Spelling suggestions: "subject:"knowledgecentric"" "subject:"knowledgecontribute""
1 |
Knowledge-centric capabilities : a configurational approachCruywagen, Marie 12 1900 (has links)
Thesis (PhD (Business Management))--University of Stellenbosch, 2010. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT:
During the past 15 years knowledge management has emerged as a key new organisational
practice with numerous organisations implementing processes aimed at facilitating
knowledge creation, integration and sharing. With knowledge management positioned as a
strategic imperative, numerous studies have explored its resource-base and management
alternatives. These studies have played an important role in establishing knowledge
management as a field of inquiry within the business sciences, but a number of weaknesses
put knowledge management at risk of becoming another passing fad. Previous research tends
to prescribe a tool, method or way of looking at knowledge while disregarding any
differences in organisational context and displaying little attempt to differentiate
organisations in a meaningful way. This assumed homogeneity constitutes a deficiency in
knowledge management research.
The knowledge-based view of the firm emphasises distinct knowledge as the key source of
firm heterogeneity, and the role of the organisation as that of knowledge creation. This view
largely ignores the personal and social nature of knowledge, and the role of the firm in
providing the organisational context for creating, sharing and integrating knowledge.
Knowledge management, as an embodiment of the knowledge-based view, thus also fails to
explore organisational context as a possible source of competitive advantage, thereby limiting
the potential of knowledge management initiatives.
The central theme of the study is that the capacity to provide an institutional context for the
creation, sharing and integration of knowledge, henceforth the knowledge-centric capability,
rather than distinct knowledge, is the key strategic resource of the organisation. The objective
of the study therefore is to understand how different knowledge-centric capabilities configure
in different organisational contexts. The objective is achieved by addressing three research
questions, namely what dimensions can be used to describe a knowledge-centric capability,
what configurations of knowledge-centric capabilities emerge in different organisational
contexts, and why do specific configurations of knowledge-centric capabilities emerge in
specific organisational contexts?
Considering the philosophical foundations of the study, namely knowledge as personal, social
and context-specific and the organisation as an open, adaptive system, the study follows a
social constructionist research philosophy. The study’s focus on identifying emerging patterns or configurations of knowledge-centric
capabilities necessitates a configurational research approach. This allows the study to move
beyond uncovering relationships that hold across all organisations, affording the opportunity
to identify multi-dimensional constellations of conceptually distinct characteristics that
commonly occur together.
A sequential mixed-method research methodology is employed to address the research
objective and research questions. First a conceptual framework is developed from the extant
literature in order to identify the dimensions of a knowledge-centric capability. Next a theorydriven
survey, based on the dimensions of the conceptual framework, is employed to obtain
data from which the configurations of knowledge-centric capabilities are derived using
cluster analysis. Finally, four case studies are presented to explain the emergence of the
configurations within specific organisational contexts.
This research is important for two main reasons. First, it addresses the identified shortcoming
of existing research by providing a mechanism to explore an organisation’s knowledgecentric
capability following a context-sensitive approach. Second, the research demonstrates
that knowledge-centric capabilities can indeed be used to differentiate between organisations
at a strategic level. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING:
Die afgelope 15 jaar het kennisbestuur as ‘n belangrike nuwe besigheidspraktyk ontwikkel,
met talle ondernemings wat prosesse implementeer wat daarop gemik is om die skepping,
integrasie en deel van kennis te fasiliteer. Met die posisionering van kennisbestuur as ‘n
strategiese noodsaaklikheid, het verskeie studies die hulpbron-basis en bestuurs alternatiewe
ondersoek. Hierdie studies het ‘n belangrike rol gespeel om kennisbestuur as ‘n
navorsingsveld te vestig in die bestuurswetenskappe, maar ‘n aantal gebreke laat
kennisbestuur die gevaar loop om net ‘n verbygaande gier te word. Bestaande navorsing neig
om ‘n instrument, metodiek of manier voor te skryf om na kennis te kyk. Maar terselfdetyd
word enige verskille in organisasies se konteks geïgnoreer en is daar min aanduiding van ‘n
poging om organisasies op ‘n sinvolle wyse te onderskei. Hierdie veronderstelde
homogeniteit vorm ‘n gebrek in kennisbestuur navorsing.
Die kennis-perspektief van die organisasie beklemtoon unieke kennis as die belangrikste bron
van firma heterogeniteit, en die rol van die organisasie as dié van kennis skepping. Hierdie
uitkyk ignoreer grotendeels die persoonlike en sosiale aard van kennis en die rol van die
firma in die voorsiening van ‘n organisasie konteks vir die skep, deel en integrasie van
kennis. Kennisbestuur, as ‘n vergestalting van die kennis perspektief, faal dus ook om
organisasie konteks to ondersoek as ‘n moontlike bron van mededingings voordeel. Sodoende
word die potensiaal van kennisbestuur inisiatiewe beperk.
Die uitganspunt van die studie is dat die kapasiteit om ‘n institusionele konteks te voorsien
vir die skeppping, deel en integrasie van kennis, of te wel die kennis-sentriese vermoë, eerder
as unieke kennis die kern strategiese helpbron van ‘n organisasie is. Die doel van die studie is
dus om te verstaan hoe verskillende kennis-sentriese vermoëns konfigureer in verskillende
organisasie kontekste. Die doel word behaal deur drie navorsingsvrae te adresseer, naamlik
watter dimensies kan gebruik word om ‘n kennis-sentriese vermoë te beskryf, watter
konfigurasies van kennis-sentriese vermoëns tree na vore in verskillende organisasie
kontekste en waarom tree spesifieke konfigurasies van kennis-sentriese vermoëns na vore in
spesifieke organisasie kontekste?
Met inagneming van die filosofiese grondslag van die studie, naamlik kennis as persoonlik,
sosiaal en konteks-spesifiek en die organisasie as ‘n oop, aanpasbare stelsel, volg die studie
‘n sosiaal konstruksionistiese navorsingsfilosofie.
Die studie se fokus op die identifisering van patrone en konfigurasies van kennis-sentriese
vermoëns, noodsaak ‘n konfigurasionele-benadering tot die navorsing. Dit laat die studie toe
om verder te gaan as om bloot verwantskappe te identifiseer wat vir alle organisasies geld, en
stel die studie in staat om multi-dimensionele konstellasies van konseptueel-unieke
eienskappe wat tipies saam voor kom te identifiseer.
‘n Sekwensieële gemengde metode navorsingsmetodologie is gebruik om die navorsingsdoel
en navorsingsvrae te addresseer. Eerstens is ‘n konseptuele raamwerk uit die bestaande
literatuur ontwikkel om sodoende die dimensies van ‘n kennis-sentriese vermoë te
identifiseer. Volgende is ‘n teorie-gedrewe vraelys, gebaseer op die dimensies van die
konseptuele raamwerk, gebruik om die data te versamel waaruit die konfigurasies van kennissentriese
vermoëns met die gebruik van trosanalise. Laastens is vier gevallestudies ontwikkel
om die figurering van die konfigurasies binne spesifieke organisasie kontekste te verduidelik.
Hierdie navorsing is belangrik vir twee bepaalde redes. Eerstens adresseer dit die
geïdentifiseerde tekortkoming van bestaande navorsing deur ‘n meganisme te voorsien
waarmee ‘n organisasie se kennis-sentriese vermoë ondersoek kan word, deur ‘n kontekssensitiewe
benadering te volg. Tweedens demonstreer die navorsing dat kennis-sentriese
vermoëns inderdaad gebruik kan word om op ‘n strategiese vlak tussen organisasies te
onderskei.
|
2 |
Des organisations centrées processus aux organisations centrées connaissance : la cartographie de connaissances comme levier de transformation des organisations. Le cas de la démarche de "Transfert de Savois-Faire" chez Total. / From process centric to knowledge centric organizations : knowledge maps for organization transformation. The case of a "Know-HowTransfer" approach in Total.Sellin, Kelly 17 May 2011 (has links)
Depuis une quinzaine d’années, des démarches de knowledge management sont mises en place dans les organisations pour optimiser l’utilisation et le partage des connaissances entre les individus. D’une logique essentiellement « outil » dans un premier temps, ces démarches ont progressivement évolué vers une logique davantage centrée sur les interactions entre ces individus et leurs connaissances : c’est l’Organisation 2.0, dite « centrée connaissance ». Cette recherche propose d’identifier des leviers de transformation des organisations centrées processus – qui associent la notion de facteur humain à celle de risque – en organisations centrées connaissance, en considérant cette dernière comme une opportunité de développement. Elle s’appuie pour cela sur le transfert de connaissances, au coeur du knowledge centricity, en introduisant des cartographies de connaissances individuelles pourfaire émerger des réseaux d’acteurs. Réalisée sous forme d’une recherche-intervention chez Total, elle s’appuie sur le projet de « Transfert de Savoir-Faire » du Groupe. Cette recherche met en avant les forces des cartographies comme outils d’accompagnement au transfert de connaissances de par : leur capacité à identifier et à valoriser un patrimoine de connaissances à travers une approche centrée sur l’individu, leur capacité d’ouverture sur un réseau d’acteurs (et de connaissances), à créer une dynamique collective de partage. Enfin, elles constituent un outil de management intervenant notamment dans l’aide à la décision et la gestion des risques (associés à un management des connaissances), et sont une opportunité de dialogue entre les différents acteurs de l’organisation. La combinaison de ces résultats permet à cette recherche de contribuer aux travaux menés surle knowledge centricity, via l’introduction des cartographies de connaissances comme levier de transformation par la voie du transfert de connaissances. Cette recherche montre également les limites de l’introduction de ces cartographies de connaissances dans des organisations centrées processus : une structure matricielle forte associée à des stratégies d’acteurs en environnement changeant sont autant de freins au développement d’une démarche collective et globale pouvant aboutir à une organisation centrée connaissance. / For several years, knowledge management approaches mainly based on Information Systems are implemented to optimize the use and sharing of knowledge between individuals. More recently, this technical view has evolved towards a more human centric approach to enhance the value created from the human interactions: it the Organization 2.0, called “knowledge centric”. This research proposes to identify levers of organization transformation, from a process centric view - which associates human factor with the concept of risk - to a knowledge-centric organization, where knowledge appears as an opportunity. Thus, the focus is set on knowledge transfer, at the heart of knowledge centricity, by introducing individual knowledge maps in the organization in order to make actor networks emerge.This research is based on an intervention-research carried-out in Total to deploy a know-how transfer approach. The main results show the strength of the combination of knowledge maps and knowledge transfer for an organizational transformation: the identification of the intellectual resources of an organization through a human centric approach, the identification of actor (and knowledge) networks, the creation of a collective sharing dynamic, a management tool for decision support and risk management, and an opportunity for dialogue between the actors. Through these results, this research contributes to the work on knowledge centricity through the introduction of individual knowledge maps as means of promoting change through knowledge transfer. This research also shows the limits of this introduction in process centric organizations: a strong matrix structure associated with actors' strategies in a changing environment is hampering the development of a collective and global approach leading to a knowledge centricity.
|
3 |
Parametric Optimization Design System for a Fluid Domain AssemblyFisher, Matthew Jackson 22 April 2008 (has links) (PDF)
Automated solid modeling, integrated with computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and optimization of a 3D jet turbine engine has never been accomplished. This is due mainly to the computational power required, and the lack of associative parametric modeling tools and techniques necessary to adjust and optimize the design. As an example, the fluid domain of a simple household fan with three blades may contain 500,000 elements per blade passage. Therefore, a complete turbine engine that includes many stages, with sets of thirty or more blades each, will have hundreds of millions of elements. The fluid domains associated with each blade creates a nearly incomprehensible challenge. One method of organizing and passing geometric and non-geometric data is through the utilization of knowledge based engineering (KBE). The focus of this thesis will be the development of a set of techniques utilizing KBE principles to analyze an assembly which includes multiple fluid domains. This comprehensive system will be referred to as the Parametric Optimization Design System (PODS).
|
Page generated in 0.0354 seconds