Page 165 -

154 MANAGING KNOWLEDGE WORK AND INNOVATION

Another issue in understanding the problems with this kind of KMS is to
reflect on why some knowledge may not readily lend itself to capture and codi-
fication. There are a number of reasons for this, including:
1. Difficulty: Some knowledge may just be too difficult to express in written
form and so may be more effectively communicated through face-to-face
interaction or learning by doing. For example, it may be far easier to simply
show a person how to set up, log on and use a computer than to ask them to
follow a set of detailed written instructions on how to do this. The complex-
ity of computer manuals and the continued attempts by designers to create
‘user-friendly’ help services attests to this. The telephone helpline where
knowledge can be communicated through two-way interaction is often pre-
ferred to the text-form help databases available on the computer itself.
2. Uncertainty: Some knowledge may be too uncertain. For example, I may feel that
I ‘know’ that the best way to design a training course is to include humour and
anecdotes. However, this is based on personal experience and intuition, and so I
am uncertain of its accuracy. I am therefore not likely to write it down (in case it
is wrong), although I may well share this ‘knowledge’ informally.
3. Dynamism: Some knowledge may be subject to continuous change. For
example, ‘process mapping’ attempts to articulate and represent in written
form the underlying processes involved in work tasks. However, organiza-
tional routines are subject to almost continuous change such that by the time
the processes are mapped they are almost immediately out of date or wrong
in some detail.
4. Context-dependency: Some knowledge may be highly context-dependent. For
example, knowledge about how customers react to a particular new humor-
ous marketing campaign is likely to be unique to a particular country, given
what we know about national predispositions in humour. Reusing the same
campaign in a different country, ignoring the importance of context, is likely
to prove ineffective and may even produce the opposite effects to those
expected.

5. Cost: Some knowledge may cost more to codify than to learn by trial and error.
For example, writing down in detail instructions about how to use a simple
mechanical device, like a stapler in an office environment, is not likely to prove
very useful. This may sound like a trivial example, but it does not take much
imagination to realize that there is an awful lot of material ‘written down’ in
an organization, which is rarely if ever referred to.
6. Politics: Some knowledge may be politically too sensitive to codify. For exam-
ple, very important knowledge when managing a project relates to who is a
good team player and who is likely to be obstructive and difficult. It is very
unlikely that someone will formally share this knowledge with others, stating
on a database that ‘Sue is a pain to work with!’ (and in any case it might well
be considered libelous if it were formally codified).

6/5/09 7:05:10 AM
9780230_522015_08_cha07.indd 154
9780230_522015_08_cha07.indd 154 6/5/09 7:05:10 AM