisational Cynefin framework

contexts

derived

from

F.2 – Organisational contexts derived from four modes framework

1.2.2 MODELLING THE TYPE OF KNOWLEDGE For the identification of what kind of knowledge is flowing in the different organisational contexts, this research divides knowledge as tacit knowledge, explicit knowledge, and knowing as action. These types of knowledge are based on Spender’s (1996) matrix of four different elements of an

13 organisation’s

intellectual

capital

(IC)

individual explicit know-ledge, individual tacit knowledge, social explicit knowledge and social tacit knowledge in addition with Cook and Brown’s (1999) knowing as action (see figure F.3).

Each identified organisational context

consists of a knowledge type audit for the exploration and exploitation of knowledge. Consequently, after identifying the organisational F.3 – Different types organisational context

knowledge

context and the different types of knowledge, the

OL processes promoted by the leader together with the leadership’s characteristics are placed in the social context. Thereupon this research gives an overview of what the best OL process is in relation to the identified organisational context.

1.3 RESEARCH METHODS 1.3.1 THE EXTENDED LITERATURE REVIEW The extended literature review is a critical review that provides a concise and accurate overview of all substantive as well as methodological material that appears relevant to the topic. The aim of the extended literature review is to chart the body of knowledge, identify gaps, and develop a proposed new theoretical model for the discovery of crucial leadership behaviour that enhances OL processes. This new theoretical model is a merge between the two frameworks for modelling the organisational context and the two frameworks for modelling the types of knowledge. The extended literature review was conducted at the British Library, the Royal Library of Denmark and the Libraries of the London Metropolitan University. Through the institution’s catalogues primary and secondary resources were being found. The former type of resources consisted of conference reports, published by the European Conference on Knowledge Management (ECKM) and the Knowledge Management Consortium International (KMCI), and emails with recognised experts (see appendix B); whereas the latter type of resources consisted of books, journals and external Internet resources, like Business Source Premier, Emerald, Ingenta Connect, and ScienceDirect, covering subject areas of business studies and information science (see Appendix C for a full list of frequently used secondary resources). The languages of the secondary resources were Dutch and English. By using cross-border and cross-disciplinary institution catalogues, the research draws from a wealth of readily available sources. For instance, the frequently used journals covered many case-studies

14 which were of high quality. Although a literature review has a little focus on the social context of the proposed new theoretical model, the case-studies, on the other hand, generated sufficient information regarding social contexts. Additionally, the data can be difficult to interpret accurately if gathered data from primary and secondary resources had another purpose than the purpose of this research. Therefore, the proposed new theoretical model cannot express gaps in previous models as precise or testable through only an extended literature review (Yin, 1994). Consequently, the research also includes an analysis of a published case-study and interviews to test and identify leadership characteristics.

1.3.2 THE ANALYSIS OF A PUBLISHED CASE-STUDY By analysing a published case-study more body is being given to the outcomes derived from the extended literature review and, additionally, evidence is found of how leadership behaviour enhances OL processes.

The published case-study is being used to answer the questions regarding the

organisational context, the types of knowledge, the OL processes, and, eventually, the leadership’s characteristics. By linking the preceding extended literature review with the published case-study, the research tests the proposed new theoretical model and identifies leadership characteristics within its real life context. Therefore, the published case-study is an explanatory study in which a theory is being tested and further built on. The published case-study is extracted from Carter et al. (2005) book ‘Best practices in leadership development and organization change: How the best companies ensure meaningful change and sustainable leadership’. This book highlights eighteen contemporary American case-studies in which leadership was the engine behind organisational change. With respect to this research, the case-study of Hewlett-Packard (HP) is being applied.

This published case-study outlines a leadership

development programme to improve up-to-speed sense- and decision-making. Carter (2005), coeditor of this book and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Best Practice Institute (BPI), only approved to publishing the summary of the case-study. By granting this research with the summary rather than the full text of the published case-study, the analysis of the published case-study within this research is less transparent.

To avoid this

disadvantage, the published case-study is being linked to another source of evidence. This source of evidence is the article ‘Hewlett-Packard takes the waste out of leadership’ published in the Journal of Organizational Excellence and written by Susan Burnett, HP’s Vice President of Workforce Development and Organization Effectiveness (WDOE), which is available in appendix D.

15 According to Perry (1998; p. 792), “several case-studies should usually be used in postgraduate research because they allow cross-case analysis to be used for richer theory building”. Therefore, to further test the proposed new theoretical model by identifying context-specific leadership’s characteristics and getting evidence of how leadership behaviour enhances OL processes, this research also covers case-studies generated from interviews. Consequently, the published case-study and interviews together generate rich data and ensure information-rich analysis of data for answering the research question.

1.3.3 INTERVIEWS By incorporating interviews into the research there is another way to discover crucial leadership behaviour and evidence of how leadership behaviour enhances OL processes through the proposed new theoretical model.

After agreeing by e-mail, this research adopts of three interviews with

organisational leaders varying from an organisation with a traditional hierarchy to an organisation based on a partnership and one with a flat structure. The interviews (see appendix E, F and G) took up to 30 to 45 minutes, were taken at the leader’s organisation (except for Charlie which was taken by telephone), were recorded with iTalk, and were based on storytelling. Storytelling is an increasingly accepted way to gather rich data in qualitative management research. Storytelling results in different aims and therefore storytelling employs a variety of narrative patterns (Denning, 2005). This research adapts the narrative pattern for the aim to share knowledge during the interviews. According to Denning (2005; p. 16) “intellectual capital of an organization is not written down anywhere but resides in the minds of the staff. Communicating this know-how ... occurs informally, through the sharing of stories”. Knowledge-sharing narratives are describing the context of problems, and how and why they got, or did not get, resolved. Therefore, the interviews consisted of three to five open-ended questions, depending on how extensive the interviewees were in their story, about the description of the problem or opportunity, the setting, the solution, and the explanation. One of the main reasons for the integration of open-ended questions is that the interviewee is being encouraged to create a rich explanation. However, Denning (2005; p. 17) argues that knowledgesharing narratives tend to have a negative tone and, consequently, stories about problems do not flow easily, mainly “because, in the flush of success, people tend to forget what they learned along the way”. Therefore Denning (2005) argues that the interviewee needs to be teased to produce a rich explanation of the problem or opportunity. This research consequently adapted Denning’s (2005) template for nurturing the community by:

16 (1) brainstorming briefly about why interviewer and interviewee have come together; (2) letting interviewee recount a recent problem or opportunity that seemed significant; (3) letting interviewee tell the story; (4) setting out the three rules: speak honestly and truthfully from the heart and limit the sharing to the agreed-upon time of five minutes per question, and; (5) having ready the proposed new theoretical model that will enable the interviewee to understand the story and move forward using the energy liberated by the session. By using the proposed new theoretical model during the interviews, an explanation was being given to the interviewee. A story without an explanation is just a story about something that happened as information, whereas a story with an explanation becomes knowledge once the interviewer and interviewee diagnosis and add items to the explanation. “Having the correct explanation for phenomena is the key to accurate knowledge” (Denning, 2005; p. 188). The richness of the story is important for testing the proposed new theoretical model against a real-life case. By recording and transcribing the interviews, cross-references with the new proposed theoretical model are more transparent. Additionally, transcribing is also useful because cognitive experts argue that people who listen to stories have the problem of not hearing in the first place, and then of forgetting what they heard. According to Schacter (2001; p. 111) “we observe the world through a set of mental filters that focus our attention on the things that we have come to see as important and overlook new elements because they do not fit our existing mental frames”. The interviewees were working in various businesses and were selected based on the management structure. Table T.1 is an overview of the interviewees.

T.1 – Overview of interviewees

1.4 DATA ANALYSIS The data collection and analysis within this research are mainly a result of qualitative and inductive approaches.

However, critics of qualitative and inductive approaches argue that data are

unrepresentative because findings lack quantification. Therefore, the findings of the published casestudy and interviews have been merged into polygon circle-graphs.

Through this, elements of

positivist research design, such as quantification, are incorporated. The polygon circle-graphs are incorporated to include theoretical sampling.

Glaser and Strauss (1967, p. 62) argue that

“[t]heoretical sampling is done in order to discover categories and their properties, and to suggest the interrelationship into a theory”. The polygon circle-graph consists of three axes: one axis for the organisational context, one axis for type of knowledge used to explore knowledge needed for the problem or opportunity, and one axis for the type of knowledge used to exploit knowledge derived from the problem or opportunity (see figure F.4). For the organisational context axis four measures are included in the polygon circle-graph and for the type of knowledge axes of both the exploration and exploitation of problem or opportunities three measures are included (see table T.2).

F.4 – Theoretical sampling through polygon circlegraph

T.2 – Measurements qualitative findings

quantify

Consequently, the polygon circle-graph maps and simplifies the social context of the problem or opportunity faced by the case-study organisation. For instance, figure F.5 shows the social contexts of two different problems or opportunities. In the simple context the leader used tacit knowledge to explore the problem or opportunity and produced explicit knowledge to exploit the knowledge generated from the new problem or opportunity (see inner triangle).

F.5 – Example of leadership’s problem opportunity mapped in polygon circle-graph

Additionally, through the analysis of a published case-study and interviews the identified action steps to create effective learning processes are mapped in a cross-graph based on whether it is an explicit/dynamic, or a static/dynamic action step (see figure F.6). Through this, the graph easily shows for the published case-study and each interview which action steps or OL processes are preferred in the defined organisational context. Based on scoring (see table T.3) the action steps are being placed in the cross-graph. For instance, storing knowledge in a document management system (DMS) results in fairly explicit knowledge (score of 25) and it is static (score of 25) because the DMS only allows you to save content in predefined fields. Consequently, the DMS as action step or OL process to enhance OL is being mapped on 25 of both the x and y axis. This OL process could have been useful in a simple context. However, the more unordered (complex or chaotic context) a new problem or opportunity is the more dynamic the OL process needs to be.

F.6 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Example of action steps to create effective learning processes mapped in cross-graph

T.3 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Measures to map action steps in crossgraph

1.5 IMPORTANCE AND LIMITATIONS The role of leaders in KM processes is relatively new. Therefore, the topic is mostly covered by academics; practical examples are limited. That is the reason why this research first precedes with an extensive description of the theory, after which the research tests the theory through the analysis of a published case-study and interviews.

19 The data gathered from the published case-study and interviews are from international organisations each operating in different fields of expertise. Therefore this research does not take into account what the relationships are between the field of expertise and the identified leadership’s characteristics to enhance OL processes. This research only shows the relationships between the organisational contexts and the identified leadership’s characteristics to enhance OL processes.

This can be seen as a

limitation of the applicability of the research outcomes in real-life environments. Nonetheless, every organisation can apply the leadership’s characteristics, as long as the leader is facing problems or opportunities belonging to the identified organisational context of the leadership’s characteristic. In respect to the published case-study, it is important to be aware that the external validity is a common concern. Some critics argue that a published case-study leads to analytic generalisation. The researcher replicates the elements from the case that is valuable to the research. Through this, the elements from the case are being interpreted differently because the writer of the case-study had a different purpose. To avoid these problems, this research applies an extra source of evidence for the published case-study. Additionally, this research also combines the findings of the case-study with findings generated from the interviews with leaders.

part two

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH: EXTENDED LITERATURE REVIEW REVIEWING THE LITERATURE IN THE AREAS OF ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING, LEADERSHIP AND COMPLEXITY

2.1 THE HISTORY OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT 2.1.1 DEFINING KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT KM has always been the talk of the town concerning the significance of words. Professionals and academics cannot write about KM without briefly explaining what knowledge implies and, as a result, many articles cover different definitions. These definitions are being formulated by the professionals and academics working in the field from psychology to history to sociology to economy. All these different insights indicate the complexity of what knowledge is and how knowledge can be managed. Since the scientific revolutions of the seventeenth century, knowledge is dictating human activity. On one hand, academics were concerned with the discovery and promotion of useful knowledge, and, on the other hand, professionals transferred knowledge to the apprentice (Boisot, 2002). For that reason, Call (2005) stresses that KM in the organisational context is not rocket science. However, if people were already aware of the significance of exploring and exploiting knowledge, why are contemporary organisations so interested in KM? After Polanyi (1958, 1967) suggested that there are two types of knowledge, explicit and tacit knowledge, KM received great interests from organisations. Furthermore, at the same time, the traditional economy moved to a post-industrial economy which is widely referred to as the new economy (Bell, 1976). Within this new economy, organisations recognise “the fundamental economic changes resulting from the acceleration in the accumulation and availability of knowledge” (Grant, 2002; p. 134), where knowledge is seen as a new factor of production (Drucker, 1993) – focussing on intangibles rather than tangibles (Stewart, 1997) – which results in a predominance of services over goods (Grant, 2002). Thereupon, tacit and explicit knowledge have become the pivot of KM and they are currently operating as the backbone of the discipline. However, these two types of knowledge are being used in popularised ways. For instance, the United Nations (2005; p. xvi) points out that “tacit knowledge is information combined with experience, context, interpretation and judgment [and] explicit knowledge (information) ... is codified in formal, systemic language”. This definition is a good example of “sloppy thinking on the subject of knowledge” (Boisot, 2002; p. 67) because knowledge, information and data are used interchangeably. A better definition for explicit and tacit knowledge is outlined by Nonaka (1998; p. 33): EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE CAN BE ARTICULATED AND EASILY COMMUNICATED BETWEEN INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANISATIONS.

TACIT

KNOWLEDGE

MANIFESTED ONLY IN ITS APPLICATION COSTLY AND SLOW

(SKILLS, –

KNOW-HOW, AND CONTEXTUAL KNOWLEDGE) IS

TRANSFERRING IT FROM ONE INDIVIDUAL TO ANOTHER IS

Organisations have widely started to embrace KM in the beginning of the 1990s.

This was

particularly a result of the new economy that exhibits, according to Grant (2002; p. 134), several characteristics, like the “[new economy] is more networked” and “subject to rapid change”. Particularly due to the rapid change, organisations are sensing an “absence of the data or information necessary to make an informed judgment” (Spender, 2002; p. 154) concerning a new problem or opportunity. Such an absence creates uncertainty and new knowledge is required.

2.1.2 POST-INDUSTRIAL GENERATIONS OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) introduced the first generation of KM in organisations by arguing that tacit knowledge could be transferred to explicit knowledge through the four processes of socialisation, externalisation, combination, and internationalisation, also referred to as the SECI model. However, the degree of transfer from tacit to explicit knowledge depended on the necessity; “it did not follow that all of the knowledge in the ... heads and conversations had, should or could have been made explicit” (Snowden, 2002; p. 103). In a period in which computer technology was seen as the solution to every organisational problem, organisations also started implementing computer technologies for capturing and codifying all of the knowledge of staff members. The aim of this strategy was to change knowledge from an organisational liability to an organisational asset (Dufour and Steane, 2007). In this respect, McElroy (2003; p. 71) stresses that “first generation KM assumes that current knowledge is valid and the goal of such approach is to optimise the delivery of existing organisational knowledge to staff members”, so that they can function successfully in organisational processes. This is why technology has played such a dominant role in KM to date. Consequently, consulting firms and software developers jumped into the market of total KM and the discipline took off as a technical solution. However, in the late 1990s it became clear that the technical approach of KM failed to show its value. Organisations had spent a large amount of money on setting up the technology to capture and codify knowledge, but unfortunately – in most cases – the technology was not being used. Hence, KM had neglected the social-cultural factors. Subsequently, critical case-studies were published which showed that “human, social, and cultural factors are typically key determinants of the success or failure of KM initiatives” (Hislop, 2005; p. 44). Consequently, KM moved to a second generation by emphasising on OL. OL is about improving and developing “knowledgeability” (Hislop, 2005; p. 44) where individuals, groups and organisations are changing ideas, values, and / or behaviours through a change or transformation in understanding. In this respect, Stacey (2001; p. 94) argues that “knowledge is not a thing, or a system, but an ephemeral, active process of relating in which you cannot manage it”. With this idea no one is able to manage knowledge. This approach is the extreme opposite of

23 capturing and codifying all knowledge through computer technology. However, these extremes have resulted in the recognition that organisations “must become better at learning if they are to succeed” (Bennet and Shane Tomblin, 2006; p. 294) in KM.

2.1.3 THE CURRENT TREND OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT Currently, all the changes in KM generations have resulted in a focus on context and narrative, rather than only on content. Polanyi (1958, 1967) argues that we only know what we know, when we need to know it. Hence, “human knowledge is deeply contextual” and tend to focus on the thing contained, rather than the container (Snowden, 2002; p. 105). This development emphasises on how organisations should learn. Andersen (2000) argues that the reliance on centralised strategic planning process is insufficient. The strategy process evolves around ongoing learning from the actions taken by managers in different parts or units of the organisation. Nicolas (2004; p. 21) stresses that “in this paradigm, strategy is formed over time as shared cognition developed among managers who enact the organisation’s strategic moves”. Similar is the assumption that OL is a process which goal is to improve the development of the organisation by means of new initiatives. This requires a “new move from simply putting more knowledge into databases to levering the many ways that knowledge can migrate into an organization and impact business performance” (Pérez López et al., 2005; p. 228).

2.2 THE FUTURE OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT 2.2.1 COMPLEXITY OF CONTEMPORARY ORGANISATIONS Organisations in developing countries find themselves increasingly engaging in manufacturing activities, while organisations in developed countries focus more on information and services (Drucker, 1999). Among other things, this is a result of competition and it requires speed, flexibility, and adaptability to keep track and innovate in the changing environment. As a result, organisations face extraordinary challenges. For instance, the traditional organisations of the last century have evolved “from a bureaucracy with clear boundaries and internal areas of authority to a new form, which has fluid and flexible external and internal boundaries” (Schneider and Somers, 2006; p. 351). In organisational studies this development also occurs; moving from a theory in which organisational features are being traced back in a linear way to historical or cultural factors (Tsoukas and Hatch., 2001; p. 980), to a theory in which organisational features are influenced by so many variables that the over-all behaviour of organisations can only be understood as an emergent consequence of the holistic sum of behaviours embedded within (Levy, 2001). Thus, behaviour is nonlinear and there is an

24 understanding that small changes and shifts in such behaviour can have significantly large implications. Since recent years, organisational studies increasingly embrace this development that is covered by complexity theory. Complexity theory attempts to understand how organisations and environments adapt to changing circumstances over time. Based on the work of Tsoukas and Hatch (2001, p. 988) on interpretive dimensions of complexity, table T.4 highlights five properties of complexity theory.

T.4 – Five interpretive dimensions of complexity by Tsoukas and Hatch (2001)

To put complexity theory in an organisational context, Brown and Duguid (2000; p. 77) give the following example: THE “GEEK” WHO UNDERSTANDS THE NETWORK, THE SECRETARY WHO KNOWS THE SECRETS OF WORD, THE ONE COLLEAGUE PROFICIENT WITH DATABASES, THE OTHER WHO HAS LEARNED JAVA IN HER SPARE TIME, AND THE ONE WHO KNOWS HOW TO NURSE THE SERVER ALL CONTRIBUTE.

If all staff members in an organisation, also referred to as agents in complexity theory, engage in intelligent acts with each other, a CAS evolves in which agents present a diversity of options to the whole (Miller, 2007) and eventually the leader should grasp an unanimous decision based on effective mechanisms for narrowing choices.

25 2.2.2 LEADERSHIP IN CONTEMPORARY ORGANISATIONS Leadership is a core factor in contemporary organisations. However, as noted by Davenport (2001), it has become clear that traditional leadership was formed to deal with a very different set of circumstances and is therefore of questionable relevance to the contemporary work environment. Of the same mind is Drucker (1999), who argues that many organisations are taking a far too simplistic view of their structure and culture. They underestimate the size and scale of the “challenge of change” (Drucker, 1999; p. 193) of especially the culture. He stresses that leadership is a key element in such a successful change. Additionally, Umemoto (2002) stresses the knowledge-creating processes cannot be managed in a traditional sense of management that centres on controlling the flow of information. This traditional leadership is making way for a new type of leadership in which the leader “is getting people to share their knowledge by not only new processes but also a new covenant between employer and employees” (Hibbard and Carillo, 1998; p. 52). According to Snowden and Boone (2007) this new type of leadership is based on the “advances in complexity science, combined with knowledge from the cognitive sciences”. What they all have in common, is that “under the influence of good leadership, organizational missions are established, goals are reached, problems are addressed through innovative and creative means, and the growth and development of individuals within the organization is nurtured” (Marcketti and Kozar, 2007). With this new type of leadership surprising and innovative behaviour emerges without the necessity of centralised control.

Boal and Schulz (2007; p. 412) argue that “influencing complex adaptive

organizations can be accomplished through intervention in the maintenance and modification of the structure of agent interactions and of the context in which their behaviors occur”. A particular agent’s behaviour, for example, is always guided by the agents in their immediate proximity, and the benefits that arise in the various ways of interacting with them. Therefore, leaders should be more involved in the creation of the context and structure of coordination. Boal and Schulz (2007; p. 415) stress that one way to influence the context and structure of agent activity is through tagging process. Tagging is a process identified by Holland (1995) and serves to co-ordinate the activities of different agents by creating identities around different agent groupings.

Hereupon, tags basically signal differences

between agents’ types and act as mediators between differentiated agents. In short, tags shape agents into organisational structures like departments, functions and teams. According to Boal and Schulz (2007; p. 415) leadership should use the tagging process “to manage the adjustment of interactions between a system’s agents and to promote movement to new modes of activity in response to the environment”. This does not mean that agent behaviour should be defined along the lines of familiar organisational patterns by representing core competencies through “the history of the organizations’ attempt to survive and grow. In the present tense, core competencies are the platform by which

26 organisations engage the competition. In the future tense, core competencies are the well-spring for growth and evolution” (Boal and Schulz, 2007; p. 416). According to Malloch and Porter-O’Grady (2005; p. 129) leadership in contemporary organisations should include the ability to anticipate, identify, and respond to unpredictable occasions. They refer to it as “the ability to read signals and to anticipate challenge ... in a way that crisis influence and impact can be quickly assessed and responded to”. As a result, Schneider and Somers (2006; p. 351) argue that “new models of leadership continue to develop, including a model of leadership for the new form of organization, in which leadership relies less upon managerial authority, and a new set of ideas that transcends the physical, biological, and social sciences”. Thus, the leadership’s legitimacy must be based on more rational norms. The trust that leaders build must be an inclusive, open, democratic kind, or knowledge creation and sharing will falter (Bennis and Nanus, 1997; Adler, 2002). It is now obvious why OL is so important in the contemporary organisation. These contemporary organisations have to learn in order to adapt to a changing environment. Thereupon, Malloch and Porter-O’Grady (2005; p. 127) argue that previously, OL was based on the application of a more mechanistic notion of organisational life and that the contemporary OL approaches have shifted towards a belief that organisations are not so much machines but, instead, organisms. In order to adapt to a fast changing environment, organisations must also make it possible – even desirable – for staff members at all levels of the organisation to own the obligation of identifying and responding to the shifting realities affecting their ability to address the purposes of the organisation and undertake their own work. In the literature this is referred to as self-organising (Knowles, 2001). Consequently, often leadership is seen as crucial to the process of self-organising and is, therefore, the link with OL by acting as context setters and designers of learning experiences (Brown and Eisenhardt, 1997). Schneider and Somers (2006; p. 356) are even arguing that leadership in contemporary organisations should be performed by people in rotation or in tandem. “Leaders serve as tags and influence other persons and processes. They [then] frequently lead without authority and often do so in temporary capacity. Leaders might consciously initiate their leadership role, or might accept the role that has been given to them ... but nonetheless leaders might occur”. A danger of allowing staff members to evolve too independently is that they become too loosely coupled to the organisation. By loosening staff members enough to allow them to develop their own new knowledge and tightening staff members to be able to push knowledge along the lines of process is one of the challenges of contemporary leadership (Brown and Duguid, 2000).

27 2.2.3 LEADERSHIP FRAMEWORKS IN CONTEMPORARY ORGANISATIONS The literature is proposing several new leadership frameworks to enhance OL in contemporary organisations. This chapter summarises two frequently-cited leadership frameworks together with the specific leadership’s characteristics that would be required: 1. Complexity Leadership Theory (Uhl-Bien et al., 2007) Leadership is composed of three separate but entangled roles. Firstly, the administrative leadership for traditional top-down leadership. Secondly, the adaptive leadership which refers to leadership that occurs within interdependent interactions of emergent collective action (Schreiber and Carley, 2008; p. 294). In other words, it raises awareness among leaders of the differences among people and situations.

Thirdly, enabling leadership which serves the

creation of conditions that stimulate emergent collective action and adaptive leadership Schreiber and Carley (2008; p. 294) argue that “one way it does this is by limiting the topdown controls of traditional leadership that inhibit collective action” and the other way “it channels productive responses originating in the emergent collective action back up to administrative leadership for strategic planning and exploitation”. As a result, the personal approach and structural approach of leadership, also known as “leadership through interaction” and “leadership through systems” (Reichwald and Siebert, 2004; p. 185) are integrated as one. 2. Network Leadership Framework (Schreiber and Carley, 2008) This framework is an extension of the Complexity Leadership Theory with the addition that it focuses on OL and adaptability. Schreiber and Carley (2008) argue that interaction induces knowledge and interdependence pressures people to act on knowledge. According to them there are four ways to enhance learning. Firstly, through relational coupling that illustrates the degree of interdependent relations within a system. For instance, “low coupling does not generate enough interactive activity and high coupling can lead to information overload” (Schreiber and Carley, 2008; p. 297). Secondly, through requisite variety that illustrates the degree of diverse knowledge because diversity enhances the capacity “to search for solutions to challenge and to innovate because it releases the capacity of a neural network of agents in pursuit of such optimization” (Uhl-Bien et al., 2008; p. 190). Thirdly, through a network form that illustrates the degree of status differentiations, which can have an effect on the ability to produce OL processes. Fourthly, and finally, through the degree of stress that induces interactions and pressures agents to act. However, stress requires good leadership whereas overstressing can be counterproductive to OL processes (Schreiber and Carley, 2008)

28 The leadership’s characteristics that are required in this leadership framework have a focus on how leaders shape communication structures. Through this practice, organisations establish a social network for every agent in which knowledge flows back-and-forth. For instance, the ones who are otherwise disparate working from an organisational ‘island’ are able to enact within the network and the ones who are the organisational minority with new or different knowledge can also diffuse and share their knowledge; this way of creating new knowledge is the basis of innovation. Consequently, leadership can be described as distributed and shared; moving away from control orientation.

2.2.4 HOW SUSTAINABLE ARE THE LEADERSHIP FRAMEWORKS? The leadership’s characteristics outlined in the two leadership frameworks can be traced back to the attempt of Grant (2002; p. 138) “to create mechanisms that reconcile the efficiency in knowledge creation (which requires specialization) with efficiency in knowledge deployment (which requires integrating many types of knowledge)”. He proposed four mechanisms for knowledge integration of which three are applicable to the leadership frameworks. Firstly, rules and directives which are topdown approaches to co-ordinate plans, schedules, forecasts, rules, policies and procedures, and information and communication systems (Van de Ven et al., 1976). Thus, these are the rules in the form of etiquette, politeness, and social norms. Within the complexity leadership theory this is referred to as the administrative leadership. Secondly, routines which are relatively complex patterns of behaviour triggered by a relatively small number of initiating signals or choices (Grant, 2002). The routines of the emergent collective should be adapted by the leaders, because “routines may be a simple sequence, their interesting feature is their ability to support complex patterns of interactions between individuals in the absence of rules and directives” (Grant, 2002; p. 139). Thirdly, group problem solving and decision making which require, in contrast with the previous mechanisms, more personal and communication-intensive forms of integration. Grant (2002) argues that this mechanism relies on high-interaction, non-standardised coordination that increases task complexity and task uncertainty.

This mechanism is closely linked with the role of enabling

leadership in the complexity leadership theory. Based on these mechanisms, it becomes clear that leadership in contemporary organisations creates complexity, because such leadership pushes organisations to the edge of chaos. On one hand, leadership should promote unknown attraction in organisations by giving staff members the possibility to raise new ideas. On the other hand, however, leadership should also follow the more bureaucratic approach of the organisation’s management.

29 Therefore, leadership in contemporary organisations should find a balance between “bureaucracy and anarchy” (Boal and Schulz, 2007; p. 412).

2.2.5 ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING IN THE CONTEMPORARY ORGANISATION Essential to OL is that it is the process that enables an organisation to adapt to change and, consequently, move forward by acquiring new knowledge, skills, or behaviours and thereby transform itself (Hackett, 2002; p. 727). Thus, this change will not happen until people look beyond the simplicities of information and individuals to the complexities of learning, knowledge, and judgment. Brown and Duguid (2000; p. 220) argue that organisational teaching and education are not simply matters of putting staff members in touch with information. Rather, they are matters of putting the staff members in touch with particular communities. Through this way, staff members may progress from learning about to learning to be, which requires more than just information; it requires the ability to engage in the practice. Thereupon, practice is an effective teacher and the community of practice an ideal learning environment, because learning about “is on its own not enough to produce actionable knowledge” (Brown and Duguid, 2000; p. 135). One of the most-cited and utilised discussions on OL is provided by Argyris and Schön (1978). They identify two types of learning which involve detecting and correcting errors in routine. Firstly, the single loop learning (SLL) which is defined as the detection and correction of an error that generally takes place when organisations are making sense of a new problem or opportunity without creating new knowledge. Secondly, the double loop learning (DLL) which occurs when “previous knowledge and new situational knowledge are not sufficient for the current situation” (Bennet and Shane Tomblin, 2006; p. 295). SLL and DLL have been profitable in organisations that need to make sense of and decide on problems and opportunities in a rapidly changing environment. According to Basadur and Gelade (2006; p. 46) SLL and DLL “are concerned with organizational efficiency – the maintenance, improvement, and mastery of routine. Single-loop learning restores routine (efficiency), while double loop learning improves or modifies it”. If SLL and DLL processes are not wellestablished in organisations, it is almost evident the organisation can not compete with its environment.

Particular without DLL, staff members are only equipped with a historical

understanding; they use the rules and routines derive from what has been known about failures and successes. Tsoukas and Hatch (2001) argue that this “past-derived knowledge is not very useful when it comes to examining a particular problem”. If staff members need to make sense of what to do in new situations, it is not enough to get informed through defined situations, such as single-loop learning (McElroy, 2003). Staff members need to shift to DLL in which they not only reference to rules but constructively challenge them. In this way staff members construct alternative scenarios which, if the OL processes do allow, can be tested as new ideas and hopefully can replace or alter the

30 response. Thus, DLL processes result in innovation. This illustrates the importance of the impending three-way convergence of KM, OL and complexity theory (McElroy, 2000).

2.2.5.1 PUTTING ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING IN ITS SOCIAL CONTEXT: THE TYPES OF KNOWLEDGE When previous knowledge and new situational knowledge are not sufficient for the current situation, the cognition in human systems is particularly important. Because of this, Spender (2002) argues that the management of tacit knowledge is demonstrated in activity, whereas explicit knowledge is demonstrated by explanation. Based on a matrix of four different elements of an organisation’s IC (see figure F.7) – individual explicit knowledge, individual tacit knowledge, social explicit knowledge and social tacit knowledge – created by Spender (1996), Cook and Brown (1999) argue that each of the four elements are influenced by the knowing as action (see figure F.8).

Knowledge gives

particular shape and meaning to our interactions with the world. However, not everything we know lies in our knowledge; some also lies in our actions. Hence, according to Cook and Brown (1999), knowing does not sit statistically on top of knowledge, but its relationship with knowledge is

F.7 – Matrix of an organisation’s IC

Figure F.8 – Adding Knowing to Knowledge

dynamic. This view is based on the fact that organisations need to be increasingly innovative. And this requires “attention not only to what they possess, but also to how they practice” (Cook and Brown, 1999; p. 393). This development is a movement from a model in which knowledge is isolating from practice to a learning model as a social construction, putting knowledge back into the context in which it has meaning (Brown and Duguid, 1991). This model assists organisations to move KM to an attempt to embrace behavioural components in the study of knowledge. Through this, “knowledge, knowing and doing become more closely aligned with organizational learning” (Crossan and Hulland, 2002; p. 712).

31 2.2.5.2 PUTTING ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING IN ITS SOCIAL CONTEXT: ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT To make sure that leaders can make decisions in different contexts, Choo (2002) argues that there are four modes of decision making (see figure F.9): boundedly rational mode (with a low level of uncertainty and conflict), political mode (with a high level of conflict and low level of uncertainty), process mode (with a low level of conflict and high level of uncertainty), and anarchic mode (with a high level of both uncertainty and conflict). The boundedly rational mode is applied when goal and procedural clarity are both high, and where choice is guided by decisions premises and decision routines. These premises are embedded in decision routines that structure the decision making process with fairly explicit knowledge, like rules and procedures.

The political mode ensures coalition

between multiple groups in an organisation to push for preferred alternatives. The process mode is divided in three phases. Firstly, the identification phase that recognises the need for decisions. Secondly, the development phase that activates routines. Thirdly, the selection phase that focuses on alternatives generated from the development phase. This process should be dynamic, operating in an open system where it is subjected to interferences, feedback loops, dead ends, and other factors. Finally, the anarchic mode promotes the dumping of problems and solutions by everybody as they are generated (Choo and Johnston, 2003).

F.9 - Four modes of organisational decision

Figure F.10 – Leader’s framework for decision

making

Additionally, Snowden and Boone (2007) represent these modes in the Cynefin framework consisting of four organisational contexts - simple, complex, complicated, and chaotic. They argue that by understanding the contexts, leaders can better make sense of problems or opportunities in contemporary organisations. Snowden and Boone (2007) summarise how leaders should respond to danger signals in the organisational contexts (see figure F.10). Appendix A is the full description of what the characteristics are of the context, what the leader’s job is in each context, what the danger signals in each context are and how the leader should response to the danger signals. What both frameworks have in common is that it gives an overview of different forms of emerging problems or

32 opportunities. For the ‘boundedly rational mode/simple context’ and ‘political mode/complicated context’ leaders will make decision based on rules and routines (explicit knowledge). The ‘process mode/complex context’ and ‘anarchic mode/chaotic context’ are based on dynamic processes with non-routines (tacit knowledge).

2.2.5.3 ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING AND THE CONCEPTS OF EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP STRATEGY Communication Grant (2002; p. 139) argues that the mechanisms, as mentioned in the contemporary leadership frameworks, can be integrated through the existence of a common language in speaking the same tongue and embody the same symbolic communication (for instance the ability to interpret computerised charts), the commonality of specialised knowledge (if the individuals have entirely separate knowledge bases, then knowledge integration cannot occur beyond the most primitive level), shared meaning (common cognitive frameworks, metaphor and analogy, and stories as vehicles for integrating different individual experiences and understandings), and, finally, the recognition of individual knowledge domains. As staff members learn their way into, for instance, language, they are simultaneously inserting themselves into a variety of complex, interwoven social systems (Brown and Duguid, 2000).

Hierarchy The contemporary leadership frameworks also embody two ideal typical organisational forms. These organisational forms are the hierarchy form that relies on authority and the community form that relies on trust. According to Adler (2002; p. 25) the hierarchy form uses authority to create and co-ordinate a horizontal and vertical division.

Additionally, he points out that although a large body of

organisational research has shown that an organisation structured by this mechanism may be efficient of routine, “it encounters enormous difficulty in the performance of innovation”. Thereupon, a community form is required to improve the visibility of tacit knowledge of individuals. This does not mean that leadership should only operate on a horizontal differentiation of hierarchy. In short, “the vertical differentiation of hierarchy is effective for routine tasks, facilitating downwards communication of explicit knowledge and commands, but less effective when tasks are non-routine, since lower levels lack both the knowledge needed to create new knowledge and the incentives to transmit new ideas upward” (Adler, 2002; p. 25).

Trust In general, traditional leadership is seen as a discipline of stability seeking and uncertainty avoidance through organisational structures and processes. Unfortunately, these characteristics are insufficient

33 for global, competitive environments (Uhl-Bien et al., 2007). New leadership encourages the OL process and the generation of new knowledge which, at the end, will also create uncertainty. However, by continuously learning uncertainty can be quickly transformed into an opportunity. This vicious circle gives organisations more chance to compete in the new economy. Nonetheless, before creating and sharing knowledge staff members should be confident of the objective of the organisation; they need trust. According to Adler (2002) there are three mechanisms by which trust it generated. Trust can be produced by: 1. direct interpersonal contact; 2. reputation through a network of other trusted parties, or; 3. an understanding of the way institutions shape the other agent’s values and behaviours (Adler, 2002; Coleman, 1990). Before individuals have trust in high-commitment vertical relations between staff members and management and in collaborative horizontal relations between internal and external specialist groups, it is required to be aware of the obstacles of trust. Some academics stress that trust is far easier to destroy than to create and that the most powerful forms are those that accumulate over long periods. Additionally, trust can fail us because it makes betrayal more profitable (Granovetter, 1985). Therefore, the different concept for effective leadership strategies require something that nearly cannot be taught; it is something a leader knows how to implement these different concepts.

2.3 SUMMARY CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH

The literature review focuses on the synergy between KM, OL and complexity theory.

Where

contemporary organisations realise that without innovation they cannot compete in a fast-changing environment, KM, OL and complexity theory are all concerned with innovation. McElroy (2003; p. 41) argues that “the implications of organizational learning for business are profound. Managing to outlearn ... can easily lead to better performance in the marketplace as new ideas translate”. In this respect, KM has changed from strategies that stress “dissemination and imitation to those that promote problem-solving and innovation”, where there is a higher value on learning and knowledge creation (McElroy, 2003; p. 42). Finally, complexity theory defines how knowledge evolves in human beings, which is neither centrally planned nor centrally controlled.

34 Leadership is the key element in embracing KM, OL and complexity theory. However, traditional leadership that centres on controlling the flow of information is a far too simplistic view of management. A new type of leadership is required through which surprising and innovative behaviour emerges without the necessity of centralised control. Therefore, leaders should promote unknown attraction in organisations by giving staff members the possibility to raise new ideas and also follow the more bureaucratic approach of the organisation’s management. Consequently, the role of leaders should be more concerned with the creation of the context and structure of coordination. Before answering the research question regarding the leadership’s characteristics that enhance OL processes, the literature review summarises a merge of two models that assist in describing the organisational context of the leadership’s characteristics of a specific problem or opportunity. These models are the Cynefin framework and the four modes framework for decision making. Within the process of decision making, the leader should apply tools or mechanisms for the exploration of the problem or opportunity. The leader will ask questions like ‘do we have enough knowledge to make a decision and, if not, how should we generate this new knowledge to make that decision’. Thus, for the exploration of the problem or opportunity the leader requires diverse knowledge in the process of learning and adaptability. Additionally, after making a decision the new generated knowledge should be exploited to make sure organisational-wide learning continues. The tools or mechanisms the leader is using for both the exploration and exploitation of knowledge are based on Spender’s (1996) matrix of four different elements of an organisation’s IC together with Cook and Brown (1999) knowing as action. As a result of this extended literature review the leadership’s characteristics within the contemporary organisations have changed and should, on one side, limit the top-down controls of traditional leadership and channel productive response originating from the bottom-up action back up to the top of the leadership for strategic planning and exploitation (Complexity Leadership Theory). Therefore, the leader is the intermediary between traditional top-down management and the networked form of the organisation of which bottom-up ideas arise. The leader should create appropriated tools and systems for the personal approach (leadership through interaction) and the structural approach (leadership through systems) of leadership.

Eventually, by applying these tools and systems

successfully, leaders enhance OL processes and contemporary organisations become more innovative in making sense and deciding over new problems and opportunities in a fast-changing environment. Based on the literature review the most preferable concept for effective leadership strategy is communication: daily leadership is about interaction by shaping communication structures which rely on high interaction, non-standardised coordination that increases task complexity and task uncertainty. Additionally, hierarchy and trust have also been seen as concepts for effective leadership strategy.

35 Consequently, leadership can be described as distributed and shared; moving away from control orientation. The next chapters, the analysis of a published case-study and the three interviews, will examine to what extent the leaders are applying the shaping of communication structures derived from the new leadership frameworks and what the exact action steps, or tools and systems, are that enhance OL processes in their particular organisation.

part three

PRACTICAL FRAMEWORK OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH: THE ANALYSIS OF THE PUBLISHED CASE-STUDY

3.1 HEWLETT-PACKARD’S CASE 3.1.1 INTRODUCTION TO HEWLETT-PACKARD Hewlett-Packard (HP) is a provider of technological solutions for customers and businesses operating in more than 170 countries. HP recently experienced an uncommon period of fast change because the “overall economy had weakened ... [and] HP began to question whether [the] competitive, innovative, and honourable spirit [of the beginning of HP] still existed” (Appendix D; p. 66). Additionally, HP merged with Compaq and HP realised it could not proceed in the same manner. The overall opinion of leaders was that: ...

INNOVATION WAS LACKING, AND CUSTOMERS WERE COMPLAINING ABOUT POOR SERVICE AND

INCONVENIENT PROCESSES. CHANGE WAS NECESSARY TO ASSURE A STRONG FUTURE (APPENDIX D)

Consequently, leaders believed that many opportunities to serve customers and stakeholders had been lost because of the poor co-ordination between more than 80 business units. The lack of connectivity was not only a problem for customers; it promoted turf protection while stifling innovation and profitable growth (Appendix D). Therefore HP faced the opportunity of increasing connectivity.

3.1.2 THE ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT OF INCREASING CONNECTIVITY The WDOE workgroup of HP interviewed leaders and launched a survey for staff members. The outcomes of the interviews and survey were: LINE MANAGERS WERE NOT ALIGNED ON PRIORITIES FOR ACTION, [D]ECISION MAKING WAS SLOW, [AND] CROSS-BOUNDARY COOPERATION WAS WEAK (APPENDIX D)

After HP merged with Compaq there was a lot of flux and unpredictability, because there were too many unknown unknowns (Snowden and Boone, 2007; p. 73) and, as the interviews and survey revealed, there was a need for creative and innovative approaches, because as a result of the lack of internal connectivity they experienced the protection of own work. Therefore HP experienced many competing ideas. These characteristics are in line with the complex context (see table T.5)

T.5 – Characteristics of a complex context as outlined in the Cynefin framework

The complex context is similar to the process mode of an organisation as indicated in the four modes framework. The process mode plays a role in an environment with high uncertainty without a high degree of conflict. This characteristic is similar to what had happened at HP. HP experienced high uncertainty through the uncommon period of fast change and a low conflict in the new environment because managers were unanimous about changing their leadership skills. When making sense and deciding over this new opportunity in a complex context, the literature suggests that the applied OL processes should consist of a high level of interaction and communication. In other words, the crucial type of knowledge within the complex OL processes should be tacit knowledge.

3.1.3 THE CONCEPTS OF INCREASING CONNECTIVITY As indicated in the literature, tacit knowledge should be the crucial type of knowledge for exploring and exploiting knowledge in a complex context. In this case-study, HP successfully focused on tacit knowledge by improving the communication skills of leaders and staff members to increase connectivity: [M]ANAGERS

WHO WERE MOST EFFECTIVE IN UNSCRIPTED CONVERSATION WERE THE MOST EFFECTIVE

CHANGE LEADERS.

WHEN

STRATEGY PROCESSES, METRICS, AND BEHAVIOR ARE STABLE AND

RELATIVELY UNCHANGING, CONVERSATIONAL SKILL IS LESS IMPORTANT THAN SIMPLE FOLLOWING THE PROVEN PATH.

WHEN

THOSE SAME THINGS ARE DYNAMIC, IN A STATE OF CHANGE, CONVERSATIONAL

SKILL BECOMES CRUCIAL (APPENDIX D)

The objectives of the communication skills as concept to enhance OL were to discourage turf protection and encouraging cross-boundary co-operation. First, leaders were required to share the organisation’s vision and mission, or better said the bureaucratic approach of the organisation’s management, by the communication skills. This matches with the complexity leadership theory where administrative leadership, one of the three roles of new leadership, is concerned with the traditional top-down leadership. Second, the communication also needed to result in an increasing level of

39 interaction on a bottom-up level. Thus, the communication skills resulted in tiding the horizontal and vertical differentiation of hierarchy, which are both important to improve learning on individual as well as group and organisation level, and innovation.

3.1.4 KNOWLEDGE TYPES OF INCREASING CONNECTIVITY To explore the knowledge required to increase connectivity by applying communication skills, HP organised workshops co-led by an external content expert and an HP line manager. Within these sessions leaders and staff members explored new knowledge through the flow of tacit knowledge and actions. However, the sessions were two-day sessions and it became clear that some leaders and staff members needed extra support (Appendix D). Therefore, HP introduced a management tool that assured that the principles of the communication skills were being applied in real time, provided follow-on coaching and reinforcement through online advice.

Additionally, HP included

evaluation tools to support program improvement and measure the program’s impact.

Through

this, the exploitation of the new acquired knowledge were mainly distributed as explicit knowledge.

This is the opposite of what

Snowden and Boone (2007) argue. They point out that within a complex context leaders should

F.11 – The social context connectivity in HP’s case

increasing

not try to over-control the organisation, because this interferes with the notion of promoting informal informative patterns to increase innovation. They also strongly suggest that “leaders who try to impose order in a complex context will fail, but those who set the stage, step back a bit, allow patterns to emerge, and determine which ones are desirable will succeed” (Snowden and Boone, 2007; p. 74). Thus, the exploitation of the new knowledge through the application of effective communication skills should be based on tacit knowledge which cannot and should not be managed.

Therefore, the

conversion of tacit knowledge to only explicit knowledge is neither required nor preferable in the complex context of HP (see figure F.11).

3.1.5 ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING PROCESSES FOR INCREASING CONNECTIVITY The OL processes which derive from the communication skills to increase connectivity are, on one side, very dynamic two day workshops. The workshops consisted of exercises lead by “external experts ... and internal HP line managers [who were] certified to lead a ... workshop” (Appendix D; p.

40 72). Within the workshop the expert “presents the concepts, conducts the exercises and coaches” (Appendix D; p. 72). Thus, through a very tacit (100) and dynamic way (100) new knowledge was being explored. After the workshop, however, the communication skills to increase connectivity were being screened electronically by a ten-week electronic follow-up and a three-month follow-up.

The follow-up

sessions are the opposite in comparison with the two-day workshop consisting of dynamics and the flow of actions and tacit knowledge. HP was aiming to quantify the outcomes of the two-day workshop by letting “participants [include] two valuable goals that required them to apply what they had learned” in a computerised system (Appendix D; p. 73). However, “the system makes each participant’s goals visible to all the other members ... to encourage shared accountability and learning” (Appendix D; p. 73).

Consequently, the ten-week electronic follow-up was sharing explicit

knowledge (25) which was static to dynamic (50) because all staff members could learn from each other. Additionally, the three-month follow-up was a program that was launched to quantify the impact of the program by asking participants to indicate how frequently they had used the concepts outlined in the two-day workshop (Appendix D; p. 75). This makes the three-month follow-up a very static (0) and explicit (25) way of sharing new acquired knowledge. Figure F.12 has captured each of the OL processes in the cross-graph, based on table T.6.

T.6 – Measures for mapping HP’s action steps in crossgraph

F.12 – Action steps to create effective learning processes as proposed by HP in cross graph

The OL processes in a complex context should be dynamic, operating in an open system where it is subjected to interferences, feedback loops, dead ends, and other factors (Choo, 2002). As shown in figure F.12 the OL processes are – with the exception of the two-day workshops – static and focused on SLL rather than DLL. Although HP successfully acknowledged communication as effective concept to enhance OL, it is less successful in applying OL processes to increase connectivity.

part four

PRACTICAL FRAMEWORK OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH: THE ANALYSIS OF THE INTERVIEW CASE-STUDIES

4.1 ALPHA’S CASE: A PARTNERSHIP MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE 4.1.1 INTRODUCTION TO ALPHA Alpha is a global law firm with the headquarter located in London. It has around 6,000 employees spread over 30 offices from all over the world. Half of those employees are the lawyers and the other half belongs to business services. As in most of the global law firms the management structure is based on partnership. Currently Alpha is “going through a quite a large change process [and] knowledge and information is merging with ... [the] learning and development function” (Appendix E; p. 81). Additionally, Epsom (2007) argues that the focus of global law firms is switching from internal managerial tasks and structures to externally faced leadership challenges. As a result, Alpha’s leader suggested offering secondments of information officers for clients on a day or week basis for a certain period of time. This is in line with the merge of the knowledge and information department with the learning and development department. By placing Alpha’s information officers at the client organisation Alpha is getting a better picture of how client teams work, “what they prioritise, who are the personalities involved [and] what are they thinking of Alpha” (Appendix E; p. 86). Through this, Alpha is learning what the client’s needs are and the requirements towards Alpha and competitors.

4.1.2 THE ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT OF SECONDMENTS OF INFORMATION OFFICERS One of Alpha’s clients, an investment bank, had “a freeze on recruitment due to the current economic climate” (Appendix E; p. 83) and at the same time an assistant in charge of the know-how system of the investment bank was taking off for maternity leave. As a result, the investment bank was missing the diagnosis of an expert to continue developing the know-how system, the unknowns were known, and there was more than one right answer possible to this problem (Snowden and Boone, 2007). These are characteristics of a complicated context (see Table T.7). In the complicated context leaders should make sense, analyse, and respond to such a problem. When Alpha’s leader arrived back at the office there was immediately a brainstorm session about how this problem could be tackled and become an opportunity for Alpha. The idea of secondment information officers, which was far less common to do, was born. The idea of moving human resources from Alpha to the client organisation in the time of freezing recruitment is clear and results in low uncertainty.

However, by identifying and placing an

information officer in a different environment this can raise high goal conflict. These characteristics are similar to the political mode in Choo’s (2002) four modes framework.

T.7 – Characteristics of a complicated context as outlined in the Cynefin framework

4.1.3 THE CONCEPTS OF SECONDMENTS OF INFORMATION OFFICERS Internally, the secondments of information officers could generate high goal conflicts as the leader of Alpha was “taking somebody out of the team” (Appendix E; p. 83). The information officers were reticent to get involved, because if they go off to work for clients there won’t be anybody to do the work that they were doing for Alpha. The leader of Alpha tended to use the conversation to encourage the idea. However, these were not conversations with the information officers directly. The leader found conversations on a smaller level more effective (Appendix E). He believed that individual conversations with the leaders of the particular information unit were more successful to see whether there was anybody in the team who might be able to be leased. Therefore, the concept of effective leadership to enhance OL processes while seconding information officers to clients was fairly indirect communication.

4.1.4 KNOWLEDGE TYPES OF SECONDMENTS OF INFORMATION OFFICERS Alpha needed to be selective about who is actually going to be put in front of a client organisation. In other words, Alpha needs to make sure that the information officer has the right skill set for the job. Consequently, for the exploration of the idea to second an information officer, Alpha is conducting a skill set analysis. As outlined in previous sub-chapter, this skill set analysis is being conducted through individual conversations with leaders of the particular information unit. Thus, Alpha explores the opportunity of secondments of information officers through tacit knowledge between the leaders of the information unit.

44 For the exploitation of the knowledge that Alpha receives through the secondments of information officers, Alpha mainly uses explicit knowledge. Work of a secondment will be “documented in terms of ... emails or notes” and “stored on the document management system” (Appendix E; p. 85). Additionally, Alpha is experimenting with media-wiki, a type of Wikipedia, that would include documents about the client organisation in general and how the client organisation F.13 – The social context of information officers secondments in Alpha’s case

operates in particular (Appendix E). As a result, Alpha

acknowledge

communication.

the

However,

strength the

way

of staff

members are being encouraged to learn is through explicit knowledge (see figure F.13).

4.1.5 ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING PROCESSES FOR SECONDMENTS OF INFORMATION OFFICERS As noted before, for the exploration of the required knowledge Alpha’s leader is having individual conversations with the leader of an information unit, rather than directly with the information officer. This makes the conversations neither static nor dynamic (50), however, the flow of knowledge is tacit (75). For the exploitation of new generated knowledge from the secondments, Alpha is experimenting with a Wiki where generic information is captured in documents, such as strategy papers and notes. Thus, in order to enhance OL Alpha is mainly documenting the new knowledge in strategy papers or notes, even though this knowledge was generated from observations. The notes sent by e-mail are less static than the strategy papers, because e-mails are more or less open for discussion and strategy papers are closed outcomes of discussions. Therefore the notes per e-mail are explicit (25) and static (25) and the strategy papers explicit (25) and very static (0). Because the Wiki includes generic information, this makes the Wiki explicit (25) but more dynamic (75) than the notes and strategy papers because staff members can easily add links and other types of media to a Wiki. Besides the flow of explicit knowledge to exploit new knowledge, the leader of Alpha sees the secondments of information officers as an opportunity and hopes to generate a story which can be told on a number of levels (Appendix E). Internally, these stories will “help demonstrate that information officers can add value outside [Alpha] directly to clients” (Appendix E; p. 84). Externally, the stories

45 raise the profile of the information team within the firm and acting as inducement to people who want to join Alpha because there is an opportunity to work externally as well as internally (Appendix E). The leader argues that storytelling is an important OL process because it can work as a tool that changes scepticism of mainly the practice of lawyers whether secondments can genuinely help with client relationships (Appendix E). These stories are very tacit (100) and very dynamic (100) because in addition to the flow of tacit knowledge stories can also illustrate actions that have been used within the client organisation, or actions that have been noted within the client organisation on which Alpha can anticipate. In short, although Alpha acknowledges communication as a way to enhance OL, OL processes to exploit new knowledge are explicit. Within a complicated context this is not advisable, as the leader should preferably enhance OL by creating panels of experts through which the leaders needs to listen to conflicting ideas. Conflicting ideas will not necessarily arise from documented knowledge. Figure F.14 has captured each of the OL processes in the cross-graph, based on table T.8.

T.8 – Measures for mapping Alpha’s action steps in cross-graph

F.14 – Action steps to create effective learning processes as proposed by Alpha mapped in cross graph

4.2 BRAVO’S CASE: A FLAT MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE 4.2.1 INTRODUCTION TO BRAVO Bravo is an agency in retail and sales promotion founded in London and has offices in eight countries. At first Bravo was “very bounded by traditional retail and sales promotional techniques” (Appendix F; p. 88), such as poster campaigns and leaflets. However, the team grew and more creative skills were available in-house. This resulted in the opportunity of Bravo to add a new practice, which is Bravo Digital: “...

IN GROWING THIS BUSINESS WE HAVE REALISED THAT THERE IS BOTH AN OPPORTUNITY

GEOGRAPHICALLY TO GROW THIS BUSINESS, BUT ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY TO GROW FROM THE SKILL SETS THAT WE HAVE GOT INSIDE AND THE

...

PRODUCTS AND SERVICES THAT THE AGENCY DELIVERS”

(APPENDIX F; P. 88)

The growth of skill sets let Bravo Digital fill the gaps where other agencies were not able to complete the work (Bravo, 2008). As a result, Bravo argued that “if we [Bravo] going to compete in today’s advertising and marketing landscape, we need to develop a ... more robust and full-service offering when it comes to doing digital” (Appendix F; p. 88).

4.2.2 THE ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT OF THE DIVERSIFICATION STRATEGY As a result of Bravo’s opportunity a business has grown inside of a business and the employee size six folded in 18 months. This almost inclines that the organisational context of the diversification strategy is complex because the growth resulted in flux and unpredictability. Nonetheless, Bravo argues that some of the hiring was in anticipation of the success of the business but the majority thought that Bravo simply needed a team that was able to deal with the opportunity: “...

THE BUSINESS WAS SIMPLY THERE FOR THE TAKING IF WE WERE TAKING THE ADVANTAGE OF THE

OPPORTUNITY” (APPENDIX F; P. 90)

Thus, Bravo was aware of the opportunity. By creating a team with different skill sets Bravo was able to make sense of the opportunities the diversification was presenting them. This is in line with the complicated context, because leaders should encourage expert diagnosis as they are the ones who know the unknowns (see Table T.9).

T.9 – Characteristics of a complicated context as outlined in the Cynefin framework

Consequently, Bravo is running the new practice with a team of experts. Each of the experts have their own special skill and together it becomes very powerful. Through this the uncertainty of the diversification strategy is very low. However, it can occur that this could lead to overconfidence of the expert, which can eventually results in a higher goal conflict. The low uncertainty and high goal conflict are both the characteristics of the political mode drafted by Choo (2002).

4.2.3 THE CONCEPTS OF THE DIVERSIFICATION STRATEGY Bravo is avoiding high goal conflict of overconfident experts and the danger signals attached to the complicated context by emphasising on hierarchy. The hierarchy is made as flat as possible to make sure there is a “kindred spirit of someone who is co-responsible” (Appendix F; p. 89). Additionally, not like the global CEOs who are strong individual people and who know how to make a decision, Bravo consists of “people who know how to rely on or gather strong information from their peers” (Appendix F; p. 90). Bravo is realising this by making it understandable to everybody “what is coming and ... figuring out where to push your team ... by distilling the complexity down to things that are a little bit more simple to understand” (Appendix F; p. 91). Thus, communication is essential in flattening the hierarchy in order to enhance OL in a transparent environment. This helps the staff members make sense of information and complexity and Bravo argues that this is not resulting in high goal conflict because “by empowering other people, by giving them information, will actually make me [the leader] more powerful because they rely on me to help them figure out how to be empowered about the next thing” (Appendix F; p. 90).

4.2.4 KNOWLEDGE TYPES OF THE DIVERSIFICATION STRATEGY Mainly tacit knowledge has been used for the exploration of the new opportunity of launching a new practice in Bravo. As a result of the speedy growth of the new practice, Bravo Digital needed to recruit many new people. The exploration of new people occurred through face-to-face contact where “body language and personal relationships matter” (Appendix F; p. 92). Additionally, interviews with new people, as well as meetings with Directors from Manchester, Singapore or New York, occur

48 through face-to-face contact by using videoconferencing. This focused on tacit knowledge. For the exploitation of the new generated knowledge Bravo is publishing contact reports and small notes. However, Bravo stresses that through this it is noted that everybody has agreed on something so that it relies less on what everybody thinks they heard and more on what is going to happen. F.15 – The social context of the diversification strategy in Bravo’s case

Furthermore, Bravo is also

exploiting new knowledge by creating spaces for collaborative thinking. These are spaces for

teams across the agency to work together on one particular client. To make sure the new knowledge is being shared organisational-wide, the teams consist of “different people from different parts of the company” (Appendix F; p. 93). In other words, within the spaces for collaborative thinking staff members are exploring new knowledge by talking to each other, and exploiting the generated knowledge because they eventually go back to their own part in the organisation.

4.2.5 ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING PROCESSES FOR THE DIVERSIFICATION STRATEGY Besides the notes, a static (25) flow of explicit knowledge (25), which are being sent out, Bravo mainly enhances OL through the development of team spaces, a very dynamic (100) flow of very tacit knowledge (100). Additionally, Bravo also applies technologies that enable face-to-face contact for, for instance, new people who need to be recruited and for the maintenance of overseas relationships. The technology gives Bravo the opportunity to learn from each other based on tacit knowledge (75) in a dynamic (75) way. Bravo has also made funding available for the acquisition of a data and client management system. Through this, Bravo aims to make parts of the knowledge explicit. This is required to continue sharing on a global level within a team that is growing fast. “Any business that is less than 25 people ... you can shout across the office and your knowledge sharing happens organically” (Appendix F; p. 105). However, if the team is bigger and spread all over the world, a system that is indexing knowledge is crucial. This system is fairly static (25) and exploits explicit knowledge (25). Figure F.15 has captured each of the OL processes in the cross-graph, based on table T.10.

T.10 – Measures for mapping Bravo’s action steps in cross-graph

F.16 – Action steps to create effective learning processes as proposed by Bravo mapped in cross graph

It is clear that Bravo has well-considered which OL processes work best for the flow of explicit and tacit knowledge. Bravo does not try to translate the tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge but is more looking for tools and systems in which knowledge keeps its context. When Bravo is creating a note, it is not because they necessarily want to capture the tacit knowledge. It is a part of decision making that has been sensed and analysed by the leader (Snowden and Boone, 2007) and, additionally, been formalised so that staff members will know what the organisation’s next step is.

4.3 CHARLIE’S CASE: A HIERARCHICAL MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE 4.3.1 INTRODUCTION TO CHARLIE Charlie is an intergovernmental organisation that helps developing countries fund projects and programs that benefit the global environment. Charlie embeds an independent evaluation office that reports directly to the Council of Charlie consisting of 32 Members States, also referred to as the Charlie Evaluation Office. Among other responsibilities, this office is responsible for evaluating the effectiveness of Charlie. As a result, the Evaluation Office was asked to examine Charlie’s procedures because: THERE WAS

“AN

INCREASING AMOUNT OF AGITATION AND PEOPLE WERE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE

LENGTH OF THE PROCEDURES AND THAT EVEN HAPPENED WITHIN THE COUNCIL OF CHARLIE” (APPENDIX

G; P. 100).

Consequently, Charlie needed to redefine its internal current procedures for assessing project proposals.

4.3.2 THE ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXT OF REDEFINING INTERNAL PROCEDURES Charlie recognised that there was a problem with the procedures to assess project proposals. However, the cause-and-effect relationships were not evident immediately. Therefore Charlie asked the Charlie Evaluation Office to examine the current procedures. Although it was obvious that current procedures were ineffective, the cause-and-effect relationships were not immediately discoverable and an expert diagnosis was required. Charlie saw in the Charlie Evaluation Office this expert. These characteristics are similar to the complicated context (see table T.11).

T.11 – Characteristics of a complicated context as outlined in the Cynefin framework

Additionally, the complicated context as indicated in the Cynefin framework, is matching the characteristics of the political mode in Choo’s (2002) four modes model. The outcome of the expert

51 diagnosis which Charlie Evaluation Office conducted was not uncertain, because out of experience it became clear that the procedures were not working. However, the Charlie Evaluation Office was taking a closer look at internal procedures. Internally, this might have ended up with goal conflicts among staff members, because showing a weakness is more difficult and conventional than a strength.

4.3.3 THE CONCEPTS OF REDEFINING INTERNAL PROCEDURES The examination of the internal procedures was an extensive research, because the Charlie Evaluation Office was required to keep the Council in the loop of the development. Firstly, by giving “account to the research by submitting a report of the research” (Appendix G; p. 100). Secondly, by putting the research on the agenda.

Thirdly, by forwarding a proposal to start reviewing the procedures.

Fourthly, and finally, by agreeing to previous documents in the Joint Summary of the Chairs. These four steps were “business-like”, “technical” and “cold and dry data” (Appendix G; p. 100). The Charlie Evaluation Office made this data ready-to-digest by presenting the four steps with the outcomes. In this case the concept of effective leadership strategy is communication, because it was recognised that: “THE PEOPLE FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD ... ARE COMING TO WASHINGTON TO MAKE ... DECISIONS IN A WEEK TIME.

SO THEY HAVE LITTLE TIME AND THEY NEED TO MEET QUICKLY OVER ALL THE DOCUMENTS.

THEY OFTEN READ THE DOCUMENTS IN THE AIRPLANE TO WASHINGTON SO THEY ... CANNOT DIGEST ALL THE DOCUMENTS” (APPENDIX G; P. 100)

4.3.4 KNOWLEDGE TYPES OF REDEFINING INTERNAL PROCEDURES Charlie first started with an extensive examination on the internal procedures. The findings needed to be quantified as the results were required to be as objective as possible. For instance, Charlie examined the data that was being used for a project proposal “like the data on which it has been submitted and the date on which it has been approved” (Appendix G; p. 102). This resulted in a simple time check to understand whether the procedure accelerated or not.

Consequently, the

exploration of knowledge about the internal procedures occurred through data analysis that was made explicit. The exploitation of the new knowledge regarding the results of the examination into the internal procedures mainly consisted of forwarding the results in, at least, four documents. Normally these documents are not resulting in sharing knowledge or proceedings. Therefore the leader of Charlie

52 Evaluation

Office

presented

the

explicit

knowledge in a tacit way; in a storytelling way. As a result, the Council of Charlie “instructed the Chief Executive Officer to draw up completely new procedures about how project proposals should be dealt with” (Appendix G; p. 101). Thus, the Charlie Evaluation Office successfully experimented how explored explicit knowledge could be exploited effectively and this was as tacit knowledge. F.17 – The social context of the redefinition of internal procedures in Charlie’s case

4.3.5 ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING PROCESSES FOR REDEFINING INTERNAL PROCEDURES The opportunity of redefining internal procedures was being explored through the outcomes of a quantitative study. This generated explicit knowledge (25) in a static environment (25). However, by encouraging staff members to talk about business trips, the Charlie Evaluation Office was trying to find stories to the quantitative studies: “IF

YOU JUST TELL A DRY FACT

...

THEN IT WILL NOT BECOME INTERESTING. IF YOU TELL THE STORY,

THEN EVERYBODY IMMEDIATELY SAY: O YES, IT WORKS LIKE THIS” (APPENDIX G, 2008; P. 115)

The informal talks exploits tacit knowledge (75) which is flowing in a dynamic environment (75). If a story is found for a particular study, more body is being given to the explicit knowledge because it is more than only quantitative data, it is about a real-life story. In other words, storytelling generated very tacit knowledge (100) in a very dynamic way (100). Finally, to grasp the stories and use these in future work, the Charlie Evaluation Office is storing the stories on their internal Wiki. By capturing stories explicitly on a Wiki, the Charlie Evaluation Office is making it possible to give new colleagues the opportunity to read them. As indicated earlier in Alpha’s case, a Wiki is an OL process for the exploitation of fairly explicit (25) knowledge but in a dynamic environment (75) because staff members can edit and expand explicit knowledge on Wikis. Figure F.18 has captured each of the OL processes in the cross-graph, based on table T.12.

T.12 – Measures for mapping Charlie’s action steps in cross-graph

F.18 – Action steps to create effective learning processes as proposed by Charlie mapped in cross graph

4.4 SUMMARY PRACTICAL FRAMEWORK OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH As outlined in the summary of the extended literature review, the new leadership’s characteristics should enhance OL processes by creating tools and systems to capture top-down and bottom-up knowledge. This is being established by shaping communication structures. Although each casestudy successfully acknowledge the effectiveness of communication by focusing on communication tools and systems to enhance OL processes, only one case-study was successful in these tools and systems because it understood the underpinning concepts such as trust and hierarchy to lead effectively between top-down and network-driven management. This is Bravo’s case-study. Bravo’s leader empowers staff members by putting them in cross-disciplinary spaces through which an organisational-wide flow of tacit knowledge occurs. Bravo’s leader steps back in the process of creating and sharing knowledge by encouraging the flow of tacit knowledge in the spaces for collaborative thinking – an OL process. Therefore, in comparison with HP, Alpha and Charlie, Bravo relies on high interaction, non-standardised coordination by keeping tacit knowledge tacit, rather than transferring tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge through Wikis or document management systems like HP, Alpha and Charlie.

Additionally, by documenting tacit knowledge organisations will

encounter problems in the sense and decision making process. Staff members cannot directly grasp innovative ideas because they lack different patterns in their knowledge-base and as a result they need to look for explicit knowledge to find an answer on a problem or opportunity. This process will be counter-productive in environments that require speedy decisions to make sure to compete. As a result, Bravo is most successful in competing based on the OL processes they apply.

part five

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 RESEARCH SUMMARY This research presents a new proposed theoretical framework which ensures that the identified leadership’s characteristics are applicable in real-life by also examining the social context of these leadership’s characteristics. Chapter one answers the question why this research should be of importance to both the academic and professional field. The main reason is that the role of leadership in OL and KM is an emerging field which has a lack of practical examples. Chapter two elaborates the various frameworks that resulted in the new proposed theoretical framework. The frameworks are the Cynefin framework (Snowden and Boone, 2007) and the four modes framework (Choo, 2002) that identify the organisational context in which the OL processes are being applied; and the matrix of four different elements of an organisation’s IC (Spender, 1996; Cook and Brown , 1999) that identifies the flow of

the different types of knowledge within the OL processes.

Additionally, chapter two

synthesises theoretical answers based on the research questions. On the other hand, chapter three and four synthesise practical answers as these answers are linked to real-life situation through a published case-study and three interviews. Consequently this research area is expanded with a research that feeds into the theoretical as well as a practical knowledge of the leadership’s role that enhances OL.

5.2 CONCLUSIONS The findings from the extended literature review, the published case-study and the three interviews indicate that communication is the most crucial and effective leadership’s characteristic that enhances OL. By increasing the effectiveness of communication organisations: ▪

allow leaders and staff members to create a common language that enhances organisational-wide learning because individual staff members can insert themselves into a variety of complex, interwoven social systems (Chapter two: Extended Literature Review), and;

▪

create an organisational form that relies on the community. A community form improves the visibility of tacit knowledge and empowers individuals. The empowerment of individual staff members automatically results in the empowerment of the leader because staff members rely on the leaders to help them figure out how to be empowered about the next thing (Chapter four: Interviews)

However, while the literature review highlights that the current trend of KM moves from simply putting more knowledge in databases to levering the many ways that knowledge can migrate into an organisation, two out of four case-studies show that new explored knowledge through communication is being migrated into the organisation through systems. In other words, in order to re-use tacit

56 knowledge that is communicated, this knowledge is being captured, stored and made explicit in systems. Consequently, this research concludes that there are two types of leaders: 1. the leader who enhances OL with direct communication by letting staff members create and share knowledge through:

Spaces for collaborative thinking and informal talks

Video-conferencing

Workshops

2. the leader who enhances OL with indirect communication by letting staff members create and share knowledge through:

Data and client management systems

Wiki’s

As indicated in the literature review, KM has moved to a new generation where knowledge-creating processes cannot be managed in a traditional sense of management that centres on controlling the flow of knowledge by making the knowledge explicit. Of course certain knowledge, like the decisions that have been made by the leaders, need to be made explicit and circulated among staff members as emails or notes. However, the most important leadership characteristic to enhance OL in the new generation of KM is direct communication, because this makes staff members more informed and they can allow themselves to develop their own new knowledge and tightening staff members to be able to push knowledge along the lines of the processes. This is why the spaces for collaborative thinking (see Bravo’s case) and informal talks (see Charlie’s case) are the perfect situations initiated by the leaders, because these are situations that let staff members explore and exploit knowledge. Additionally, the three interviews show that all of the leaders were operating in a complicated context. As indicated in the Cynefin framework the responses to problems or opportunities in a complicated context should “encourage external and internal stakeholders to challenge expert opinions to combat entrained thinking [and] use experiments and games to force people to think outside the familiar” (Snowden and Boone, 2007; p. 73). In this respect, Bravo was the best-practice organisation in OL by putting people from different parts of the organisation in teams to make sure new knowledge is being shared organisational-wide. Through this tacit knowledge is not necessarily documented but just kept tacit. Therefore, the leader encourages communication in order to continuous OL, increase innovation and speedy sense and decision making which result in a better competition. Consequently, by answering the research question regarding what the leadership’s characteristics are that enhance OL the following description of a leader can be given:

57 A LEADER OPERATING IN A COMPLICATED CONTEXT SETS OUT ENVIRONMENTS FOR DIRECT COMMUNICATION – LIKE SPACES FOR COLLABORATIVE THINKING – WHERE INDIVIDUAL STAFF MEMBERS FROM ALL OVER THE ORGANISATIONS CAN EXPLORE AND EXPLOIT KNOWLEDGE WITH OTHER INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS WHICH CHANGE THE ORGANISATIONAL FORM TO A COMMUNITY-DRIVEN FORM. MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE.

THIS FORM REQUIRES ORGANISATION TO CHANGE TO A FLAT AS A RESULT THE ROLE OF THE LEADER IS TO SENSE, ANALYSE,

AND RESPOND TO A NEW SITUATION WHICH REQUIRES EXPERTISE

5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS 5.3.1 IDENTIFYING LEADERSHIP’S CHARACTERISTICS IN ALL ORGANISATIONAL CONTEXTS This research results in a new proposed theoretical framework to identify leadership’s characteristics in its social context. By adapting this model, best practice in leadership and OL can be mapped and made available to leaders who require tools to effectively move the organisation through different situations

5.3.2 FURTHER RESEARCH ON WIKIS DYNAMICS TO ENHANCE ORGANISATIONAL LEARNING Although Wikis are being used to transfer tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge, this cannot be compared with, for instance, e-mails or notes that transfer thoughts in an explicit way. A Wiki, with Wikipedia as a well-known example, has a neutral point of view – which means that it strives for articles that advocate no single point of view – and is free content that anyone may edit (Wikipedia, 2008). A Wiki could be a very powerful tool for the exploration as well as the exploitation of knowledge. Particularly, a Wiki is useful for opportunities or problems encountered in a complicated context because for the sense making it is important “to encourage external and internal stakeholders to challenge expert opinions to combat entrained thinking” (Snowden and Boone, 2007; p. 73). However, this research has not examined the Wiki of Alpha and Charlie as this was out of the research scope. Therefore, a further continuation of this research could perhaps be an examination of Wikis as OL process for the exploration and exploitation of knowledge. Such an examination is critical to understand the value of a Wiki as OL process. For instance, Google recently launched KNOL as their Wiki. However, as opposed to Wikipedia, KNOL sets permission for who can edit (Google, 2008). This is against the characteristic for an OL process within a complicated context to encourage different stakeholders and challenge expert opinions to combat entrained thinking. According to Snowden (2008) the major mistake of first generation KM was well meaning but excessive constraint which means you do not get evolution. Lightly constrain the system, increase the diversity of connections and interesting things start to happen: meaning emerges. Of course that means that you have to trust the network of people who engage because the crowd generally turns out to be wise.

REFERENCES Adler, P.S. (2002) Market, hierarchy, and trust: The knowledge economy and the future of capitalism, in Choo, C.W. and Bontis, N. (ed.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 23-46 Andersen, T.J. (2000) Strategic planning, autonomous actions and corporate performance, Long Range Planning, 33(2), pp. 184-200 Argyris, C. and Schรถn, D. (1978) Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective, Reading: Addison Wesley Basadur, M. and Gelade, G.A. (2006) The role of knowledge management in the innovation process, Creativity and Innovation Management, 15(1), pp. 45-62 Bell, D. (1976) The coming of post-industrial society: A venture in social forecasting, New York: Basic Books Bennet, A. and Shane Tomblin, M. (2006) A learning network framework for modern organizations: Organizational learning, knowledge management and ICT support, VINE: The journal of information and knowledge management systems, 36(3), pp. 289-303 Bennis, W.G. and Nanus, B. (1997) Leaders: Strategies for taking charge, New York: Harper-Business Boal, K.B. and Schulz, P.L. (2007) Storytelling, time, and evolution: The role of strategic leadership in complex adaptive systems, The Leadership Quarterly, 18, p. 411-428 Boisot, M. (2002) The creation and sharing of knowledge, in Choo, C.W. and Bontis, N. (ed.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 65-77 Brown, J.S. and Duguid, P. (1991) Organizational learning and communities of practice: toward a unified view of working, learning and innovation, Organizational Science, 2(1), pp. 40-57 Brown, J.S. and Duguid, P. (2000) The social life of information, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press Brown, S.L. and Eisenhardt, K.M. (1997) The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-spaced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations, Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, p. 1-34 Call, D. (2005) Knowledge management - not rocket science, Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(2), pp. 19-30 Carter, L, Ulrich, D. and Goldsmith, M. (2004) Best practices in leadership development and organization change: How the best companies ensure meaningful change and sustainable leadership, San Francisco: Pfeiffer Choo, C.W. (2002) Sensemaking, knowledge creation, and decision making: Organizational knowing as emergent strategy, in Choo, C.W. and Bontis, N. (ed.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 79-88

Choo, C.W. and Johnston, R. (2004) Innovation in the knowing organization: A case study of an e-commerce initiative, Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(6), p. 77-92 Coleman, R. (1990) Foundations of social theory, Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press Connolly, M. and Burnett, S. (2003) Hewlett-Packard takes the waste out of leadership, Journal of Organizational Excellence, 22(4), p. 49-60 Cook, S.D.N. and Brown, J.S. (1999) Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing, Organization Science, 10(4), pp. 381-401 Crossan, M. and Hulland, J. (2002) Leveraging knowledge through leadership of organizational learning, in Choo, C.W. and Bontis, N. (ed.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 711-723 Davenport, T.H. (2001) Knowledge work and the future management, in Bennis, W.G. et al., (ed.), The future of leadership: Today’s top leadership thinkers speak to tomorrow’s leaders, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 41-58 Denning, S. (2005) The leader’s guide to storytelling: Mastering the art and discipline of business narrative, San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons Drucker, P. (1993) Post-capitalist Society, Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann Drucker, P.F. (1999) Management Challenges of the 21st Century, Oxford: ButterworthHeinemann Dufour, Y. and Steane, P. (2007) Implementing knowledge management: A more robust model, Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(6), pp. 68-80 Empson, L. (2007) Managing the modern law firm: New challenges, new perspectives, Oxford: Oxford University Press Fulmer, R.M. and Keys, J.B. (1998) A conversation with Peter Senge: New developments in organizational learning, Organizational Dynamics, 27(2), pp. 33-43 Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. (1967) The discovery of grounded theory : Strategies for qualitative research, New York: Aldine Google (2008) Collaboration in knolls, Online: http://knol.google.com/k/knolhelp/collaboration-in-knols/si57lahl1w25/3#, last updated 8 August 2008, last visited 12 August 2008 Granovetter, M. (1985) Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness, American Journal of Sociology, 91, p. 481-714 Grant, R.M. (2002) The knowledge-based view of the firm, in Choo, C.W. and Bontis, N. (ed.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 133-148 Hackett, B. (2002) Beyond knowledge management: New ways to work, in Choo, C.W. and Bontis, N. (ed.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 726-738

60 Hibbard, J. and Carillo, K.M. (1998) Knowledge revolution, InformationWeek, 5(663), pp. 49-54 Hislop, D. (2005) Knowledge management in organizations: A critical introduction, Oxford: Oxford University Press Holland, J.H. (2005) Hidden order: How adaptation build complexity, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Ju Choi, C. and Karamanos, A. (2002) Knowledge and the internet: Lessons from cultural industries, in Choo, C.W. and Bontis, N. (ed.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 297-314 Keene, . (2000) Complexity theory: The changing role of leadership, Industrial and Commercial Training, 32(1), p. 15-18 Kiedrowski, P.J. (2006) Quantitative assessment of a Senge learning organization intervention, The Learning Organization, 13(4), pp. 369-383 Knowles, R.N. (2001) Self-organizing leadership, Emergence, 3(4), p.112-127 Kurtz, C.F. and Snowden, D.J. (2003) The new dynamics of strategy: Sense-making in a complex and complicated world, IBM Systems Journal, 42(3), pp. 462-483 Levy, S. (1992) Artificial life: The quest for a new creation, New York: Random House Malloch, K. and Porter-O’Grady, T. (2005) The quantum leader: A resource for health care innovation, Sudbury, Ma: Jones & Bartlett Publishing March, J.G. (1996) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning, in Cohen, M.D. and Sproull, L.S. (eds.) Organizational learning, Thousand Oaks: Sage Marcketti, S.B. and Kozar, J.M. (2007) Leading with relationships: a small firm example, The Learning Organization, 14(2), pp. 142-154 McElroy, M.W. (2000) Integrating complexity, knowledge management and organizational learning, Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(3), pp. 195-203 McElroy, M.W. (2003) The new knowledge management: Complexity, learning, and sustainable innovation, Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann Mintzberg, H., Lampel, J., Quinn, J.B. and Ghoshal, S. (2003) The strategy process: Concepts, contexts and cases, Harlow: Pearson Education Limited Nicolas, R. (2004) Knowledge management impacts on decision making process, Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(1), pp. 20-31 Nonaka, I. (1998) The Knowledge-Creating Company, in: Harvard Business Review on Knowledge Management, Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing, pp. 21-45 Nonaka, I and Takeuchi, H. (1995) The Knowledge-Creating Company, London: Oxford University Press Pérez López, S., Montes Peón J.M. and Vazquez Ordás, C.J. (2005) Organizational learning as a determining factor in business performance, The Learning Organization, 12(3), pp. 227-245

61 Perry, C. (1998) Processes of a case study methodology for postgraduate research in marketing, European Journal of Marketing, 32(9/10), pp. 785-802 Polanyi, M. (1958) Personal Knowledge, Chicago: Chicago University Press Polanyi, M. (1967) The tacit dimension, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Reichwald, R., Siebert, J. and MĂśslein, K. (2005) Leadership excellence: Learning from an exploratory study on leadership systems in large multinationals, Journal of European Industrial Training, 29(3), pp. 184-198 Schacter, D. (2001) The seven sins of memory: How the mind forgets and remembers, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Schneider, M. and Somers, M. (2006) Organizations as complex adaptive systems: Implications of complexity theory for leadership research, The Leadership Quarterly, 17(4), p. 351-365 Schreiber, C. and Carley, K.M. (2008) Network leadership: Leading for learning and adaptability, in: Uhl-Bien, M. and Marion, R. (eds.) Complexity leadership, Part 1: Conceptual Foundations, p. 291-331 Senge, P. (1990) The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, New York, NY : Currency Doubleday Sherif, K. (2006) An adaptive strategy for managing knowledge in organizations, Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(4), p. 72-80 Snowden, D. (2002) Complex acts of knowing: Paradox and descriptive self-awareness, Journal of Knowledge Management, 6(2), pp. 100-111 Snowden, D. (2008) The controlling knol, Online: http://www.cognitiveedge.com/blogs/dave/2008/07/the_controlling_knol.php, last updated 26 July 2008, last visited 12 August 2008 Snowden, D. and Boone, M.E. (2007) A leaderâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s framework for decision making, Harvard Business Review, 85(11), pp. 68-76 Spender, J.-C. (1996) Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm, Strategic Management Journal, 17(s2), pp. 45-62 Spender, J.-C. (2002) Knowledge management, uncertainty, and an emergent theory of the firm, in Choo, C.W. and Bontis, N. (ed.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 149-162 Stacey, R. (2001) Complex responsive processes in organizations: learning and knowledge creation, Routledge Stewart, T.A. (1997) Intellectual capital: The new wealth of organizations, New York: Doubleday/Currency Tsoukas, H. and Hatch, M.J. (2001) Complex thinking, complex practice: The case for a narrative approach to organizational complexity, Human Relations, 54(8), p. 979-1013 Tsoukas, H. and Chia, R. (2002) On organizational becoming: Rethinking organizational change, Organization Science, 13(5), p. 567-582

62 Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R and McKelvey, B (2008) Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era, in: Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R. (eds.) Complexity leadership: Conceptual foundations Pt. 1 Umemoto, K. (2002) Managing existing knowledge is not enough, in Choo, C.W. and Bontis, N. (ed.), The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 463-476 United Nations (2005) Understanding Knowledge Societies: In twenty questions and answers with the Index of Knowledge Societies, New York: United Nations: Department of Economic and Social Affairs Van de Ven, A.H., Delbecq, A.L. and Koenig, R. (1976) Determinants of coordination modes within organizations, American sociological review, 41, p. 322-338 Wikipedia (2008) Wikipedia: Five pillars, Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars, date modified 7 August 2008, last visited 12 August 2008 Yin, R.K. (1994) Case study research: Design and methods, Applied Social Research Methods Series, 34, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Zander, U. and Kogut, B. (1995) Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and limitation of organizational capabilities, Organization Science, 6(1), pp. 76-92