Posted by Prac on July 31, 2002 at 03:47:48:

In Reply to: Re: Knowledge Sharing Incentives posted by TMalik on July 30, 2002 at 13:22:45:

Hi TMalik

Thank you for your response. Again, it seems as if you are painting a scenario of a mono-cultural organization. That would mean that the employees share similar cultural values and the organization support these by being sympathetic to this culture.

Mono-cultural organizations have pros and cons. One of the pros is that communication is more effective, and people do not have to explain their motives too much for everything. This leads to a fast-paced company where a lot can be done quickly. It may also lead to the organization being trapped in the weaker side of the culture, for example, individualism.

Let's assume communication is effective, and knowledge is valued as "money" by the culture.

One should find a higher level of competitiveness and knowledge sharing would become an arduous task, at a "self" knowledge level. People would share knowledge as they need to make progress and to increase their competitive position for "money" purposes.

In short, what I am suggesting is that the factor(s) around knowledge sharing (a translation of knowledge values) should be identified and a strategy implemented to capitalise on those factors to increase "self" knowledge sharing.

Yes, I am further suggesting that the knowledge should be classified into different levels, and the organization should prioritize the levels of knowledge it would like to see flowing though the organization.

It is obvious that not all knowledge of all individuals would be relevant all of the time. one would have to know which individuals have relevant tacit knowledge and how the organization, and the individual could benefit from it. Then one would have to speak to such individuals in the "language" they understand to provide them with an incentive for sharing that knowledge. They may choose to accept the incentive or not, or even choose to move onto a "less complicated" organization, which would simply pay them for a position, which represents the value of that personal knowledge.

As such, knowledge becomes a product, and each individual represents the marketing and implementation of that knowledge product. It is a tough one, but one would probably need excellent skills in convincing such people to go along with the organization's wishes.

You could try a survey, but if the culture suggests that surveys are a sign of weakness, or an invasion of privacy, then one would have to rethink the method and approach. One would probably have to "pay" people to complete the survey. The world has really changed, hasn't it?

I think there is a bottom line here. If people want to get access to the smarts of individuals, they have to be at least as smart as the individuals they want to benefit from. If an individual detects lack of smartness, he/she will not cooperate effectively. Make sure smart people interact with smart people. I call this intellectual compatibility for relationship building and eventual sharing.

You'll find these relationships already established within this hypothetical organization. Exploit them, if you can. ;-)

All the best.

---

Follow Ups:

• Re: Knowledge Sharing Incentives TMalik 20:34:33 08/01/02 (7)
  • Re: Knowledge Sharing Incentives prac 15:18:09 08/02/02 (6)
    • Re: Knowledge Sharing Incentives-Research TMalik 21:11:03 08/02/02 (5)
      • Re: Knowledge Sharing Incentives-Research Riva Gianluca 14:46:00 08/05/02 (1)
        • Re: Knowledge Sharing Incentives-Research TMalik 08:39:55 08/06/02 (0)
      • Re: Knowledge Sharing Incentives-Research Prac 10:39:21 08/05/02 (2)
        • Re: Knowledge Sharing Incentives-Research TMalik 14:29:53 08/05/02 (1)
          • Re: Knowledge Sharing Incentives-Research prac 14:23:07 08/06/02 (0)

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: