|
Services: Knowledge Portals · Knowledge Map · Knowledge Network · Book of Knowledge · NEWS· INFORMATION
Channels: General Business · Business Technology · E-Business · Knowledge Management Community: Join the Network! · Global Network · Events Calendar · Executive Jobs |
|
Posted by Denham on March 14, 2000 at 13:53:08:
Nancy Dixon's new book "Common Knowledge, How companiesthrive by sharing what they know" Harvard Business School Press 2000 gives 5 knowledge transfer methods that result from the interaction between the intended receiver (similarity of task and context), the nature of the task (how routine & frequent) and the type of knowledge (explicit vs. tacit) being transfered.
Serial transfer:
Same team, same task, different settings. After action reviews, learning histories and set meetings, open diaglog, local facilitation.Near transfer:
Explicit knowledge of frequent & routine tasks moved across organizational boundaries. Electronic dissemination, supplemented by personal interaction, 'push', best practices are shared where context is not an issue.Far transfer:
Tacit knowledge is moved by coaching and consulting, same task different context, reciprocal exchange, peers travel to assist.Strategic transfer:
Infrequent and non-routine, complex system, knowledge is gathered by specialists, multiple 'voices' are synthesized mostly in realtime.Expert transfer:
Explicit knowledge is pulled from forums, summarized and recorded in terms of solutions, rules and distinctions. Context is the same but the task differs, e.g. technical questions to 2nd level helpdesks.Somehow the whole notion of knowledge transfer does not sit too well with me, feels too much like an object is being exchanged rather than an individual or group learning experience!
Are we starting to see greater clarity and the emergence of some KM theory here? I'm thinking of Dixon's transfer types, KM models from Don, Bo Newman and others, knowledge validation practices from KMCI, ontologies and classifications of tool sets, KM strategy opitions.....
What do you think?
- Re: Knowledge transfer Mohamad Haitan 21:35:15 03/21/00 (0)
- Re: Knowledge transfer- Review of Common Knowledge Bo Newman 22:05:58 03/20/00 (1)
- Another view of Common Knowledge Denham 00:03:51 03/21/00 (0)
- Re: Knowledge transfer Mahei 18:29:22 03/16/00 (2)
- Transfer vs. sharing Denham 21:56:40 03/18/00 (1)
- Re: Transfer vs. sharing Jack Vinson 11:46:25 03/21/00 (0)
Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums
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]
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