Page 243 -

232 MANAGING KNOWLEDGE WORK AND INNOVATION

knowledge exploitation – or aim for a combination of both (but typically with
more emphasis on one than the other). In Chapter 2 we saw that many knowl-
edge-intensive firms compete primarily on the basis of innovation, developing
new products processes and services for clients. Work practices in these con-
texts can be thought of as largely craft-based and closely resemble the work
of traditional artisans, relying largely on the creation and integration of scarce
expert knowledge that workers have developed over time. The major difference
between these knowledge-intensive firms and traditional artisan firms is that
that the products are often intangible and knowledge-based. For example, Sci-
enceCo often develops new products or services for clients in the form of intel-
lectual property. Advertising and public relations campaigns are other examples
of knowledge-based products developed for clients. The design of knowledge-
intensive work in these settings is, therefore, very different from that advocated
by Taylor. We can characterize this as a change from simplified, clearly defined
and individualized job design to complex, problem-oriented, loosely defined
and team-/project-based job design. Management and the knowledge work-
ers employed focus predominantly on knowledge exploration – creating new
knowledge. These firms are often quite small and entrepreneurially driven.
In this kind of craft-based context, firms place far less strategic emphasis on
knowledge exploitation – re-using existing knowledge – as knowledge is created in
practice and integrated within the context of self-forming and self-managed project
teams. The discussion around the types of innovation and innovation diffusion in
Chapter 9 emphasized, however, that knowledge exploration in, and of itself, is not
particularly valuable. Innovations have to diffuse, be adopted and be implemented
by users (clients) for knowledge exploration to generate competitive advantage for
these firms. The work conducted in ScienceCo, for example, only generates profit
for the firm if clients are satisfied with the outcomes produced. In order for clients
to make use of the products, processes and services developed by ScienceCo, the
innovation needs to be implemented within the client organization.
Chapter 3 discussed the emergence of new, more fluid and modular or
project-based (inter) organizational forms which have been enabled by develop-
ments in ICT. In these contexts much of the work is geographically dispersed
across individuals, projects and organizations and is largely conducted and
co-ordinated through ICTs. Chapter 6 also discussed a recent trend in outsourc-
ing and offshoring some forms of knowledge work which firms do not consider
part of their core competencies, specifically knowledge work that is highly reliant
on codified knowledge such as IT-based services. Typically these connected firms
are large and well-established in their sectors, offering recognized products and
services on a global basis. Management’s overarching aim in these types of orga-
nization is to operate and respond to competitive demands in a dynamic manner.
Often this means perpetually looking to make efficiency savings and identify new
markets and new product/service offerings. In these types of firm, innovation of
core products and services is typically incremental rather than radical. The main
strategic aim is therefore to exploit the organizational knowledge that already
exists across individuals, teams and projects around the world, such that this

6/5/09 7:21:37 AM
9780230_522015_11_cha10.indd 232
9780230_522015_11_cha10.indd 232 6/5/09 7:21:37 AM