Performance-Centered Design of Knowledge-Intensive Processes

Massey, Andrew; Montoya‐Weiss, Mitzi M.; O'Driscoll, Tony

doi:10.1080/07421222.2002.11045700

Cited by 37 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A firm's success often depends on its ability to make efficient and effective use of the knowledge it possesses. While successful new product development is the application of knowledge innovation, knowledge dissemination prompts innovation by disseminating the firm's knowledge resources (Massey, Montoya-Weiss, & O'Driscoll, 2002).…”

Section: The Moderating Effects Of Marketing and Manufacturing Competmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge integration and innovation: Securing new product advantage in high technology industry

Yang

2005

The Journal of High Technology Management Research

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Moderating Effects Of Marketing and Manufacturing Competmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge integration and innovation: Securing new product advantage in high technology industry

Yang

2005

The Journal of High Technology Management Research

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This may be particularly true in virtual settings wherein participants rely heavily (if not entirely) on electronic media to communicate, may have little (if any) history of working together using various media, and may be separated not only geographically, but also culturally. For example, Massey et al (2002) found that different national cultures perceive media differently. Moreover, experience with topic, partner, and media have been demonstrated to impact media perceptions -leading to an evolving view of richness (Carlson and Zmud 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In order to address our research questions, we establish an asymmetric KT context where the sender has more knowledge about a topic than the receiver. This structure is widely observed in practice, e.g., technology transfer (Argote 1999;, new product development (Massey et al 2002), and distance education (Griffith and Neale 2001), and thus has significant practical importance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Role-Based Experiences, Media Perceptions, and Knowledge Transfer Success in Virtual Dyads

2006

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge transfer (KT) is the process through which one is affected by the experience of another. While many of the challenges of KT have been discussed in the literature (e.g., incentives, cognitive limitations), the challenge of KT in virtual settings has received limited attention. In this paper, our interest lies in exploring asymmetric KT where a sender has more knowledge about a topic than a receiver. We focus on a dyadic relationship between geographically dispersed sender and receiver units, supported by a multi-media technology environment. Drawing from the KT literature and Channel Expansion Theory, we specifically explore the evolution of and relationship between role-based experiences (e.g., with partner, topic, media) and media richness perceptions. Our results provide evidence that KT roles do matter relative to the acquisition of experiences and expansions in media richness perceptions. Despite some differences in acquired experiences, our results also suggest that KT partners converge in their perceptions of acquired experiences and evolve to shared (or congruent) perceptions of media richness. Finally, our results provide evidence that sender-receiver congruence in media richness perceptions influences KT success.

show abstract

“…Do they follow a debriefing process at the end of a project to document lessons learned? This view of Knowledge Use, which emphasizes embedding knowledge-sharing activities in the design of knowledge-intensive processes, is embraced by organizations that are successful in this regard [59]. Joachim Döring, president of Siemen's Information and Communication Networks, had his star salespeople map the complex solutions-selling process and identify broad categories of business and technical knowledge relevant to each stage of the process in order to consciously make knowledge sharing a routine practice [56].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Knowledge Management Success Model: Theoretical Development and Empirical Validation

Kulkarni

Ravindran

Freeze

2007

Journal of Management Information Systems

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. Ronald Freeze is a visiting Assistant Professor of Information Systems at the W.P. Carey School of Business, Arizona State University. He received his Ph.D. in Information Systems at Arizona State University. His broad research area is knowledge management. His research has been published in the Journal of Knowledge Management as well as AMCIS, ICIS, and HICSS conference proceedings.Abstract: We examine a knowledge management (KM) success model that incorporates the quality of available knowledge and KM systems built to share and reuse knowledge such as determinants of users' perception of usefulness and user satisfaction with an organization's KM practices. Perceived usefulness and user satisfaction, in turn, affect knowledge use, which in our model is a measure of how well knowledge sharing and reuse activities are internalized by an organization. Our model includes organizational support structure as a contributing factor to the success of KM Journal of Management Information Systems/ Winter 2006-7, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 309-347. © 2007 M.E. Sharpe, Inc. 0742-1222 / 2007.50 + 0.00. DOI 10.2753/MIS0742-122223031 1 3 1 0 KULKARNI, RAVINDRAN, AND FREEZE system implementation. Data collected from 150 knowledge workers from a variety of organizations confirmed 10 of 13 hypothesized relationships. Notably, the organizational support factors of leadership commitment, supervisor and coworker support, as well as incentives, directly or indirectly supported shared knowledge quality and knowledge use. In line with the proposed model, the study lends support to the argument that, in addition to KM systems quality, firms must pay careful attention to championing and goal setting as well as designing adequate reward systems for the ultimate success of these efforts. This is one of the first studies that encompasses both the supply (knowledge contribution) and demand (knowledge reuse) sides of KM in the same model. It provides more than anecdotal evidence of factors that determine successful KM system implementations. Unlike earlier studies that only deal with knowledge-sharing incentives or quality of shared knowledge, we present and empirically validate an integrated model that includes knowledge sharing and knowledge quality and their links to the desired outcome -namely, knowledge reuse.Key words and phrases: information systems success, knowledge management, knowledge management success, knowledge management systems, knowledge quality, knowledge reuse, knowledge sharing, system quality, user satisfaction.Knowledge management (KM) is evolving into a strategically important area for most organizations. Broadly, KM can be viewed as the process by which organizations leverage and extract ...

show abstract

Performance-Centered Design of Knowledge-Intensive Processes

Cited by 37 publications

References 51 publications

Knowledge integration and innovation: Securing new product advantage in high technology industry

Knowledge integration and innovation: Securing new product advantage in high technology industry

Role-Based Experiences, Media Perceptions, and Knowledge Transfer Success in Virtual Dyads

A Knowledge Management Success Model: Theoretical Development and Empirical Validation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About