Reconciling ambiguity with interaction: implementing formal knowledge strategies in a knowledge-intensive organization

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to look at the actions autonomous knowledge workers perform to implement formalized knowledge strategies as part of an accreditation. Design/methodology/approach Using a strategy-as-practice framework, this paper follows a qualitative approach to study the implementation of a standard in a business school. The data collection was carried out over a 14-month period, with access to interviews, observations, meetings minutes and other institutional information. Findings Even though faculty members received similar information, the standard was implemented in different and conflicting ways. Three themes explain these differences: different approaches to ambiguous knowledge management practices, enablers and inhibitors of knowledge sharing and different conceptions of continuous improvement. Research limitations/implications As this was a single case, findings are not broadly generalizable. The research is based on rich data over a prolonged period, albeit in a very specific setting where unique actor and structural characteristics are not generally representative of the wider business and organizational environment. The nature of the university setting is quite unique. Although possible links to other fields which share some specific similarities with universities are provided, the contextual limitations are acknowledged. Accordingly, the work is presented as a basis for future enquiry when investigating implementation, especially activity-based research within knowledge-intensive organizations. Practical implications This paper provides a deep analysis of the actions knowledge workers perform when implementing standards promoted by organizational directives. It exposes tensions and conflicts among knowledge workers when implementing a standard. Our model is the basis for insights on how managers can balance the tensions of creative change and stable structure. Originality/value This paper describes how ambiguity and human interactions can reveal a deeper understanding of the different stages of standards implementation. It provides a model that uses the level of ambiguity and structure to explain how knowledge workers interacted in groups and as a whole can implement Assurance of Learning.

Knowledge forms in the project lifecycle: A blueprint for knowledge management in small creative agencies in Johannesburg

“…The present study argues that the contemporary landscape within which organisations operate demands more descriptive and varied approaches to the life of knowledge. As such, the findings are more in line with studies that look at KM through the lenses of experimentation (Krylova et al 2016); the importance of team construction (Savino et al 2017); performativity (Marin et al 2016)…”

“…Knowledge-intensive Organisations, as noted earlier, is a broad term to reference those that offer non-utilitarian services (Lampel et al 2000;Marin et al 2016), which include financial institutions, law, technology companies, and many creative industry businesses. Lampel et al (2000), as well as Lawrence and Phillips (2002), argue that the sub-sector within this grouping of creative agencies, which include art, advertising, fashion, and design is under-investigated.…”

“…Recent work has turned to Web 2.0, and found it has opened up new knowledge management challenges (Roblek et al 2013;Soto-Acosta & Cegarra-Navarro 2016). There is also a growing body of work that looks at more abstract concepts in relation to KM, such as experimentation (Krylova et al 2016); the importance of team construction Original Research http://www.sajim.co.za Open Access (Savino, Petruzzelli & Albino 2017); performativity (Marin et al 2016), and the importance of improvisation (Pina e Cunha & Da Cunha 2006).…”

“…

Knowledge-intensive Organisations is a broad term to reference businesses that offer nonutilitarian services (Marin, Cordier & Hameed 2016), and creative agencies can be seen as a subsection that focusses on, for example, art, design, entertainment, and advertising (Lampel, Lant & Shamsie 2000). This research is situated in this sub-section of KIOs.

…”

A utilização das práticas de gestão do conhecimento e facilitadores estratégicos em uma instituição de ensino superior

“…Estudo recente de Mousavizadeh et al (2015) buscou integrar facilitadores importantes, tais como cultura e apoio à gestão para a avaliação dos benefícios derivados da prática de gestão do conhecimento. O interesse chave dentro desta discussão é como as práticas de gestão do conhecimento estão sendo utilizada nas organizações (MARIN, CORDIER, HAMEED, 2016). Assim, a seguinte questão é objeto de estudo: Como são utilizados os facilitadores estratégicos que apoiam às práticas de gestão do conhecimento em instituição de ensino superior?…”