UNESP

[Report to Prof. Otavio Oliveira about

knowledge management, quality management and the relationship between them.]

Evelyn Bender Fernandez

[11-09-2013]

[ This inform develops the ideas gathered from papers by various authors. First concepts are developed purely for the management of knowledge, then a short introduction to quality management and ISO 9001 standards, for then relate the two concepts.]

2

Knowledge Management

Introduction and definitions.

With the rapid growth of knowledge economy, knowledge management has gradually

developed into an independent academic field and a large number of researchers have begun to examine knowledge management.

Every day members of an organization use what they learn from the knowledge that is available to them to take advantage of the opportunities and solve the problems they face.

Knowledge management facilitates this by bringing ‘‘order to ‘ the chaos of infoglut’ with powerful organizational, search and retrieval technologies that enable employees to find and focus on business’’ (Darwin Magazine, 2001).

In recent years, knowledge management (KM) has attracted considerable interest from the academic community. A growing number of organizations have included knowledge management into their strategies and have as a result reported:

Business process efficiency improvements;

Better-organized communities;

Higher staff motivation (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). So what is knowledge management? IBM and Lotus used this definition of knowledge management when developing their

entry into the knowledge management arena: ‘‘a discipline that systematically leverages content and expertise to provide innovation, responsiveness, competency, and efficiency’’ (Pohs, 2001). While Microsoft prefers to state that ‘‘Knowledge management is nothing more than managing information flow; getting the right information to the people who need it so they can act on it quickly’’ (Gates, 1999). The American National Standards Institute proposes to define knowledge management as ‘‘the production, mediation, and use of knowledge; the management of intellectual capital’’ (ANSI/GKEC, 2001).

Peter Drucker brings us a more concise definition: ‘‘the coordination and exploitation of organizations knowledge resources, in order to create benefit and competitive advantage’’ (Perseus Publishing, 2002).

3

Yet none of these definitions are completely accurate, nor are they completely inaccurate. The definition of knowledge management changes from company to company, even from initiative to initiative.

Explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge

There are two types of knowledge: explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge. Nonaka et

al. (2000) and other authors such as Kikoski and Kikoski (2004) describe explicit knowledge as what can be embodied in a code or a language and as a consequence it can be verbalized and communicated, processed, transmitted and stored relatively easily. It is public and most widely known and the conventional form of knowledge which can be found in books, journals and mass media such as newspapers, television internet etc. It is the sort of knowledge we are aware of using and it can be shared in the form of data, scientific formulae, manuals and such like. Patents are an ideal example of explicit knowledge in a business context.

In contrast, tacit knowledge is personal and hard to formalise – it is rooted in action,

procedures, commitment, values and emotions etc. Tacit knowledge is the less familiar, unconventional form of knowledge. It is the knowledge of which we are not conscious. Tacit knowledge is not codified, it is not communicated in a ‘‘language’’, it is acquired by sharing experiences, by observation and imitation (Kikoski and Kikoski, 2004; Hall and Andriani, 2002). Tacit and explicit knowledge are complementary, which means both types of knowledge are essential to knowledge creation.

Explicit knowledge without tacit insight quickly looses its meaning. Knowledge is

created through interactions between tacit and explicit knowledge and not from either tacit or explicit knowledge alone (Nonaka et al. 2000).

Competitive advantage will only be gained if companies value their tacit knowledge, as

explicit knowledge can be known by others as well.

Knowledge sharing

In the emerging knowledge-based society, major emphasis of organizations is placed

on the processes of knowledge sharing, which are increasingly seen as crucial to organization’s success (Barrett et al., 2004). The fact is that organizational success can be

4

based on its ability to share the knowledge embodied in organizational routines from one organization unit to another (Szulanski, 1996) as well as to improve their capabilities by assimilating new technology (Gilbert and Cordey-Hayes, 1996). This argument is developed by Cohen and Levinthal (1990), who suggest that the knowledge sharing is a critical factor in an organization’s ability to respond quickly to change, innovate and achieve competitive success.

A growing body of empirical evidence indicates that organizations that are able to

share knowledge effectively from one unit to another are more productive and more likely to survive than organizations that are less adept at sharing knowledge (Argote and Ingram, 2000; Argote et al., 2000; Baum and Ingram, 1998).

Approaches to sharing knowledge

A significant proportion of the contemporary literature suggests that the mechanisms

which are used for organizational knowledge transfer can be classified into two dominant groups based on the tacit-explicit dichotomy.

Focusing on knowledge-as-a-category, two very different mechanisms in order to

transfer knowledge have emerged what we call them soft and hard mechanisms. The soft mechanism tends to transfer tacit knowledge through face-to-face interface. The hard mechanism represents transfer of explicit knowledge using information and communication technology (ICT).

Soft mechanisms

While considering soft mechanism, the emphasis is to share tacit knowledge between individuals. Davenport and Prusak (1998) suggest that ‘‘firms hire smart people and let them talk to one another and use water coolers, talk rooms, and picnics as examples of places where the transfer of tacit knowledge can take place’’. In this regard, various methods are recommended as suitable for facilitating the transfer of tacit knowledge. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) use ‘‘examples of apprenticeships, brainstorming camps, the use of metaphors and analogies, social network, and learning by doing as viable ways of tacit knowledge transfer’’.

Hard mechanisms

In the majority of the literature (Scarbrough et al., 1999; Storey and Barnett, 2001; Alavi and Leidner, 2001; Bhatt, 2001; Newell et al., 1999; Broendsted and Elkjaer, 2001; Huber, 2001), it is suggested that information and communication technology (ICT) could

5

play a central role in the transfer of an organisation’s knowledge. The fact is that ICT makes the transmission of explicit knowledge, which is in words, easier. Carbonara (2005) contends that such mechanisms have the capability to transfer the vast array of knowledge and to reduce the space and time barriers. This is also supported by the empirical evidence of the present study as the majority of the interviewees also prefer to use Email when knowledge is more formal and explicit. Resonating with this, Loeb et al. (1998) observe that technology-assisted tools enable coordination across geography and time, and logically integrate data spreading all over the world.

In addition to e-mail, interviewees employ a variety of other computer-mediated

mechanisms, including Lotus Notes, Instant Messaging and electronic bulletin board, to support knowledge transfer activities.

A proposed strategy that combines the existing mechanisms

To be effective and efficient, transmission mechanism must be tailored to the type of

knowledge being transferred. When it comes to transmission mechanisms, ‘‘effectiveness’’ refers to whether the receiver actually receives what the sender has sent; ‘‘efficiency’’ refers to the cost and speed of the transmission channels.

Both the mechanisms, soft and hard, have crucial role to play for the effective

knowledge transfer. There are strengths and weaknesses in all the mechanisms available for the transfer of knowledge. To overcome such difficulties, some respondents mention ‘‘hybrid’’ approach to knowledge transfer . As shown in Figure 1, by hybrid, the respondents mean a combination of soft and hard approaches.

A hybrid strategy allows organizations to seek an integrated approach to knowledge

transfer through the interplay between soft and hard mechanisms. In terms of the iceberg analogy, the benefits of both tacit and explicit knowledge can be gained if soft and hard mechanisms are allowed to interact. The interesting point is that the hybrid between the two mechanisms is found crucial as far as the successful accomplishment of knowledge transfer is concerned. Strictly speaking, a pluralistic stance that hybrid approach to knowledge transfer takes will provide powerful arguments for a more holistic view.

6

Figure 1 - A proposed strategy that combines the existing mechanisms.

Knowledge management challenges

Focusing only in technology

‘‘The biggest misconception that IT leaders make is that knowledge management is about technology’’, says Shir Nir, managing partner at Knowledge Transformation Partners (KTP), a KM consultancy based in New York City. ‘‘Usually people begin a KM project by focusing on the technology needs, whether they want a database or a portal. But the key is people and process’’ (Kaplan, 2002).

It is important to realize that knowledge management is less of a technical problem,

and more of a cultural problem. Technology can assist a well-established knowledge management initiative, but knowledge management will not succeed based solely on technology.

Learning

The common assumption is that getting people to learn is largely a matter of motivation, but learning is not simply a function of how people feel. It is a reflection of

7

how they think that is, the cognitive rules or reasoning they use to design and implement their actions (Harvard Business School Press, 1998).

Every action a person undertakes is accomplished based on the prior learning of that person. It is the prior learning that allows two individuals to accomplish the same task in radically different ways.

Six steps for successful knowledge management plus one

Kiri Nesbitt defines six steps for creating a knowledge management system. These six

steps are (Nesbitt, 2002): 1. Define the business goals the KM system will address. 2. Perform a knowledge audit to identify any duplication, gaps, and overlaps in an

organization’s knowledge base. 3. Create a visual map which describes units of knowledge and the relationships

between them. 4. Develop a KM strategy based on the content management, integration, search

mechanisms, information delivery, and collaboration. 5. Purchase or build appropriate tools for capturing, analyzing, categorizing and

distributing knowledge. 6. Periodically re-asses the value of the KM system and make necessary adjustments.

Plus one

While Kiri Nesbitt addresses six fundamental issues surrounding knowledge management he neglects the most obvious, and perhaps most important: culture.

No organization can successfully implement knowledge management without first

changing the culture of the organization. In knowledge management ‘‘people are themselves considered as part of the

organization’s overall capability . . . people are the crucial differentiators in business success’’ (Palmer, 1998).

8

Knowledge management requires an environment where an individual’s knowledge is valued and rewarded (Santosus and Surmacz, 2001). The organization’s culture must provide a ‘‘climate of continuity and trust’’ (Pan and Scarbrough, 1998).

187(…)

Basic approaches to quality management

Quality represents a summary of characteristics and features of a product (i.e.

product or service) which determines the fulfillment of the requirements for which the given product was/is intended. The Official definition of Quality – according to the International Organization for Standardization –ISO 8402 norms, which states: “Quality is a summary of the characteristics and features of products or services, determining their ability to satisfy established or anticipated needs or requirements”.

Over the past ten to twenty years, a wide variety of concepts have been put forward

for the creation of a quality management system – of which today, it is possible to recommend two approaches to the successful development of quality and its systematic assurance:

The (QMS) - Quality Management System. The QMS creates and maintains mechanisms capable of preventing unwanted

behavior through internal controls and independent (external) controls demonstrating credibility towards customers. This approach is based upon the documentation and standardization of procedures, their stabilization, and improvements in the form of corrective and preventive measures, and is based upon the standardized directives and models described in the ISO 900X set of norms. These norms depend upon –among other things- , the certification of the quality management system.

The(TQM) - Total Quality Management.

The first (TQM - Total Quality Management) models originally spread across Japan and the USA, and oriented on the exploitation of the knowledge and skills and abilities of people in resolving problems, constant improvement of processes, achieving customer satisfaction, ensuring success, and the development and satisfaction of co-workers, the management, and owners of an enterprise. This conception is rather, a philosophy of management, and which in practice is implemented in line with a variety of models.

9

Introduction at ISO 9001.

ISO 9001 is an international standard that specifies the basic requirements for a QMS.

The two primary objectives of the standard are to help an organization demonstrate its ability to meet customer and regulatory requirements and to enhance customer satisfaction. To that end, the standard contains key requirements clauses focusing on (1) the QMS in general, (2) management responsibility, (3) resource management, (4) product realization, and (5) measurement, analysis, and improvement. Originally released in 1987, the standard was updated in 1994, 2000, and 2008. As of December 31, 2007, at least 951,486 certificates had been issued worldwide certifying verified compliance with ISO 9001 [1]. ISO 9001 is supported by a broader family of standards. These include ISO 9000 (QMS fundamentals and vocabulary), ISO 9004 (QMS guidelines for performance improvements), and ISO 19011 (guidelines for quality and/or environmental management systems auditing).

ISO 9001:2000 is a development-based process model using eight quality

management principles. These principles are: 1. Customer focus, 2. Leadership, 3. Involvement of people, 4. Process management, 5. System approach to management, 6. Continuous improvement, 7. Factual approach to decision making, 8. Mutually beneficial supplier relationships. Zairi (2002) noted that these principles stress the importance of leadership as a key

driver for quality improvement. They focus on customer satisfaction as the end result, and highlight the importance of continuous improvement, measurement, and learning.

10

Managing knowledge contributed by ISO 9001:2000

Faced with global competition, more demanding customers, rapidly shrinking product life cycles, and shorter response times, organizations are now pursuing the competitive strategy of achieving higher levels of product value and, in turn, generating greater customer satisfaction. These goals and demands have been met by implementing knowledge management techniques (Johannessen and Olsen, 2003). Knowledge management (KM) will provide knowledgeable information to employees in order for them to make decisions that will promote continual and consistent improvement (Lim et al., 1999). Besides, a well-managed quality will now become a competitive advantage to attract more customers (Chin et al., 2002).

Zetie (2002) mentions that KM can also be directly linked to total quality through the realization that an organization’s quality manual is the depository of its process knowledge – what Blackler (1995) calls encoded knowledge. In this perspective, an ISO 9000 quality manual can be seen as one kind of encoded knowledge and can facilitate knowledge storage, knowledge transfer and finally, knowledge application. In his research work, Miyashiro (1996) highlights the usefulness of an ongoing assessment process such as ISO 9000 for creating shared experiences, which form the building blocks of organizational memory. Working together in preparation for ISO 9000 audits creates shared understanding as well as common memories, and ISO documentation houses those memories for future workers.

In addition, ISO 9000 also represents a guideline to build an efficient quality system

and to provide learning effects. As a codebook, ISO 9000 provides a process of knowledge codification (Be´ne´zech et al., 2001). Meanwhile, According to Bravener (1998), the information system required for ISO 9000 is not just a database with predefined reports; rather, it is the support for trouble-shooting, decision making and knowledge management. Zuckerman (2000) discusses the ISO 9000 revisions and their connection to the knowledge age. He points out that ISO 9000 encourages information sharing as a key to the internal auditing of a knowledge management system; this reciprocal sharing overcomes communication barriers existing in an organization, as well as facilitates knowledge flow. All these characteristics are essential for knowledge management practices.

11

ISO 9001:2000 process-based knowledge flow

Knowledge flow is concerned with developing channels or networks between

knowledge providers and seekers and seems to be the most practical area in knowledge management (Shin et al., 2001). Since ISO 9001:2000 processes contain various forms of knowledge, and provide a ready framework for structuring an organization’s knowledge (Heng, 2001).

Organizations that effectively employ ISO 9000 must have developed an information

system that allows for the sorting, selecting and utilizing of documents and information (Zuckerman, 2000).

When quality information is used to make decisions to solve problems for promoting

a continuous and consistent improvement in quality, it can be converted into knowledge (Lillrank, 2003).

In addition, infrastructure such as information technology (IT) tool is the basis of the

KM system and the driver which facilitates KM activities (Lin et al., 2002). Information technology (IT) has a pivotal role to play in improving communication and coordination. Thus, when these components are aligned strategically, effective knowledge management opportunities evolve (Berawi, 2004). A KM conceptual framework which integrated ISO 9000 processes, quality information system and infrastructure is proposed to guide a company in developing its knowledge management practice for continual improvement toward customer satisfaction. Figure 2 shows this conceptual framework.

Figure 2 – A KM conceptual framework.

12

Quality information for facilitating knowledge management.

Quality improvement information is intended to stimulate the efficiency of the

organization, to increase its competitive advantage in the market and to better respond to its customers’ needs and expectations. It also provides opportunities for knowledge creation. When an organization’s performance falls below expectations, knowledge can be re-used and new knowledge can be integrated with existing knowledge to develop and improve performance (Sharkie, 2003). In addition, a company which treats customer complaints as a valuable form of message communication is likely to benefit because dissatisfied consumers can be converted into loyal customers by a prompt and effective response to a complaint (Devasagayam and DeMars, 2004).

The organizations that effectively utilize ISO 9000 have developed a documentation

system. It is a key manifestation of knowledge and provides a way for the successful distribution of knowledge (Heng, 2001). On the other hand, knowledge flow within other activities (36.1 percent) is usually informally structured and relies on social networking in which employees and management share tacit knowledge.

Tacit knowledge is in general more difficult to transmit than codified knowledge; it

travels particularly poorly between organizations. ISO 9001:2000 communication activities, which is a driving force for tacit knowledge distribution in organizations (Jaffrey, 2004), that provide person-to-person contacts tend to promote such tacit knowledge flow. Communication is two-fold: external communication in customer complaints and perception as well as supplier ability for supplying product; and internal communication in establishing quality-control guidelines across-the-board for employee and management responsibilities.

ISO 9001:2000 may be insufficient for tacit knowledge flow. Such a dilemma may be

overcome through the assistance of organizational culture infrastructure for facilitating knowledge management that we discussed above.

To complete the idea presented Figure 3.

13

Figure 3 – An ISO 9000 process–based knowledge management system architecture.

ISO 9001:2000 offers an initial model for an organization that wants to facilitate

knowledge flows to encourage the management of corporate knowledge and effectively enhance the firm’s competitiveness.

References

Call, D. (2005), “Knowledge management – not rocket science”, Journal of Knowledge management , Vol. 9, No 2.

Davis, J., Subrahmanian, E. and Westerberg A.(2005), The ‘‘global’’ and the ‘‘local’’ in knowledge management”, Journal of Knowledge management , Vol. 9, No 1.

Jasimuddin, S. (2008), “A holistic view of knowledge management strategy”, Journal of Knowledge management , Vol. 12, No 2.

Lin, C. and Wu, C. (2005), “Managing knowledge contributed by ISO 9001:2000”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 22 No. 9.

14

Seidler-de Alwis, R. and Hartmann, E. (2008), “The use of tacit knowledge within innovative companies: knowledge management in innovative enterprises”, Journal of Knowledge management , Vol. 12, No 1.

Vorakulpipat, C. and Rezgui, Y. (2008), “An evolutionary and interpretive perspective to knowledge management”, Journal of Knowledge management , Vol. 12, No 3.

Yu, K. and Ma, Z. (2010), “Research paradigms of contemporary knowledge management studies: 1998-2007”, Journal of Knowledge management , Vol. 14, No2.

Tucková, Z and Tucek, D (), “New trend in the quality management”, Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Faculty of Management and Economics.

Sousa-Poza, A., Altinkilinc, M and Searcy, C (), “Implementing a Functional ISO 9001 Quality Management System in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises”, International Journal of Engineering, Vol. 3, No3.