Crowdsourcing the Future: the Foresight Process at Finpro

BS4S02 – Management Theories and Practice

Assignment Two

With reference to the article, “Crowdsourcing the Future: The Foresight Process at Finpro,” and broader literature, critically evaluate the extent to which digital tools and the capacity for mass participation have addressed knowledge management and learning challenges.

[pic 1]

Submitted by

Introduction

Knowledge management may be defined as “the systematic management of an organization’s knowledge assets for the purposes of creating value and meeting tactical and strategic requirements; knowledge management consists of the initiatives, processes, strategies, and systems that sustain and enhance the storage, assessment, sharing, refinement and creation of knowledge”. (Alan Frost, 2012). Further, it is “the coordination and exploitation of organizational knowledge resources, in order to create benefit and competitive advantage” (Drucker, 1999).  It is important to note that apart from the acquisition of ‘historical’ knowledge, knowledge management also includes the creation of new knowledge.  

With the recognition, acceptance, and implementation of knowledge management as an organizational asset, firms are better able to protect and use their knowledge, to learn from mistakes and successes, and to improve, develop and innovate. As such, many digital tools have been developed to aid in knowledge management.  These tools are collectively known as knowledge management systems.  These various digital tools or knowledge management systems are extremely helpful, if not indispensable, in supporting knowledge management within organizations.  This paper seeks to critically evaluate to what extent these digital tools address organizations’ challenges, requirements or need for adequate knowledge management.  

To best achieve this objective, this paper is structured as follows: first, an understanding is sought of the definition of knowledge, both from an individual and an organizational perspective. Second, an appreciation is then sought of the theory and principles of knowledge management from the perspective of the organization.  Following this understanding or grounding, an analysis is then done on the various digital tools available to organizations, assessing the extent to which these tools address these requirements of knowledge management.  

Individual Learning

Knowledge may be defined as “knowledge or skill acquired by instruction or study. (Merriam-Webster.com). Learning, therefore, has two meanings: the acquisition of skill or know-how, and the acquisition of knowledge or know why.  The learning of individuals and organizations is inextricably linked: while all organizations have individuals who learn, an organization can also learn.  This is somewhat of a paradox as learning at the organizational level does not depend on any one individual but is dependent on the learning of individuals. Daniel H. Kim (1993).   All organizations learn, and all organizations at some point begin learning through their individual employees.  “In the early stages of an organization’s existence, organizational learning is often synonymous with individual learning because the organization consists of a small group of people and has minimal structure.  As an organization grows, however, a distinction between individual and organizational learning emerges, and a system for capturing the learning of its individual members evolves”. Daniel H. Kim (1993).  

According to Russel Ackoff (1989), individual learning is best explained as a pyramid.  Known as the DIKW hierarchy, the lowest level is data, followed by information and knowledge with wisdom at the apex. Data, information, and knowledge include what the individual already know while wisdom examines the basic principles of knowledge to produce or generate what is not known.  Ackoff suggests that all movement from one stage to another (knowledge creation) is through understanding and this knowledge is cognitive and analytical by nature.  Nonaka states that all knowledge is either implicit or explicit (tacit): explicit knowledge is able to be documented while implicit knowledge is of such that it is difficult to codify. Nonaka (1994).  Another, contrasting viewpoint, is that of Polyani who states that “all knowledge is either tacit or rooted in tacit knowledge!” Polanyi (1966).  Therefore, according to Polyani, all knowledge may be or is capable of being documented.  According to Bennet D. and Bennet A (2008), more recent research in the field of knowledge management has proceeded further in identifying that there are variations of the diverse types of tacit knowledge and even between the differences between implicit and explicit knowledge.

Organizational Learning

 “The organizational learning process involves capturing, exchanging and creating knowledge in a continuous interaction of both tacit and explicit knowledge” (Boutha A. 2008).  

Elements of Organizational Learning

In order for organizations to embrace learning and knowledge, there are four critical or main elements these organizations must address or embrace.  

Leaders: The leaders of the organization must be supportive and committed to the organization learning goals.  They must establish clear visions and goals and be champions of organization learning and should act and be perceived as role models by doing and not merely by speech.

Culture: The organization should embrace a culture of learning with the objective of continuous improvement.  Incentives, measurement, and feedback should be the main ingredients of every organization’s learning culture.

Structure: Organizational structure should be aligned so as to clearly identify persons responsible for the assimilation, storage, application, and dissemination of knowledge.  The organization structure should cater for the timely distribution of information to persons who need it.    

Knowledge: Whatever the organization learns and embraces must be reflected in everyday practice and workflows.  Processes should be observed to capture and apply learning.  Technology platforms should be embraced.

Learning at the organizational level is more difficult and dynamic than that of individual learning.  This is because the process of learning is fundamentally different in organizations as obviously, these organizations are nonhuman entities. Organizations learn from individuals:  “Individuals are the primary learning entity in an organization” (Dodgson, 1993).  Organizations also achieve wisdom as individuals do by practicing and learning using their experiences – that is, learning by conceiving the acquired knowledge, acting and then reflecting upon the consequent actions.