The knowledge retrieval matrix: codification and personification as separate strategies

Abstract

Previous discussions of knowledge transfer within multinational corporations tended to focus on the process as an isolated phenomenon and on the factors that impede the process. Less attention has been given to how the individual knowledge worker retrieves or identifies, and then decodes knowledge accessed from the corporate memory. We suggest that multinational companies (MNCs) solve knowledge retrieval problems by implementing virtual communities of practice-intranet-based collaborative forums. Codification and personalization strategies have previously been emphasized as an either-or solution. These virtual communities of practice combine the codification and personalization strategies, simultaneously utilizing the advantages of two approaches.

Knowledge Sharing Intentions among IT Professionals in India

“…Knowledge can be defined as a combination of experience; values, contextual information and expert insight that help evaluate and incorporate new experience and information [9].Knowledge sharing is critical to a firm's success [7] as it leads to faster knowledge deployment to portions of the organization that can greatly benefit from it [34].…”

Assessing the value of human factors initiatives

“…One relevant topic is KM, which draws on a range of disciplines, including cognitive, social and information sciences, as well as knowledge engineering, artificial intelligence and economics. While much of the KM literature is concerned with knowledge storage and IT systems, there are also more people-reliant approaches and thinking (Gammelgaard and Ritter, 2005;Scarbrough, 2003). Ali (2001) also draws a similar delineation of processes within the KM discourse characterizing:…”

Diffusion of Knowledge in Organization From Cultural and Network Perspective

“…It is used to share explicit knowledge and requires its retrieval that consists of searching and decoding processes. IT devices enable a seeker to find needed piece of information, but deciphering the information and gaining its meaning in specific context is much more difficult (Gammelgaard & Ritter, 2005). The culture might help in bridging the contextual gap between the sender and the receiver through providing shared meaning for organizational symbols, behavior, and proceedings.…”