The purpose of the main research question “how do knowledge management practices support the development of the organization and innovativeness?” was to find what benefits can be obtained when understanding the comprehensive picture of the organization’s KM processes to promote the development of the organization and innovativeness. Furthermore, the question was also intended to elucidate the KM elements that need to be understood to encourage the actors of the organization towards self-reliant innovation. Schilling (2015, p. 34) states that by combining the knowledge of different companies together to innovate, new pathways can be constructed between firms and individuals that otherwise would not be made. The organization external as well as internal knowledge utilization and co-operation in the innovation process were addressed in studies A, B, and C (Papers I, II, III). When the purpose is to innovate and create organizational readiness for change, it is crucial to allow room for individuals to make sense of the new situation (Armenakis and Bedeian, 1999). Furthermore, the organization needs to provide alternative pathways for individuals development to promote innovativeness.
The strategy of the organization can be seen as a policy for organization evolution, a framework that steers the future orientation. However, the strategy can be mystifying for the organization actors and engender confusion and ambiguity (as in study A, Paper I). The dialogue of the strategy at all organization levels offers a fruitful basis for innovativeness in the organization evolution. The actors of the organization operate the strategy and it is essential to give them a variety of ways to implement the strategy in the organization processes. The business strategy also needs a KM strategy (Hansen et al., 1999; Carlsson, 2004). Therefore, this research identified that the KM strategy did not materialize in the studies of the current research (studies A, B and C). Nevertheless, a KM strategy provides a systematic base for communication practices, competence development, future research and internal and external information policy, e.g. knowledge protection and IT system practices.
These elements call for attention in order to develop the organization’s operations under study.
Knowledge utilization and IT adoption are more or less the selection of resources, which is one of the organization evolution approaches (Van de Ven and Poole, 1995). The other models are variation and retention. Variation can be understood in the current research e.g. as an organization-external event that affects organization operations. Retention is the model that needed strengthening in the studied organizations. Retention includes persistence in the organization. However, in the current research, retention needed to focus on reforming new models of the organization instead of updating or maintaining the existing forms. The relevant information at the right time and for the right people protects information overload and clarifies the processes of the organization. However, the possibility to access and acquire unknown information needs to be given so that the individuals can generate an idea of new products, services or processes.
In technological transformation, organizations need to find ways to survive and resources to develop products, services or processes to stay competitive in the business markets. Technology transformation occurred in the studied organizations firstly because of the requirements of the technological environment and secondly, because of the pressure of regeneration (studies A, B and C) (E.g. Schilling, 2015) The technology-organization level infrastructure in the organizations succeeded but the human–technology interaction partly faltered (Papers I, II, III). IT systems should not be a barrier to knowledge acquisition or sharing, and the relevant open access to data and information is needed. However, besides the access to knowledge, competence development for IT
adoption is important, not only because of the system or database adoption but also for expressing the benefits of the IT for the operations and the actor’s work.
Future awareness may be understood as small development steps that statistically cumulate from small events and affect the larger population (Van de Ven and Poole, 1995, p. 523). Future events may occur abruptly or through the strategic planning of the organization. Therefore, preparing for the future is even more important but needs implementation and dialogue at all organization levels to become familiar with future planning (Paper IV). The future research was only implemented by people of a certain professional status in the researched organizations (Papers I, II, III mostly as a strategy work).
The previous development suggestions are more or less about the organization structures from the individual point of view. Selected practices or organization structures and ideas are retained but have an impact on the organization progression in the long run (Van de Ven and Poole, 1995, p.
531). The organization can have a positive change originating from the action of individuals.
Table 8 summarizes the empirical results of the functional KM practices that affect the innovation capability of the organization (studies A, B, C and D). The first part of Table 8 is the actionable organization-internal knowledge that emphasizes the data or information resources that were seen as barriers to knowledge resource utilization. The second part reveals the organization-external factors that offer both an opportunity and a barrier to innovativeness that need to be processed. The third item, IT adoption, is about the information systems as such and their utilization or the access to the systems that affect innovativeness. The last part, future awareness, expresses the external and internal future work factors and the place where the future design is done to promote innovativeness.
Table 8. Critical elements affecting the innovation capability of individuals in the empirical results
&ULWLFDOHOHPHQW 3URPRWH .QRZOHGJHSURWHFWLRQ [ 8QFHUWDLQW\ x )RUNQRZOHGJHSURWHFWLRQFOHDU
SUDFWLFHVDQGSROLF\IRU NQRZOHGJHDFTXLVLWLRQVKDULQJ DQGGRFXPHQWDWLRQ
&ULWLFDOHOHPHQW 3URPRWH ,QQRYDWLRQWDUJHW [ 8QFHUWDLQW\ x 2SHQLQQRYDWLRQWDUJHW
H[SUHVVLRQ
The KM elements that the actors of the organization need to evaluate in the innovation process are how they concern the actionable knowledge, IT adoption and future awareness, both from the viewpoint of the organization social and organization operations as well as the new innovation for the organization, e.g. process or technology innovation. Rogers (2002) defined the newness of innovation of knowledge, persuasion and decision on the innovation adoption. In other words, individuals evaluate the innovation whether to accept the innovation or not based on what he knows of the innovation or how to think of the innovation and make the decision of accepting or rejecting it. The individuals of the organization have the key to advance the innovation potentially onwards from the evaluation phase. There needs to be a negotiation of the innovation process in the organization: knowledge creation and sharing challenges, available IT resources, a co-creation and network policy and the time or financial resources for the innovation process. The emphasis is to encourage individuals to actively engender new ideas for products, services or organization processes.
73