Abstract

The aim of the article. The aim of the article is to analyze development of knowledge management infrastructure (KM infrastructure) at various stages of knowledge management evolution at organization. The results of the analysis. KM infrastructure is an important issue of the improvement of existing knowledge management systems. KM infrastructure could be defined as a set of interrelated organizational factors that ensure long-term operation and development of KM and support organizational processes of knowledge capture, share, accumulation, transfer, and use. Theoretically the concept of KM infrastructure is close to the concept of «ba» – enabling context, space, conditions needed to manage knowledge flows effectively. However, these concepts are not identical and the differences between them are highlighted and discussed in the study. Content analysis of the academic literature devoted to KM provision allowed determining major components of well-developed KM infrastructure. It consists of common knowledge, physical space, human resources management procedures, IT, organizational structure and culture. Their specific roles in KM functioning are discussed. It is shown that KM evolution at organization is associated with the development of corresponding KM infrastructure. At the spontaneous stage employees exchanged data and information on demand and knowledge processes were rather sporadic and badly organized. KM infrastructure incorporated mainly common knowledge (in tacit form) and physical space for job-related communications between employees. Growing awareness of knowledge value at high management levels leaded to development of human resources management procedures specific to KM processes support. These procedures were directed mainly at accumulation of personal knowledge through vocational training and enhancing organizational knowledge basis through recruitment of highly qualified employees. The attempts to codify and store valuable information were intensified as well. Next stage in KM development was related to revolutionary growth in opportunities to store, share and transfer explicit knowledge caused by wide-spread usage of information technologies (IT). Sophisticated IT tools became an important component of KM infrastructure although IT did not meet managers’ expectations in terms of cost-result ratio to full extent. The next social and behavioral stage in KM development is characterized by shifting the focus of managers attention to the broad range of social factors vitally needed to support generation, share, transfer and use of both tacit and explicit knowledge. Organizational culture is recognized as crucial enabler of organizational knowledge processes and the most important component of KM infrastructure. At the integration stage KM is seen to be embedded totally in innovation management system providing permanent business renewal and competitiveness with all components of KM infrastructure reaching high levels of their development. Conclusions and directions for future research. The evolution of KM systems associated with corresponding development of KM infrastructure. The transition to higher KM stages is accompanied by an increase in the number of KM infrastructure components involved as well as by their complication and enhancement. Further researches in this area should be aimed at discovering the impact of essential organizational features (business area, strategic goals, size etc.) on KM infrastructure development. 

Keywords: knowledge management, knowledge management infrastructure, ba, tacit knowledge, explicit knowledge

JEL Classification: D83, M12, M14, O15, 031.

Cite as: Sytnik, N. (2016). Development of knowledge management infrastructure in organization. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 1, 126-136. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2016.1-11

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

References

1. Von Krogh, G., Ichijo, K., & Nonaka, I.O. (2000). Enabling knowledge creation: how to unlock the mystery of tacit knowledge and release the power of innovation. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press [in English].
2. Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998). The concept of «ba»: Building a foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40, 40-54 [in English].
3. Chou, S.W., & Wang, S.J. (2003). Quantifying «ba»: an investigation of the variables that are pertinent to knowledge creation. Journal of Information Science, 29, 167-18 [in English]. 
4. Pam, S.L., & Leidner, D.E. (2003). Bridging communities of practice with information Technology in pursuit of global knowledge sharing. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 12, 71-88 [in English]. 
5. Zhang, M.J. (2007). An empirical assessment of the performance impacts of IS support for knowledge transfer. International Journal of Knowledge Management, 3(1), 66-85 [in English].
6. Bryceson, K. (2007). The online learning environment – A new model using social constructivism and the concept of «Ba» as a theoretical framework. Learning Environment Research, 10, 189-206 [in English]. 
7. Nomura, T. (2002). Design of «Ba» for successful Knowledge Management – how enterprises should design the places of interaction to gain competitive advantage. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 25, 263-278 [in English]. 
8. Becerra-Fernandez, I., & Sabherwal, R. (2010). Knowledge Management: Systems and Processes. Armonk (N.Y.), London: M.E. Sharpe [in English]. 
9. Uriarte, F. (2008). Introduction to knowledge management. Jakarta: ASEAN Foundation [in English]. 
10. Nonaka, I., Takeuchi, H., & Umemoto, K. (1996). A theory of organizational knowledge creation. International Journal of Technology Management, 11, 833-845 [in English]. 
11. Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. London: Routledge, (reprint 2009) [in English]. 
12. Alvarenga Neto, R.С.D., & Choo, C.W. (2010). The post Nonaka concept of ba: eclectic roots, evolutionary paths and future advancements. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 47 (1), 1-10 [in English]. 
13. Orlova, T. &, Gaponenko, A. (2008). Upravlenie znaniіami. Kak prevratit znaniіa v capital [Knowledge management. How to turn knowledge into capital]. Moscow: Eksmo [in Russian]. 
14. Lambe, P. (n.d.). Why KM is hard to do: infrastructure, KM and implementing change. www.greenchameleon.com. Retrieved from http://www.greenchameleon.com/uploads/Why_KM_is_ hard_to_do.pdf [in English]. 
15. Harrington, J., & Voehl, F. (2008). Sovershenstvo upravleniіa znaniіami [Knowledge management excellence]. Moscow: RIA Standarty i Kachestvo [in Russian]. 
16. Sytnik, N.I. (2015). Evolіutsiіa mеnеdzhmentu znan v orhanizatsii [Knowledge management evolution in an organization]. Business-Inform, 10, 413-418 [in Ukrainian].