KNOWLEDGE MGMT | FORUMS | EVENTS | HELP | PRESS ROOM | @BRINT


About BRINT | News About BRINT | Help & FAQs | Users Guide | Advertise Here |
Welcome to the World's No. 1 Resource for Business Technology Management and Knowledge Management
@Brint.com
SEARCH [HELP]

Knowledge Management Think Tank is now: BRINT Global Knowledge Network.


Re: the truth, the only truth and nothing but KM


[ ] [ Post Followup ] [ Discussion Forums ] [ Discussion Index ]

Posted by Daan de Koning on August 24, 1999 at 04:50:14:

In Reply to: Re: the truth, the only truth and nothing but KM posted by Reilly Atkinson on August 23, 1999 at 22:08:42:

Reilly,

Indeed I have a thirst for knowledge. As an individual, the more knowledge I have, the more I become aware of how little I actually know. And sharing knowledge with others is one way of trying to catch up.

One KM assumption is: Large organizations are not as flexible and adequate in adapting to market dynamics as small organizations are. KM is the attempt to flexibilize large organizations (shorter time-to-market, shorter product-life-cycles, shorter time for return-on-investment).

Say, for the argument, that this is what KM in business is about, then your conclusion is:
large organizations do not have the time, the money, the resources, nor the commitment needed to do KM (except at a superficial level). Or, in other words (my words): (Large) organizations do not work, at least not effective and efficient.

This, however can be tested in reality, for we just have to look at what happens today in the business world. In many markets todays trend is the merging of companies: the oil industry has recently seen a merger, in France this week the birth of one of the largest banks is about to happen, the automotive industry (Chrysler/Daimler), the plane industry (both the builders as the airlines), the IT industry, in all the industries you see that the little ones are eaten by the big ones.

What is the paradox we stumble upon here? For even you claim that for knowledge sharing I have to deal with smaller organizations, while the business trend is companies growing larger and larger? Or is the basic assumption (increased dynamics in markets) wrong?

If little is good (knowledge-wise spoken) then why is large percieved as valuable (at the market)?

Best Regards
Daan



Follow Ups:



Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

Subject:

Message:

[ ] [ Post Followup ] [ Discussion Forums ] [ Discussion Index ]


Download Our Articles and Interviews
[Guru Interviews] [Real Time Enterprise Business Processes] [IT Users Motivation] [IT Users Commitment] [Commitment and Motivation] [Inquiring Organizations] [Social Influences] [Customer Relationship Management] [Supply Chain Management] [IT Adoption and Utilization] [Managing and Measuring Knowledge Assets] [The Real Competitive Advantage] [Why IT and KM Systems Fail] [Myths About Expertise Management] [How 'Best Practices' Become 'Worst Practices'] [Beyond Information Ecology to Knowledge Ecosystems] [Knowledge Exchanges and Social Networks] [Why Expert Systems Aren't Enough] [KM for E-Business Performance] [Does KM=IT? Not!] [Other Articles and Interviews]



Top of Page

BRINT: 'Your Survival Network for The Brave New World Of Business'tm
Recommended by Business Week, Fortune, Wall Street Journal, Fast Company,
Business 2.0, Computerworld, Information Week, CIO Magazine, KM World,
Los Angeles Times, New York Times, and hundreds of other worldwide publications.

About BRINT | News About BRINT | Help & FAQs | Users Guide | Advertise

Make BRINT your Start Page | | Link to BRINT | Submit Articles

Terms of Use | Privacy | © Copyright 1994-2007, BRINT Institute, New York, USA