www.jaijar.com

Is knowledge management much to do about the dichotomy between the generalist and the specialist.

“The process of Knowledge Management or KM incorporates the desire to expand our range of inquiry with the need to simplify our decisions.” (Wikipedia).

Simplifying our decisions. We are to decide over more and more disciplines. That is a fact.

Take for example Internet. Below are sumerized six out of the twenty-four categories at ezinearticles dedicated to the subject:

• Blogging-RSS
• Affiliate-Revenue
• Security
• Podcasting
• SEO
• PPC-Advertising

So there are twenty-four categories and each category probably will have its expert. The main expert on the topic. Then you will have authors who will write more about all of the areas.

Now you are managing a company where ten out of the twenty-four expertises are needed in the daily operation. How much should you know as a manager or even as an entrepreneur? You will most certainly not start a business if you do not know the first thing about it. Internet in this case.

But the more you are dealing with growth and the more people you are to direct, the more you must KNOW how to manage - - the knowledge.

The knowledge management function as described here is allocated with the generalist. He or she should know just enough to manage the knowledge of the others in the process.

It is the challenge to concentrate on what you need to know, rather than first trying to know it yourself. (This happens a lot however, and that is not strange if you think about it; you want to KNOW where you are…)

For example. Each expert will not only know through (to a certain dept) a specific topic, he or she will also have a certain approach in gathering this knowledge. You can think of someone who needs to examine in dept a certain topic itself, where the same kind of expert would more easily trust on the hint of another guru in the area.

Even amongst specialists there is a big variation in the organizing approach. As a manager you should focus on the process and on matching the different (individual) approaches. Without interfering with the knowledge of the individuals.

© 2005 Hans Bool

Hans Bool is the founder of Astor White a traditional management consulting company that offers online management advice. Astor Online solves issues in hours what normally would take days.
You can apply for a free demo account.

Share This

In this article I will first describe and will clarify the term management. After that the political process will be depicted. The purpose of this article is to discuss the management as a part of the political process.

The Concise English Dictionary includes the definition of
politics as ‘prudent and sagacious as well as crafty, scheming and
artful’. This implies politics as having both well meaning
characteristics in addition to another more sinister side. Political
processes tend to take place in democracies where no single body has
absolute power. To determine the best way forward groups of
individuals with differing views compete to have their ideas adopted
as policy. The political process consists of constructive debate and
argument between these groups followed by some form of voting system
to identify which view has the majority support. During this process
it is inevitable that other forms of pressure will be brought to bear
apart from just simple academic argument. For example allegiances are
often formed behind the scenes on a “if you scratch my back I’ll
scratch yours” basis. This interpretation of a ‘political process’ is
supported by Kakabadse in Armstrong who states that ‘politics
is a process, that of influencing individuals and groups of people to
your point of view, where you cannot rely on authority’. He also goes
on to discuss the role of politics in organisations where he states ”
political behavior in an organization could be desirable or
undesirable”. Armstrong also points out how politics can be
destructive in an organisation, mentioning behaviour such as secret
meetings and hidden decisions as well as excessive and
counter-productive lobbying. On the other hand he also illustrates the
legitimate use of politics and presents a case where a personnel
director set about influencing people indirectly to get a proposal
accepted at a board meeting knowing there would be opposition.

With respect to management there have been many definitions put
foreword over the years. Fayol in Martin whose work on
management dates back to 1916, saw management as an activity. He
identified five aspects to it; planning, organising, commanding,
coordinating and controlling. More recently in 1941 Follet in Sturdy
states it as being ‘the art of getting things done through
people’. The benefits of this definition as suggested by Sturdy
are that it suggests the concept of management as an art by combining
the idea of achieving something tangible, whilst involving the human
dimension. On the other hand he also critiques this definition as he
says it lacks rational techniques, does not include non human
resources, the management of consumers or any political aspects to
management.

Child describes the definition of
management as being a muddle but refers to it as having three
interrelated aspects; an activity, an ideology and an elite social
grouping. Here we are beginning to see evidence of a change in
viewpoint of what management is thought to entail. It is perceived to
be less focussed on control, although Collins states ‘this does
not mean that control is no longer part of management’s role’.

It is not until we look at later definitions, for example by Watson,
that we see a political content. He maps management as ‘SAMP’,
Science, Art, Magic and Politics. In this definition we are seeing
politics as part of management activity in which he acknowledges that
in order to be a successful manager an individual has to know how to
“play the game” in order to achieve his objectives.

Personal experience of political process

From the above definitions of management it is clear that earlier
concepts did not include any political element or take on board any
human motivational factors. However more recent writers on management
do clearly acknowledge a political element. Andrews records
these different eras of management thinking, from scientific
management to the more recent guru theory. Handy in his work
suggests that all organisations can be mapped onto four different
types of culture. These cultures still include ones of a scientific
management background as well as the more modern view of guru theory.
He identifies four organisational cultures, which he labels as role,
power, task and person. However by examining each of these in turn I
intend to show through personal experience that political processes
are taking place in each of them. In the following paragraphs I will
argue that no matter which organisational culture is adopted there is
always a political element to the management within the organisation.

When I first graduated I worked for Vickers Shipbuilding and
Engineering Limited (VSEL). VSEL’s main activity was building
submarines for the nuclear deterrent. It was a very traditional
British engineering company with a ‘role’ oriented culture. This
combination of industry sector and organisational culture matches the
model of Handy , who predicts that long product life cycles and
monopolies often adopt a ‘role’ type of culture. Having worked for the
company for several months and completed my initial task, the next
project was delayed for several months. In order to keep busy I
suggested a temporary move to another department, where I knew they
were short staffed and had a large amount of work outstanding. This
suggestion however was not met with any enthusiasm by my line manager,
in fact quite the opposite. It was perceived as a threat and I was
literally shouted down with the statement that this was ‘the most
stupid idea and what was I thinking of’. I then spent the next few
months at my desk with nothing to do spending most of my time reading
the newspaper, until I finally resigned in frustration. With hindsight
I concluded that my department manager was an empire builder who
wanted to maximise the size of his department for personal gain. In
this instance his approach was to the detriment of the company as a
whole since it was clearly resulting in large amounts of inefficiency
and the loss of skilled labour.

Mary Anne Winslow is a member of Essay Writing Servicecounselling department team and a dissertation writing consultant. Contact her to get free counselling on custom essay writing.

Share This

Creativity can be defined as problem identification and idea generation whilst innovation can be defined as idea selection, development and commercialisation.

There are distinct processes that enhance problem identification and idea generation and, similarly, distinct processes that enhance idea selection, development and commercialisation. Whilst there is no sure fire route to commercial success, these processes improve the probability that good ideas will be generated and selected and that investment in developing and commercialising those ideas will not be wasted.

One of the useful methods of valuing ideas is to compare the type of idea with those types of ideas that have previously been most successful.

Franklin (2003) notes that some kinds of ideas are more successful than others. He notes six types:

a) Need spotting - involves actively finding an answer to a problem.

b) Solution spotting - involves finding a problem for a solution.

c) Market Research - ideas generated as a result of market research.

d) Random event - moments of serendipity when people stumble across answers they weren’t looking for.

e) Mental invention - pure random ideas with no previous knowledge of how they may be implemented.

f) Trend following.

Of these, the random event was the most successful (92.9%) with least failures (7.1%). However, this type of idea requires previous knowledge or experience on some level - for example, an individual who has worked in an environment previously may utilise that tacit knowledge to solve a problem that becomes evident later.

Very close to the above is solution spotting with an 87.5% success and a 12.5% failure rate. Again, this idea type requires previous knowledge: the innovator consciously seeks a problem to apply that knowledge to.

These topics are covered in depth in the MBA dissertation on Managing Creativity & Innovation, which can be purchased (along with a Creativity and Innovation DIY Audit, Good Idea Generator Software and Power Point Presentation) from http://www.managing-creativity.com.

You can also receive a regular, free newsletter by entering your email address at this site.

Kal Bishop, MBA

**********************************

You are free to reproduce this article as long as no changes are made and the author’s name and site URL are retained.

Kal Bishop is a management consultant based in London, UK. He has consulted in the visual media and software industries and for clients such as Toshiba and Transport for London. He has led Improv, creativity and innovation workshops, exhibited artwork in San Francisco, Los Angeles and London and written a number of screenplays. He is a passionate traveller. He can be reached on http://www.managing-creativity.com.

Share This