Knowledge Management Social Network Analysis

Knowledge Management

Social network analysis remains relevant to the contemporary social networking process. The mechanisms for social networking may have changed, potentially adding layers of complexity, but the underlying concept remains the same. The quality of one's social network and the abilities of that network are, if anything, easier to identify with modern technology. The chapters can be updated by including a brief explanation of the tools used in modern social networking. In addition, there are some ramifications to these tools, such as improvements in the speed of communication, the breadth of information available and the size of the social networks. The chapters should focus on these differences and how the model for social network analysis should be adapted to account for these differences.

Knowledge -- in particular tacit knowledge -- is a key source of competitive advantage as it can differentiate a business from its competitors. These competitive advantages derive from ideas and other intangible resources that are linked to the knowledge within the organization (Shani, et al., 2009). Knowledge applications and processes allow the company to do several things: to learn what knowledge lies within the organization; to understand the uses of that knowledge; and to be able to bring disparate sources of knowledge together to generate innovations. Knowledge management systems in particular allow the organization to unlock the knowledge that it holds -- in many organizations knowledge is kept within individuals or small groups, rather than shared throughout the organization. Effective knowledge management systems break down these barriers, increasing the distribution of the knowledge within the organization, but they also manage information in such as way as to avoid information overload, which is itself a barrier to effective use of knowledge.

3. Knowledge management strategy is important to address some of the key challenges businesses face. For example, they face retirement of key personnel, a need for constant innovation and the need to continually address inefficiencies. KM strategy helps the organization to understand the knowledge that the organization has and compare that with the knowledge that the organization needs -- a gap analysis. The strategies in the text are applicable to real world situations. Managers need to be able to evaluate their organizations and understand what knowledge is present -- if the strategies are impossible then the managers need to build better information-gathering systems. For a company such as FedEx a knowledge audit would be challenging because there are a number of firms within the corporation, many of which were acquired externally. Firms tend to compartmentalize knowledge, so it is worthwhile to undertake a knowledge audit but that same compartmentalization makes such an audit more difficult. An easier tactic that could be utilized would be to perform a gap analysis on each individual division, focusing on knowledge specific to success in each line of business such as Express or Office. This would focus knowledge management on steps that are easier to implement because it works within the "compartments" but also has a high degree of value for the firm in that it identifies areas of weakness at the business unit level.

4. In the article Managing Change, several ideas are presented that are critical to organizational innovation and success. The first is that change must come from the top. If the organization senses that leadership is not fully committed to the change process, the organization will lose motivation to change. Leadership is therefore the most critical component of the change process. It is also important that employees be allowed to express their views on the change and to have those views heard. Ultimately, for the change process to be successful, employee buy-in is essential. Employees will be more willing to buy into the process if they feel a part of it. If they are dictated to, and do not feel as though they have any input, particularly with respect to grievances, this will make it more difficult for the employees to commit to the change process. Lastly, the author points out that it is critical for managers not to send mixed messages. When this occurs, the employees become unsure of the direction of the company, making the change process all the more difficult. Management, therefore, needs to be unequivocal in terms of aligning policy, actions and words when describing the change process to the employees and to implementing the change process.

5. Knowledge management is important for all types of organizations. At present, large companies tend to have knowledge management strategies, because they can be integrated into information management strategies. IT and other technological companies have KM strategies, but so do many other firms. Creative firms such as advertising agencies, research firms such as pharmaceutical companies and firms whose business is based on acquired knowledge such as legal firms all place strong emphasis of knowledge management. In future, as more firms understand that knowledge is a crucial source of sustainable competitive advantage, all firms will see knowledge management as being important.

There are only limited amounts of education opportunities to acquire KM skills, although the subject does receive some coverage in business school now. KM programs are attractive because of the value of knowledge in today's business world and because of the increasing recognition that knowledge is one of few legitimate sources of sustainable competitive advantage. There will be more academic attention on the subject, which in turn will lead to more courses. The discipline will become more refined over time, which will help to expand the educational opportunities for KM and the number of different approaches to KM that are promoted in academia.

6. Wasserstein's ideas are promising, particularly in terms of his views on knowledge management. He views knowledge as being the ability to combine information in ways that create value. From a knowledge management perspective, his idea that the bankers do not know more than the CEOs is a good one. Knowledge management often focuses on making use of information that has been acquired, yet Wasserstein's philosophy offers that knowledge management also includes setting strategies for the acquisition of knowledge. The company's agents probe CEOs in order to gather the information that they need. The agent acts as the driver of knowledge acquisition, but does not supply that knowledge himself or herself. Instead, the company guides the process of knowledge acquisition and then applies the new knowledge to find the best deals for the clients.

Wasserstein's view is in some ways a chicken-and-egg argument. In order to ask the right questions, the agent must have a fairly strong knowledge level initially. Thus, it takes knowledge to gain knowledge. Wasserstein solves this at Lazard through his human resources practices, but that approach may not be reasonable in the short run for companies that have an entrenched employee base, or for companies that struggle to attract and retain the best talent. This leads to the view that a key to successful knowledge management is to build the best talent base, but not every firm can do that. The weakness in Wasserstein's view, then, is that this view is not universally applicable -- but this only highlights further the notion that knowledge management is one of the few true sources of sustainable competitive advantage.