Learning by Doing

An organisation is able to generate new knowledge through conversations between people with experience: this is known as ‘learning by doing’. There are two key benefits to a business: internal performance, which is related to comparing costs, quality and customer satisfaction, and benchmarked performance, which is related to comparing the above against other businesses. Many studies that have investigated knowledge management initiatives fail to indicate that organisational culture is the main barrier to success and that a culture must be fostered.

Hutzschenreuter and Hortkotte (2010) have stated that cultural issues are an important aspect of the knowledge management process; developing

54

management trust is key and managers must carefully shape and adapt the corporate culture. Hence, to improve performance, a business must cultivate a culture that encourages and provides opportunities to communicate ideas, knowledge and experience (Tseng, 2010).

Arora (2002) points out that the most common knowledge management programmes involve development of a knowledge repository, and forming and nurturing communities of practice. Knowledge management has generated significant benefits for some companies but, at the same time, has been a fiasco for many others. Companies that follow a knowledge management programme with a clear and well set out vision, objectives and approaches tend to be more successful, whereas other companies, which jump on the knowledge management bandwagon with a focus on IT, are not. Aiming to reap some quick benefits without having any focus on the human side and a long-term strategy means businesses can fail. One of the objectives of a knowledge management programme is to avoid the re-invention of the wheel; using the learning process, problems of the past can be prevented. According to Arora (2002), the second objective of the knowledge management programme is to help the organisation to continuously innovate new knowledge which can then be exploited to create value. The third objective is to continuously increase the competence and skill level of the people working in the organisation. This will help in improving productivity and innovation, and in reducing the chances of making the wrong decisions in the long term. This contribution of employees is generally evaluated by experts, who may add their own tacit contribution to enrich it. Experts may be members of the communities of practice and therefore will have the responsibility to keep their part of the database updated. Using the communities of practice approach can drive strategy, start new lines of business, solve problems quickly, transfer best practices, develop professional skills and help in recruiting and retaining talents to drive competitiveness and innovation within a business environment (Arora, 2002). Should this approach be more common than it is in SMEs?

Arora (2002) states that KM is a tool that can support the creation of virtual KS. This is a software-based application that enables the sharing of knowledge related to the implementation of manufacturing excellence, using best practice

55

and improvement tools. Extensive literature and case studies support the belief that KM plays a key role in managing businesses successfully. The way in which an organisation learns is also a key factor in its effectiveness and potential to innovate and grow. The ability to learn, acquire, foster and integrate relevant knowledge within an organisation and also its value chain is recognised as one of the most important competencies for a firm to be successful. The failure of the early IT-based KMS has encouraged a strong tendency in KM research to focus on the softer approach of KMS development. This approach will encourage people to learn from each other through direct social communication and interaction. However, this softer approach to KM remains vague in its practical and systematic application to the successful implementation of a learning organisation. According to Arora (2002), SMEs are disadvantaged in this area due to reduced learning opportunities and a lack of trained staff and finance to develop and implement appropriate systems. Consequently, there appears to be a role for a software-based KM tool that can support organisations such as SMEs with limited resources to share knowledge to improve their business. This could be used by any type of business, regardless of size or industrial sector. In a survey of 24 businesses, the main barrier to improvement was the lack of knowledge of KM tools (Arora, 2002).

A practical methodology is required for developing a process-based KMS for supporting CI and asset management. Early, IT-based knowledge management systems were difficult to implement because they were either too narrow in scope, as in the case of expert systems, or too broad and shallow in scope, requiring extensive human interaction. Arora (2002) claims that this approach is one where, in learning organisations, individuals are constantly expanding their capacity to create and achieve desired organisational results through nurturing new ways of thinking. In addition, there has been some confusion with the repackaging of existing IT software that could have prevented a much wider use of knowledge management.

Arora (2002) states that a successful KMS also needs to create an environment that encourages users to seek knowledge for themselves or extract from sources within and beyond the boundaries of the company. This will encourage the creation of a learning organisation through the experience of implementing

56

processes that generate knowledge-driven CI. The structure of the process- based KMS through its application of information, knowledge and generating learning makes use of existing databases, provide information about processes and give people knowledge (Arora, 2002).

In order to design a valuable KMS, it is important to consider three key issues:

1. Users should not have to learn completely new technologies to use their knowledge more efficiently; instead they should use already known tools to create and obtain process knowledge.

2. Information awareness, accessibility, availability, input and maintenance must be taken into account to facilitate decision-making through the KMS.

3. Effective interaction between individuals and the IT system must be considered in the functionality of the KMS.

Arora (2002) supports the above points.