Page 138 -

HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND KNOWLEDGE WORK 127

power, knowledge workers typically expect to be given interesting and varied
work rather than follow a prescribed routine (Davenport et al., 1996).
As discussed in Chapter 2 – and again closely intertwined with the scarcity of
their expertise in the marketplace – is the degree of autonomy which knowledge
workers enjoy in their work compared to other groups. In most other areas
of organizational life, control is exercised either directly over the work process
itself, by specifying the standards, methods and pace of work (behavioural con-
trol), or by specifying and measuring the outputs of work (output control). But
knowledge work is difficult for managers to observe, and its outputs are unpre-
dictable and hard to specify. As a result, knowledge workers enjoy a good deal
of autonomy. They may have to account for their time (as, e.g. with the use of
detailed timesheets for consultants, professionals and technical staff) but they do
not have to account for their actions in the detailed way that other employees
do. The result is that whereas other workers are often tightly controlled through
technological systems or behavioural routines, knowledge workers have more
freedom to determine their own work practices.
We need to be careful not to overstate how much autonomy knowledge workers
have. They do not typically enjoy the ‘strategic autonomy’ to set their own goals.
These are defined by top management and the needs of the organization’s strategy.
But, within this framework, they do have more ‘operational autonomy’ to decide
how they will achieve these goals (Bailyn, 1988). What this means in practice is
that the knowledge worker is able to exercise a good deal of discretion over key
behaviours affecting their performance. Behaviours such as cooperating with others,
protecting the organization, and self-development have to be volunteered by knowl-
edge workers and cannot simply be commanded by managers. Crucially, knowledge
sharing, which we have highlighted as a vital process in knowledge work, is also a
voluntary behaviour, and needs to be distinguished from the reporting of informa-
tion which is mandated by organizational routines (Davenport and Prusak, 1997).
This autonomy enjoyed by knowledge workers has been shown to be an
important ingredient in individual and group performance (Amabile et al.,
1996). It is underpinned not only by their own personal expertise but also by
their ability to acquire and exploit sources of knowledge and legitimacy which
are external to the organization. These external sources sometimes take the form
of professional associations or other formal bodies, but they are more often
informal, occupationally based networks which may span many organizations
or even sectors. In some instances, these networks can be just as important to
knowledge workers as their employer organization, providing them not only
with a defined professional identity but also with access to a knowledge base and
a wider range of job opportunities, as discussed more fully in Chapter 8.

Control and commitment

From the employer standpoint, one of the most important consequences of the
relative freedom enjoyed by knowledge workers is a heightened need to ensure
that their autonomy and discretion is applied for the benefit of the organization.

6/5/09 7:03:48 AM
9780230_522015_07_cha06.indd 127 6/5/09 7:03:48 AM
9780230_522015_07_cha06.indd 127