Creating architectural approaches to knowledge management: an example from the space industry

Holm, Jeanne; Olla, Phillip; Moura, D.; Warhaut, M.

doi:10.1108/13673270610656610

Cited by 16 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The KM literature proposes that to prevent knowledge loss, component and architectural knowledge should be retained (Holm et al, 2006). Common component knowledge relates to a subroutine or discrete aspect of a firm's operations whereas common architectural knowledge relates to firm-wide routines or schemas for coordinating and combining the various components of the firm and putting them to productive use (Henderson and Clark, 1990).…”

Section: Impact Of Architectural and Component Knowledge On Knowledge Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding and managing knowledge loss

Daghfous

Belkhodja

Angell

2013

Journal of Knowledge Management

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – Research on knowledge loss is at an early stage of evolution. This paper seeks to extend the existent literature through an exploratory investigation of the drivers and impacts of knowledge loss, as well as associated retention strategies within manufacturing and service operations. Design/methodology/approach – Multiple research streams are used to explore and capture the complexities and intricacies of knowledge loss within four firms. The author follows a multiple case study approach with theoretical sampling of manufacturing and service firms. Findings – The results of this study suggest that organizations should retain and diffuse architectural knowledge, improve strategic coordination among units, develop existing capabilities through different networking strategies and more effective networks, and transform these capabilities into effective organizational routines to mitigate knowledge loss and increase knowledge retention. Meanwhile, relying solely on standard operating procedures, information systems, and codification of knowledge in databases could undermine knowledge retention and lead to knowledge loss. Practical implications – A comprehensive strategy to guide knowledge management efforts and actions should be adopted. Moreover, knowledge cannot be retained without the adoption of an integrative approach that comprises various strategies and without management commitment and drive. Originality/value – The findings of this exploratory investigation add to the understanding of the knowledge loss phenomenon by showing that it is much more complex than was found in earlier studies emanating from various research streams. The paper proposes directions for future research.

show abstract

Section: Impact Of Architectural and Component Knowledge On Knowledge Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding and managing knowledge loss

Daghfous

Belkhodja

Angell

2013

Journal of Knowledge Management

131

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Reviewing the critical success factors to establish a knowledge management program, four topics are remarkable: culture, knowledge architecture, information technology infrastructure and supportive services (Chatterjee, 2002; Holm et al , 2006). Since knowledge management addresses the generation, representation, storage, transfer and transformation of knowledge (Hedlund, 1994), the knowledge architecture is designed to capture knowledge and thereby enable the knowledge management processes to take place (Wickramasinghe, 2003).…”

Section: Knowledge Architecturementioning

confidence: 99%

Developing an architecture model for enterprise knowledge

Jafari

Akhavan

Nouranipour

2009

Management Decision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe main objective of this paper is to explore the role of knowledge architecture in an enterprise and to provide a model to architect enterprise knowledge based on the Zachman framework.Design/methodology/approachThis is a conceptual article providing a knowledge architecture model for an organization based on the Zachman framework that discussed several perspectives from the knowledge management point of view and information technology. To confirm the validity of the model a questionnaire was designed, applied and then analyzed by some statistical methods.FindingsThe paper provides a conceptual knowledge architecture model that can be applied to Iranian organizations practically. The validity of this model is confirmed by polling the opinion of knowledge architecture experts.Research limitations/implicationsThe lack of resources directly related to the subject of the research, the novelty of this kind of research in Iran and the lack of organizations which perform a knowledge architecture model in reality are the restrictions of this research. The authors' suggestion for further research studies is to execute the model and survey from foreigner experts.Practical implicationsThe paper may be beneficial for enterprise architects in the knowledge area.Originality/valueThe paper may be of high value to researchers in the knowledge management field and to practitioners involved with KM adoption in the organizations. It gives valuable information and guidelines that hopefully will help the leaders and the senior knowledge management managers to accomplish KM through their organization successfully.

show abstract

“…A review of the parameters that were effective in the operationalization of a KM enterprise yields four factors: culture, KA, IT infrastructure and supportive services [ 3 , 4 ]. The relationship between KM and KA can be envisaged as follows: KM involves the production, presentation, storage, transfer and transformation of knowledge [ 5 ], whereas KA involves the extraction of knowledge and KM processes [ 6 ].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both technical factors and nontechnical factors are critical to the successful implementation of a KM project. Culture, KA, information technology infrastructure and supportive services are important factors in the successful establishment of a KM project [ 3 , 4 ]. The relationship between KM and KA can be envisaged as follows: KM involves the production, presentation, storage, transfer and transformation of knowledge [ 5 ], whereas KA involves the extraction of knowledge and relevant knowledge managerial processes [ 6 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Presenting an Approach for Conducting Knowledge Architecture within Large-Scale Organizations

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge architecture (KA) establishes the basic groundwork for the successful implementation of a short-term or long-term knowledge management (KM) program. An example of KA is the design of a prototype before a new vehicle is manufactured. Due to a transformation to large-scale organizations, the traditional architecture of organizations is undergoing fundamental changes. This paper explores the main strengths and weaknesses in the field of KA within large-scale organizations and provides a suitable methodology and supervising framework to overcome specific limitations. This objective was achieved by applying and updating the concepts from the Zachman information architectural framework and the information architectural methodology of enterprise architecture planning (EAP). The proposed solution may be beneficial for architects in knowledge-related areas to successfully accomplish KM within large-scale organizations. The research method is descriptive; its validity is confirmed by performing a case study and polling the opinions of KA experts.

show abstract

Creating architectural approaches to knowledge management: an example from the space industry

Cited by 16 publications

References 25 publications

Understanding and managing knowledge loss

Understanding and managing knowledge loss

Developing an architecture model for enterprise knowledge

Presenting an Approach for Conducting Knowledge Architecture within Large-Scale Organizations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About