Knowledge, Innovation and Developing a Learning Culture - Assignment Example

Knowledge, Innovation and Developing a Learning Culture. Introduction We live in a knowledge world. Almost all walks of life have been impacted by a deluge of knowledge. Knowledge gives us more freedom to bank upon our strengths and fight our weaknesses. Knowledge has certainly had profound effects on the way we do business. There is hardly any aspect of business that has not become knowledge driven. Knowledge provides managers with multiple options in decision making. A whole new discourse has developed around Knowledge Management in the business policy and practice. We will study how it is affecting the study of Human Resource Management in recent times. Paradigm Change from Capital to Human Resource Departments of business and industry like Process Control, Logistics, Production, Inventory Control and Strategic Management have greatly benefited from the ‘knowledge’ revolution. However, Human Resource Management traditionally been considered from administrative angle alone, lags behind. Incidentally tangible assets represent only 20% of the company’s assents now; a good 40% down from the figure of 60% of 80s (Aughton and Barton). Barton and Aughton (2006) suggest that intangible aspects like leadership and governance, know-how, tacit knowledge, credit ratings, plant flexibility, customer and employee royalty, informal processes, and brand strength are much more important factors when it comes to the future growth of expectations of investors. (Lev quoted by Barton and Aughton). An organisation’s chief resource is the Human Resource and their knowledge (Hartel et.al). “The neo-classical view of capitalism, in which capital hires labour may well be obsolete: in a modern corporation, it may be that labour hires capital in the sense that the level of human resource determines the speed and direction of firm’s growth and the capital required is then financed accordingly” (Odagiri, 1984). Fed on the staple diet of capital controlled economic systems theory, however, we find ourselves contesting these lines but they are certainly portentous of the events that are unfold in near future. HRM powered by the intangibles of knowledge and related ideas is almost in the centre stage of business operations. Knowledge, Innovation, Learning Culture and HRM It is in the maxim of knowledge related activities that the role of Human Resource Management has gained importance. It is being argued that Human Resource professionals have not done enough to evolve as strategic business partners. The role of HRM needs to be much more than that of Strategic partners (Ulrich cited by Barton and Aughton). Ulrich (cited by Hartel et.al) has presented a range of market value drivers ranging from leadership credibility, strategic direction, and ability to create capacities. HR Managers are being increasingly asked to acknowledge and incorporate concepts like Knowledge, Innovation and a Learning Culture into their theory and practice. As of now HRM lies at the starting of Learning Curve and a lot more needs to be done. Knowledge, Innovation and development of a Learning Culture lie at the heart of the change in HRM. We will briefly describe the three concepts to bring out the common thread that weaves them. Knowledge Management and Other Key Concepts Hartel et.al refer to knowledge as a coalescing of human experiences with information to transform from a ‘potential’ to ‘practical’ set of ideas that put into practice and yield competitive advantage. Hartel et.al a construct of tacit and explicit knowledge is further elaborated by Fahey and De Long (cited by Hartel et.al) as social and structured knowledge. Social or tacit knowledge develops as notions mostly in informal settings and structured knowledge develops in the formalised settings of an organisation. Ingraining them as knowledge gives the “know how” to perform. Organisational knowledge also resides in policies and procedures, technology, organisational behaviour and culture. For example Japanese companies like Honda, Toyota and Sony are known for their company specific culture. In whichever part of the world, they may operate; the Japanese companies generally do not compromise on their ethics and culture. Culture is set of shared beliefs, assumptions, and beliefs, which guide the members of an organisation. (Hartel et.al). When individuals continuously imbibe, share, proliferate factual and empirical knowledge, through a unique companywide system, it is said to possess a learning culture. The most effective way of becoming a learning organisation is to build capacity by thinking and acting in new ways, based upon acquiring new language. (Redding and Cottanello cited by Hartel et.al). Specifically, Redding and Cottanello (cited by Redding and Cottanello) feel organisations learn by reflecting, experimenting, observing and researching. Thus Hartel et.al (2006) find an intrinsic linkage between knowledge management and organisational learning. The learning culture creates an atmosphere ‘innovation’ that works through single loop learning of identifying problems and double loop learning of suggesting solutions (Hartel et.al) thus facilitating an environment for continual improvements in products and services (Ulrich cited by Hart et.al). Tidd, Bessant and Pavitt (cited by Hartel et.al) identify it as product innovation, process innovation, position innovation and paradigm innovation. Freedman and Parker (2006) sum it up as, “if we apply ourselves to a task that is new and different it is innovation” Now we shall dwell on the idea of as to how a company wide learning culture develops through knowledge and innovation. Organisations learn much similarly to individuals. according to Hartel et.al. Organisational learning follows the company wide course of knowledge acquisition, information distribution, information interpretation and organisational learning (Huber cited Hartel et.al).This brings us very close to identifying the modern day knowledge worker with innovation and organisational learning. It is knowledge worker who makes the nucleus of creating a learning culture through knowledgeable innovation. The conservative school associates knowledge with only higher hierarchical workers and those with higher education (Bentley cited by Hartel et.al) or specifically those working in Information Technology industry. However, Hartel et. al (2006) reason just because an employee is not a manager doesn’t mean that they are unable or unwilling to contribute to innovation and creativity. Some of the best ideas and solutions came from such employees because they were actually performing the task, as opposed to managers who oversee the functioning of the organisation. (Hartel et.al). In fact, George Stephenson credited with inventing the steam locomotive was an ordinary engine operator. Knowledge is an intangible combination of experiences and information which provides insides into decision making and develops and directs future behaviour. However, such a definition of knowledge worker that includes the blue collared workers would need Human Resource the Strategic Management theorist and practitioners to develop an all-encompassing theory that gives due accord to not just resourcefulness but also knowledge, creativity, and individuality of each worker in top down hierarchy. Kelloway and Barling (cited by Hartel et.al) take the debate forward by questioning the relevance, of all classifying workers as knowledge workers. “Isn’t calling them workers not enough?” Kelloway and Barling (2000) reason. However, we can address their concern by attributing a particular intellectual worth to each level of management of the company. The higher or more important the position of a worker in the decision-making structure of the company, the more is his/her intellectual worth. This way the Research and Development Department that is totally an intellectual exercise carries a premium value in the knowledge management discourse. But such simplistic vision of intellectual and creative realm of an individual much less that of a team or organisation is impractical and naïve. Companies and their Cultural Aura Strategic Human Resource Management automatically becomes Strategic Human Resource Knowledge Management and handling HR issues becomes all the more difficult for the HR managers. Legnick-Hall and Legnick-Hall (n.d) express the concern that in such a scenario the role of HR managers, as knowledge facilitators becomes all the more diverse requiring creative integration over traditional HR activities. Peter Drucker (cited by Hartel) concurs says that all the work that entails the use of ‘head’, desiring creativity and innovation is to be considered a ‘knowledge-based.’ Taking inspiration from these views, we can extrapolate, that no job, howsoever manual and repetitive it could be uses the cognitive and mental abilities of the worker. The role of HR managers increases manifold. In this scenario, the concept of knowledge as developed by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) comes off good. It is sharing tacit knowledge, creating concepts, justifying concepts, building an archetype, and cross-levelling. In other words a company that begins with the tacit knowledge held by its originators grows into a perennial, continual and infinite source of knowledge in a dynamic process of making innovations. Thus we can say that a company has a gross existence in form of its men, material, machinery, and money and an equally important intangible existence in the form of knowledge concepts. Let us for a moment consider the definition of Knowledge Management as used by Hartel et.al. Knowledge management refers to the process of developing and controlling the intellectual capital of employees, in other words, their work related knowledge. As for its benefits, Parker and Freedman (2006) state the intellectual capacity stand for sustainability, enhanced performance, innovation and competitive advantage. “The continuous identification and capture of role specific knowledge while facilitating easy access and use and exchange to create a competitive advantage.” (Parker and Freedman). Having institutionalised knowledge, we are now confronted with the problem of managing it from HR perspective. HRM and its Potential HRM pierces through the gross shell of the company to play the important role of a knowledge facilitator. The HRM functions not only increase in magnitude but complexity as well. Human Resource Management gets a complete makeover as it deals with a Learning Organisation (Peter Senge, cited Hartel et.al) that not only appreciates and encourages innovation and creativity but gets to harness its full potential. However, even with the Five Principles of Peter Senge, the HRM lacks the metrics for intellectual wealth, creativity and innovation. But the fifth principle of Systems thinking that emphasizes that nothing happens in isolation; and employees are a part of a greater part everything is connected to everything else allows calls for an all encompassing HR policy that doesn’t limit itself merely to a head count but creates a head account of intellectual wealth of company. “System Dynamics approach based on the philosophy that the behaviour of a system is principally caused by its structure based on policies and traditions; and the structure of an organization can be best represented in terms of underlying flows of various resource can helps us by tracing feedback loops, delays and amplifications in the knowledge management (Rodriguez et.al)”. The casual loop representing discreet flows of knowledge and knowledge based events can be traced in the form of flow diagram. Mentoring is one of the best ways to facilitate transfer of tacit knowledge. On the other hand, Evans (2004), feels HRM has a pivotal role in building a culture where informal culture is valued and supported. This entails identification of different learning resources, as well as physical positions where learning can take place. The culture of cross-boundary team working is crucial for knowledge to circulate freely in an organisation. In fact, gaining knowledge to promote innovation are essentials of a learning culture climate. Future—HRM holds the Key In this analysis Human Resource Management transcends its humble origins to exercise a strong yet flexible control over Knowledge, Innovation and Developing a Learning Culture. Hartel et.al emphasise more psychology based approach in the soft model of HRM, while Freedman and Parker (2006) make a case for adoption of emotional overtones in Strategic Human Resource Management. Value creation tends to attract and retain talent. Value is personal and relative to individuals and is determined by positive desire, which is emotional, Freedman and reason. Degler (1999) makes the suggestion to ‘think big, start small.’ The journey from the simplicities of the tangible to the intricacies the intangible cannot traversed in a single step. The need is develop a holistic approach (Hartel et.al) step by step in phases toward an end that fully amalgamates the HR Management and Knowledge in a dynamically working environment. The knowledge oriented Human Resource management also gets importance because of the fast diminishing employee retention rate. Ulrich (cited by Aughton and Barton) and Hartel et.al (2006) feel that job loyalty is on the wane. An employee lost is knowledge drained for along with his self, the employee carries away the years of experience, learning and expertise and may lend their competence to competitors. A friend turns a foe and what once was an asset becomes a liability. Conclusion The contemporary literature written in varying contexts and different perspectives hold a number of choices for a business to adopt a learning culture in its HRM practices. Learning culture imparts a dynamic flow of ideas which can keep the wheels of change always moving. This, in fact, is its beauty. Like a perpetual motion machine, once in motion, it keeps moving. Companies only have to choose to move in this direction. When? This is the most important question confronting the Boardrooms today. References: Legnick-Hall, Mark & Legnick-Hall, Cynthia A (n.d), “The Role of HRM in Knowledge Management” www.explorehr.org , Exploring HR Website, Accessed March 11th 2008. Aughton, Peter & Barton John (2001) Is HRM a Dinosaur in the New Economy? www.amerin.com.au, “Amerin Website” Accessed March 11th 2008 < http://www.amerin.com.au/images/Article101.pdf> Odagiri, Hiroyuki (1984), Growth through Competition, Competition through Growth: Strategic Management and the Economy in Japan, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. Parker, James & Freedman, Erica (2006), HR & Knowledge Management, A Vital Strategic Role, www.gmshrm.org “The Greater Miami Society for Human Resource Management Accessed March 11th 2008 < http://www.gmshrm.org/storage/docs/GMSHRMHRKnowledgeManagement.pdf> Rodrigues, Lewlyn L. R., Martis, M. S, (2004), System Dynamics Of Human Resource And Knowledge Management In Engineering Education, Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, October 2004, Accessed March 11th 2008 < http://www.tlainc.com/articl77.htm> Hartel, C, Fujimoto, Y, Strybosch, V, Fitzpatrick, K (2006) Human Resource Management: Transforming Theory into Innovative Practice, 1e, Pearson Education Australia. Evans, Christina (2004) Managing for knowledge: HRs strategic role (2003), Butterworth-Hienemann, Elseviers Science & Technology Publishing Degler, Duane (1999) Knowledge Management: the Human Perspective, www. www.ipgems.com. The IPGems Website,   Read More