Literature Review
The literature review focuses on organizational learning, organizational memory, organization structure, shear tacit knowledge as well as KM tools and techniques. Organizational Learning (OL) can be defined as the means by which team detects errors and them by gaining knowledge through individuals who act as agents (Tom and Murphy, 2007). According to Huber, there are four constructs which are linked to OL, which include: knowledge acquisition, information distribution, information interpretation and organizational memory (OM) (Dalkir, 2016). One important aspect in KM is the organization chart can be defined as the manner in which an organization designs its management and information flow to enhance performance (Leonard-Barton, 1992).
According to Vestal, best organization practices show that knowledge sharing is heading into process and learning. He revealed that most organizations will seek knowledge from reliable sources when there is a need for it provided the source can help solve the problem (Vestal and Lopez, 2016). Organizational Memory is considered as unstructured concepts or information that can be partially represented by physical memory aids like a database (Vestal and Lopez, 2016). It is a combination of history and trend data collected by an organization as well as experience gained by the member of an organization in a given period (Abdullah, 2005 and Stein, 1995).
Considering tacit knowledge, it is a personal or interior experience; it is different from external knowledge which is written or recorded as an article (Liebowitz, 2012). Stephen Gourlay defines tacit knowledge as "an arrangement of facts classified as highly private, situation specific in addition to being deeply embedded in distinct experiences, emotions, ideas and values (Husted and Machailova, 2002). An identified approach for managing the exchange and creation of tacit knowledge is by having communities of practice to take it up spearhead it. The principal task for managers is to convert implicit, from the social capital into plain text, and finally structural capital.
KM is aided by technology and tools which include that equipment which helps to assist in knowledge transfer for enhanced effectiveness such as computers, use of mobile communication, e-mailing among others. The tools and technology affect the level of collaboration among people within an organization (Bose, 2004). According to Nonaka concept of "ba"; the concept is described as a shared space for emerging relationships. Space can be physical, virtual or mental (Nonaka and Konno, 2016). Ba provides a platform for promoting individual and collective knowledge which brings about information integration (Ngai and Chan, 2016).
Review of the case study
The study focuses on Oxfam Company, which was created in 1942. The organization is known for providing emergency relief and engages in extended-period tasks to encourage expansion of significant aspects of human livelihood (Jennex and Olfman, 2002). Oxfam works with international partners and communities to combat partners' poverty and injustice. The project was intended to afford a test bed to better comprehend the most vital issues behind the achievements of Vichama in the young population mobilization (Jennex and Olfman, 2002).
For the case study, McGill investigation crew traveled to Peru to conduct a case study for the period of the yearly solidarity cultural forum to explore the collaboration of the youth. The study involved interviews of the participants in the event which was to lead to the production of storytelling videos (Nonaka and Konno, 2016).
The main purpose of the videos was to be used in the transfer of tacit knowledge gained from the two-decade experience as a result of youth mobilization. A similar study was carried out in a club with 2/3 affiliates in Quebec (Liebowitz, 2012). Finally, the case study involved administration of a post-mortem questionnaire for both Peruvian and Quebec teams to help understand the critical issues which led to success in the mobilization. This was also to help identify the critical cultural based differences between the Peruvian and Canadian contexts (Nonaka, 2016).
Critical discussion of the case study
The challenges in the case study were caused by the cultural differences, language barrier, type of technology as well as differences in preferences between the two groups. One of the obstacles was the language barrier. Even though the native Spanish speaking individuals were readily available to help in the majority of the conversations, there still existed a challenge of the language barrier (Nonaka, 2016). The cultural differences which existed between the Peru and Quebec proved to be a barrier to effective collaboration of the teams (Braganza, Awazu and Desouza, 2016).
There was a witnessed conflict of interest where the Vichama team was of the view that communal based method was the key to progress and development. They expected that Quebec team would work in an extremely concerted way, but it appeared that the two groups understood what the term collaboration meant differently (Nonaka, 2016). The Quebec team was of the opinion that technology supported links meant collaboration while the Vichama view was that what Quebec wants was only communication and connection which does not imply collaboration (Dalkir, 2016). On the context of technology, the risks of the study were that the Peru team felt they did not have understanding of website design as well as content was settled upon without engaging them which posed a threat to the success of the project (Nonaka and Konno, 2016). The differences between the two groups led to communication breakdown which led to discontinuation of the project (Senge 1990). The study found that the Quebec favored the use of computerized technology as opposed to Peru (Nonaka, 2016).
Use of technology was one way which contributed to the lack of proper collaboration as shown from the case study. The two groups collaborated mainly through the use of tools such as telephone, teleconferencing, e-mailing and website posting. Skype was used at the post-mortem level of the research (Dalkir, 2016.
Expectation and technology preference
As was rightly highlighted in the above review of the KMS in the Case Study, most of the KM techniques and tools employed by the teams were mainly technology-mediated. According to the study, the team from North America was quite comfortable with these tools and seemed to work extremely well with them. From their end, the success of Knowledge Management does not necessarily lie in the social collaboration of the people involved. The Quebec team believed that the success of knowledge transfer and management, on the contrary, relies strongly on the availability of a platform (of whatever kind) upon which participants may interact in a timely manner (Dalkir, 2016).
The Peru team, on the other hand, seemed to value strongly KM platforms that promoted social presence. It is for that reason that they seemingly were not at per with their counterparts in Quebec, Canada. From the case, it can be seen that the Peru team felt that the email and website reviews they had to make from their sister team in Quebec only demeaned them. It made them feel like they were not part and parcel of the actual design. The Quebec team favored the use of e-mail and posting changes on the website for the team in Peru to review. On the other hand, the Peru team preferred use of those technologies which enabled more social interactions like the Skype (Dalkir, 2016). The behavior by Peru team showed how they were concerned about social connection as opposed to Quebec team. The Quebec team, however, were much concerned with the completion of the task other than connections and interactions. From the cultural differences witnessed, there emerged different objectives where the Quebec team was focussing on making sure the website job was done, whereas the Peru team felt no ownership of the website.
Cross-culture and languages
Even though some of the objectives might have been achieved, the success of the project might have been hindered by the cultural differences between the two teams. In projects where different cultures are involved, there is always need to build a rapport through social interactions which never happened in this case (Dalkir, 2016). The project used technologies which limited social interaction. Thus, people could not understand cultural diversity. Project management in a cross-cultural setting requires a different approach, especially when dealing with a group which highly respects it cultural solidarity like the Vichama (Stein, 1995).
Language barrier limits success in any social setting. In the project, they used telephone calls and emails. In a project where people do not understand each other's language, the techniques could not achieve much. KM management requires effective communication and understanding of the key issues which can only be achieved when the groups were more interactive and had a common language (Dalkir, 2016).
Hierarchies and statutes
For effective KM in any organization, there is need of clear leadership structure to show how information flow, and role assignment. Lack of leadership was evident in the case study considering that the Peru team took the project as just social interaction with family, friends and building trust. There was a lack of leadership to show out clear framework and team guidance (Dalkir, 2016). Competency is always core to a team leader to give proper guidance something which was lacking in the case study. The lack of leadership was clearly manifested when both teams had different priorities (Abdullah et al., 2005). The Quebec team had opted to manage a short term project, whereas the Vichama opted for a collaborative partnership. From such contradicting interest, it can give a clear impact of having proper leadership on the success of KM.
The KM Tools and KM Techniques Applied in the Case Organization
In a global environment, it is paramount that organizations are capable of reaching out their customers and partners effectively so that collaboratively achieve their business objectives. In this project, the two teams depended so much on the use of technology aided interaction such as e-mail and telephone calls. There has never had been any face-to-face meeting between the three set of teams, and this has been complicated by the fact that the team member is from different national backgrounds making it hard to communicate well.
The techniques of Emails and Telephones were employed by all sets of teams that were involved in this project. In particular, the teams began the project through telephone calls through which they set the objectives of the project despite the fact that they were limited by the translations and cultural issues. Use of e-mail as a means of communication inhibits social interaction among people; it is hard to discuss, hence limits the level of understanding as there is a lack of that body expression which enhances understanding. Use of telephone and e-mails makes training, coaching and mentoring less effective since these require some level of face to interaction.
When compared to other techniques like the Skype, the methods limit peer to peer knowledge sharing, social networking, and storytelling. This makes the two factors the most hindrance to effective collaboration between the two groups. For effective collaboration, the teams would have settled for those technologies such as video conferencing, teleconferencing, Skype and at least one face to face meeting especially at the beginning of the project to have that social attachment and rapport since they originated from different cultural backgrounds. The use of e-mails and telephone calls might have affected the success of the project due to the low level of collaboration associated with the technologies.
Comparing with Wiig KM model
In the wiig model, there are four stages of knowledge management which are building knowledge as a personal experience, holding knowledge, pool knowledge and finally use of knowledge (Abdullah et al., 2005). In the model, knowledge acquisition is taken to be a community, an organization and individual's process. In the case study the situation was similar where the researcher gathered knowledge through use of questionnaires. This was then built and taken to a post-mortem for better synthesis and validity tests to approve the conformity as occurs in the wiig's model. The information was then taken through analysis before being used to inform people. From the activities of the case study, it can be concluded that the process conformed to the model.
References
Abdullah, R., Selamat, M., Sahibudin, S., & Alias, R. (2005). A Framework For Knowledge Management System Implementation In Collaborative Environment For Higher Learning Institution. Knowledge Management Practice.
Beck, S. (2003). Skill and Competence Management as a Base of an Integrated Personnel Development (IPD) - A Pilot Project in the Putzmeister, Inc./Germany1. Universal Computer Science, 9(12).
Bose, R. (2004). Knowledge management metrics (1st ed.).
Braganza, A., Awazu, Y., &Desouza, K. (2016). SUSTAINING INNOVATION IS CHALLENGE FOR INCUMBENTS (1st ed.).
Butler, T. & Murphy, C. (2007).Understanding the design of information technologies for knowledge management in organizations: a pragmatic perspective. Information Systems Journal, 17(2), 143-163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2007.00237.x
Dalkir, K. (2016). Knowledge management in theory and practice (1st ed.).
Husted, K. &Michailova, S. (2002). Diagnosing and Fighting Knowledge-Sharing Hostility (1st ed.).
Jennex, M. &Olfman, L. (2002). Organizational Memory/Knowledge Effects on Productivity, a Longitudinal Study (1st ed.).
Leonard-Barton, D. (1992). Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Strat. Mgmt. J., 13(S1), 111-125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250131009
Liebowitz, J. (2012). Knowledge Management Handbook. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.
Ngai, E. & Chan, E. (2016). Evaluation of knowledge management tools using AHP (1st ed.).
Nonaka, I. (2016). The Knowledge-Creating Company (1st ed.).
Nonaka, I. & Konno, N. (2016). Building a foundation for knowledge creation (1st ed.).
Senge, P. (1990). The leader's new work:Building learning organizations (1st ed.).
Stein, E. (1995). Organization memory: Review of concepts and recommendations for management.International Journal Of Information Management, 15(1), 17-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0268-4012(94)00003-c
Vestal, W. & Lopez, K. (2016). What’s in Your KM Program?: Assessing Your KM Strategies and Approaches (1st ed.).
Walsham, G. (2001). Knowledge management: The Benefit and Limitations of Computer Systems.European Management, 19.
