13

Click here to load reader

Managing knowledge processes for value creation

  • Upload
    antonio

  • View
    223

  • Download
    9

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Managing knowledge processes for value creation

VINEManaging knowledge processes for value creationGiovanni Schiuma Daniela Carlucci Antonio Lerro

Article information:To cite this document:Giovanni Schiuma Daniela Carlucci Antonio Lerro, (2012),"Managing knowledge processes for valuecreation", VINE, Vol. 42 Iss 1 pp. 4 - 14Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03055721211207815

Downloaded on: 18 October 2014, At: 08:19 (PT)References: this document contains references to 34 other documents.To copy this document: [email protected] fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1482 times since 2012*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:Champika Liyanage, Taha Elhag, Tabarak Ballal, Qiuping Li, (2009),"Knowledge communication andtranslation – a knowledge transfer model", Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 13 Iss 3 pp. 118-131F. Javier Carrillo, K. Metaxiotis, T. Yigitcanlar, Hans#Dieter Evers, Solvay Gerke, Thomas Menkhoff,(2010),"Knowledge clusters and knowledge hubs: designing epistemic landscapes for development",Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 14 Iss 5 pp. 678-689Jie Yang, (2008),"Managing knowledge for quality assurance: an empirical study", International Journal ofQuality & Reliability Management, Vol. 25 Iss 2 pp. 109-124

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 465057 []

For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald forAuthors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelinesare available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The companymanages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well asproviding an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.

Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committeeon Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archivepreservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Dow

nloa

ded

by K

ING

MO

NG

KU

T U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F T

EC

HN

OL

OG

Y T

HO

NB

UR

I A

t 08:

19 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Page 2: Managing knowledge processes for value creation

GUEST EDITORIAL

Managing knowledge processesfor value creation

Giovanni Schiuma and Daniela CarlucciCenter for Value Management-DAPIT, University of Basilicata, Potenza, Italyand Institute of Manufacturing, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK, and

Antonio LerroCenter for Value Management-DAPIT, University of Basilicata, Potenza, Italy

Abstract

Purpose – Nowadays organizations have realized that knowledge, its effective use and the fastacquisition and utilization of new knowledge represent the only source of sustainable competitiveadvantage. In fact, an effective exploitation and management of knowledge resources are the basis ofthe development of those capabilities that ground the organization’s capacity to deliver successfullytargeted value propositions. During recent decades, there has been a growing interest in the processesof management of knowledge resources. Currently the debate on knowledge management processes isstill lively. The dynamics which link knowledge processes to value creation, the valuation of theirimpact on organizational performance and the role of some organizational and technological resourcesas enablers or restraints of successful knowledge management emerge as relevant topics to beinvestigated. This introduction to the special issue aims to develop some theoretical and managerialreasons explaining the importance of an effective management of knowledge processes to deal with theuncertainty, change, and turbulence of the current socio-economic scenario.

Design/methodology/approach – The approaches, evidences and insights discussed in thisintroduction are largely based on the discussion of the topics of the conference “International forum onknowledge assets dynamics” organized in June 2010 in Matera, Italy. At this conference, leadingexperts discussed the challenges and practices of measuring and managing knowledge resources tosupport value creation and business performance improvement of organisational systems.

Findings – The outcomes of this introduction and of all the contributions to the special issue reflectthe emerging discussion about the role of knowledge processes and, more generally, of themanagement of knowledge resources, in value creation. This discussion is largely focused on thedynamics at the base of the translation of knowledge processes and resources into value, highlightingproperly approaches and tools or application in different contexts of analysis.

Originality/value – This introduction, as well as all the contributions to the special issue, deal withdifferent aspects which are important in the discussion both of the role played by knowledge processesin achieving outstanding organisational performance and the approaches, tools, methods andtechniques to structure, organize knowledge resources and optimize their use in order to supporteffective organizational processes execution and value creation.

Keywords Knowledge management, Knowledge processes, Value creation, Organizations,Organizational effectiveness

Paper type General review

1. The questionThis special issue of VINE: The journal of information and knowledge managementsystems is devoted to the analysis of the role of knowledge and knowledge processes invalue creation.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0305-5728.htm

VINE42,1

4

VINE: The journal of information andknowledge management systemsVol. 42 No. 1, 2012pp. 4-14q Emerald Group Publishing Limited0305-5728DOI 10.1108/03055721211207815

Dow

nloa

ded

by K

ING

MO

NG

KU

T U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F T

EC

HN

OL

OG

Y T

HO

NB

UR

I A

t 08:

19 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Page 3: Managing knowledge processes for value creation

In the last decades, the pressure of global competition, the increasing productcomplexity, the relevant technology progress, the strong customer orientation havegradually forced companies to improve their capability to create and deliver value.Looking for new differentiators and drivers of bottom line performance, companieshave recognised the relevance of knowledge resources and their management as keysources of competitive advantage (Chase, 1998; Lev and Daum, 2004; McGaughey,2002; Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998; Peteraf and Bergen, 2003; Sullivan, 1999; Teece,2000, 2007). In particular, in line with the main strategic thoughts provided by theresources based-view (RBV), the competence-based view (CBV) and the knowledgebased-view (KBV), companies have realised that their sustainable competitiveadvantage results both from the possession of resources that are hard to transfer andaccumulate, inimitable, not substitutable, tacit in nature, synergistic, not consumablebecause of their use and the ways of combining and developing them.

The importance attributed to the deployment and exploitation of knowledgeresources to support and drive organizations’ performance improvement is proved bythe attention that, in the last decades, many companies have paid to theimplementation of knowledge management initiatives.

The knowledge management research stream is rich of case studies and empiricalresearches investigating and illustrating the managers’ interest for managingknowledge within organizations. It is possible to report a large number of differentknowledge management initiatives implemented within organizations with a widerange of managerial and strategic purposes. However, nevertheless the rich caserecord, it is still difficult to clearly assess why by managing knowledge resourcescompanies can improve their performances and progress their value creationdynamics. In addition, it appears quite difficult to prove the return on investments ofknowledge management initiatives due to the difficulty to rationally demonstrate andmeasure the benefits related to the development of knowledge resources.

Understanding if the development of knowledge resources and the implementationof knowledge management initiatives can really make a difference within anorganization, requires, among other things, to clarify the role of knowledge resourcesand knowledge processes into the company’s value creation dynamics and to explorethe direct and indirect network of relationships linking knowledge resources toorganization’s capabilities, organisational processes, performances objectives andstrategic value propositions.

This is an important issue, first of all, because not all organization’s knowledgeresources have the same strategic relevance and their importance can change over thetime and accordingly to the evolution of the organization and of its business. Manyknowledge resources within some organizations are just commodities, while in othersorganizations they can represent critical sources of value. The management attentionhas to be focused on those knowledge resources which represent strategic assets withinthe organization due to their relevance for the achievement of company’s business andperformance objectives.

Furthermore, a clear understanding of the strategic relevance of organizationalknowledge resources allows to define better focused knowledge managementstrategies as well as to link knowledge resources to strategy planning, executionand achievement.

Managingknowledge

processes

5

Dow

nloa

ded

by K

ING

MO

NG

KU

T U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F T

EC

HN

OL

OG

Y T

HO

NB

UR

I A

t 08:

19 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Page 4: Managing knowledge processes for value creation

From an academic point of view, in the last decades, the considerable interest inknowledge and its management as driving forces behind the creation of organizationalvalue has generated several studies.

Despite that, the research on this emergent subject appears still widely open to newtheoretical and practical contributions. Especially, more remains to be understoodabout the complex dynamics through which knowledge resources and knowledgeprocesses take part to company’s value creation (Adams, 2008; Carmel and Tishler,2004; Carlucci and Schiuma, 2007; Daum, 2002; Marr et al., 2004; Schiuma et al., 2007,2008).

The variety of ways of managing knowledge raises the questions of how knowledgecan be coherently and successfully converted in value, what are the “right” orappropriate processes to manage knowledge resources, how these processes cancontribute to improve companies’ capability to compete in today’s competitivescenario, which are proper tools supporting effective knowledge processes, whatpractical processes and systems can companies putting in place to support sharing andcreation of knowledge and, therefore, to contribute to sustainable value creation in thenew economy.

In this perspective, the contributions to this issue deal with the following questions:. How to fix the uncertainty and complexity of today’s business landscape by

leveraging knowledge resources?. How can organisations successfully manage knowledge processes?. How to transform knowledge into wealth creating resources?. What are approaches and tools to support knowledge processes?. What opportunities are provided by emerging knowledge management

technology?. What are the critical organizational and cultural issues involved in turning

knowledge management into value?

The selection of articles collected in this special issue is largely based on the works ofthe conference “International Forum on Knowledge Assets Dynamics – IFKAD 2010”that the guest editors organized in June 2010 in Matera, Italy. At this conference,organized and developed within an Italian National Scientific Research Programmes(PRIN 2007), leading experts explored the challenges and practices of measuring andmanaging knowledge resources to support value creation and business performanceimprovements of micro, macro and meso-organisations.

2. Explaining the rationale for managing knowledge processesIn the current competitive context, organizations have realized that knowledge, itseffective use and the fast acquisition and utilization of new knowledge represent theonly source of sustainable competitive advantage (Davenport and Prusak, 1998).Especially, they are increasingly aware that managing knowledge resources maximizebusiness opportunities and minimize the risk of missing opportunities (Chong et al.,2000).

In fact, an effective exploitation and management of knowledge resources are atbasis of the development of those organisational capabilities that ground thecompany’s capacity to perform business and deliver targeted value propositions.

VINE42,1

6

Dow

nloa

ded

by K

ING

MO

NG

KU

T U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F T

EC

HN

OL

OG

Y T

HO

NB

UR

I A

t 08:

19 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Page 5: Managing knowledge processes for value creation

The development of organisational knowledge resources through organisationallearning mechanisms and knowledge management processes, affects organisationalcapabilities (e.g. Andriessen, 2004; Hamel, 1994; Mills et al., 2002; Sanchez, 2001). Then,organisational capabilities are translated into performance and value consequenceswhen they are leveraged into products and services that, in turn, generate value forcompany’s stakeholders.

In sum the effectiveness and productivity of organisational processes, such asbusiness processes, support processes and decision making processes (Porter, 1985),and, consequently, the company’s ability to generate value, originates fromcause-and-effect chains activated by the proper management of organisationalknowledge resources (Carlucci et al., 2004).

Hence, value creation rests on cause-and-effect chains activated by the developmentof organisational knowledge resources through knowledge processes and learningmechanisms (see Figure 1).

It is therefore understandable why the extraction of value from knowledgeresources requires to an organization the capacity to conceive and implement in anintegrated way the organization’s strategy and value proposition (Glot and Berrell,2003; Srivastava et al., 2001), the organisational processes, the knowledge processes(Liebowitz, 2004) and the set of organizational and managerial activities and projectsdesigned for the development and exploitation of knowledge (e.g. teamwork, formal aninformal meetings, community of practice, adoption and use of ICT tools and so on).

Value creation through knowledge resources is achieved by implementing specificprinciples and processes including the contextual alignment of their applications withthe organization’s strategy (Marr et al., 2003). In other terms, the creation of valuethrough knowledge is conditioned by the manner in which knowledge resources aredeployed and managed through appropriate processes (Cuganesan, 2005) coherentlywith organisation’s strategy (Glot and Berrell, 2003; Srivastava et al., 2001).

During the last decade, a growing interest in the processes of management ofknowledge resources has been experimented. Several theoretical models andapproaches aimed to explain how organizational knowledge is created, transferredand crystallized have been produced. Often the proposed models and approaches haveused different terminology to denote similar knowledge processes. Therefore differentclassifications of knowledge processes have been proposed. This has producedconfusion and poses a threat to practitioners who are starting to get a grasp of the

Figure 1.The links between

knowledge processes andvalue creation

Managingknowledge

processes

7

Dow

nloa

ded

by K

ING

MO

NG

KU

T U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F T

EC

HN

OL

OG

Y T

HO

NB

UR

I A

t 08:

19 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Page 6: Managing knowledge processes for value creation

subject. This calls for a need of lexical standardization and the provision of a moreholistic understanding of knowledge processes.

Regardless their taxonomy, knowledge processes enable organisations to acquirenew knowledge for it to apply, store, share and preserve vital knowledge resources, soas to enhance the impact of knowledge on strategic goals achievement (Sveiby, 1997).

Knowledge processes run within or across organizational processes, and contributeto get the most out knowledge resources utilized in the organizational processes. Theyallow to structure, organize knowledge resources and optimize their use and, in doingthat, they intervene in the creation and development of organisational capabilities.

Thus it is understandable that organizations need to manage not only theirknowledge resources, but also the processes that handle them.

Additionally several scholars have described knowledge processes as knowledgemanagement enablers along with other organizational factors, such as for exampleorganizational culture, information technology, strategy, leadership, top managementsupport (see for example Anderson and the APQC, 1996; Ernst and Young, 1998; Leeand Kim, 2001; Arthur D. Little, 1998).

This special issue attempts to enrich theoretical and practical knowledge about therole of knowledge processes and, more generally, knowledge management enablerswithin the complex mechanisms of organization’s value creation.

3. Overview on contributions to this issueThe contributions to this special issue deal with different aspects, which are importantin the discussion of needs for a better understanding the role of knowledge processesfor achieving business excellence in 21st century organizations.

The topics are various and can be traced back to several approaches and methods aswell as organisational and technological factors which sustain a successful knowledgemanagement.

Main topics are an analysis of how organizations can effectively balance explorationand exploitation processes in complex environments (Bocanet and Ponsiglione), theimpact of a key knowledge resource such as organizational culture on workers’ jobsatisfaction (Bigliardi, Dormio, Galati, Schiuma), the use of insurances to manage thehuman capital risks in SMEs (Maenpaa and Voutilainen), the role of technology insupporting knowledge management processes (Iandoli, Quinto, De Liddo, BuckinghamShum; Vuori and Okkonen), the Knowledge and Technology Transfer Organizationsas tool to create value (Landry and Amara), and the role of intellectual capital for firmswhich intend to compete in the international arena through global initiatives (Ling).

Exploration and exploitation are key knowledge activities. They influence and areinfluenced from firm’s strategy. Recently several papers have analysed the trade-offsbetween knowledge exploitation and exploration activities within firms.

Anca Bocanet and Cristina Ponsiglione in their contribution develop an agent-basedmodel to explore the organizations’ difficulty in how to effectively balance explorationand exploitation in complex environments.

The authors use a series of simulations to examine the influence of externalcomplexity on the balance between exploration and exploitation inside organizations.Especially starting from the seminal work of March (1991), the paper models the “spaceof possibilities” in which organizational learning takes place as a fitness landscapewhere organizational and individual opinions are interrelated and depend on the ones

VINE42,1

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by K

ING

MO

NG

KU

T U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F T

EC

HN

OL

OG

Y T

HO

NB

UR

I A

t 08:

19 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Page 7: Managing knowledge processes for value creation

of an external reality. According the authors starting with the model, a computationalplatform can be created to experiment in a virtual laboratory the behaviour and theperformances of organization in complex co-evolving environment. This virtuallaboratory may be used to support the decision making process of managers and policymakers.

The contribution of Barbara Bigliardi, Alberto Ivo Dormio, Francesco Galati,Giovanni Schiuma and Irinja Maenpaa, Raimo Voutilainen, focus on knowledgeworkers which represent key source of growth and competitive advantage in mostorganizations.

The effective management of knowledge workers is one of the key factorsunderpinning business success. In the current competitive context organizations mustto be able to convert their human capital – the knowledge, skills and experience oftheir employees – into products and services that have value in the marketplace. Theeffectiveness of this conversion process depends on the extent to which knowledgeworkers are managed successfully. Careful attention must be paid to developing peoplemanagement policies and processes which assure knowledge workers satisfaction andretention.

In their study Bigliardi, Dormio, Galati and Schiuma test a framework ofrelationship between satisfaction of knowledge workers and organizational culturewithin the pharmaceutical industry and investigate which of the constructs thatconstitute such a framework are the most important in the investigated industry. Datacame from in-depth interviews of knowledge workers (i.e. R&D units’ employees) of aselected sample of companies. From the study emerged that a bureaucraticorganizational culture has a negative influence on knowledge workers’ jobsatisfaction, while innovative or supportive organizational culture have a positiveimpact. Moreover, the study allows to understand which aspects of their jobsatisfaction are more influenced by the organizational culture.

The study of Maenpaa and Voutilainen intended to contribute to the ongoingdiscussion on human capital risk management by focusing on human capital risks asan entity, and extending the issue from risk identification and evaluation. The authorsanalyzed the use of insurances in the management of human capital risks. Twelvepossible human capital risks were identified in the literature, and the applicability ofinsurances for the management of these risks was empirically analyzed through aqualitative case study in an insurance company. The results of the study suggest thatpension, accident, health, life, liability and crime insurances provide potential solutionsfor the management of human capital risks. The rationale behind these insurances istwofold: some of the insurances function as pre-emptive risk management tools andincentives for a desired behavior, when others compensate policyholders in theoccurrence of a pre-specified adverse event. Out of these insurances, pension insuranceseems especially prominent in the human capital risk context.

Literature on knowledge management has widely stressed that organizations eitherfocus on technology or people to manage effectively knowledge. Technological andhuman features of knowledge management are closely interdependent. Certainly thereis no right or wrong balance of technology and people in managing knowledge.Finding the appropriate balance is dependant of the context in which knowledgemanagement is being implemented and what best fit is appropriate to the organisation.

Managingknowledge

processes

9

Dow

nloa

ded

by K

ING

MO

NG

KU

T U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F T

EC

HN

OL

OG

Y T

HO

NB

UR

I A

t 08:

19 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Page 8: Managing knowledge processes for value creation

Luca Iandoli, Ivana Quinto, Anna De Liddo, Simon Buckingham Shum and VilmaVuori, Jussi Okkonen in their studies discuss respectively the use of a web-basedcollaborative mapping platform to enhance knowledge sharing and how collaborativework setting and social media tools are used in refining of unstructured andunmanaged knowledge for value adding purposes.

Especially, Iandoli, Quinto, De Liddo, Buckingham Shum present the “DebateDashboard”, an online collaborative platform designed to support distributedknowledge management and decision-making. The platform integrates an argumentmapping tool with visual widgets with the objective to enhance collectivesense-making, mutual understanding as well as to compensate for the costs ofmediated communication in virtual collaborative environments. The DebateDashboard based on a web-based collaborative mapping platform known asargument mapping tools (AMTs), is able to deliver better collaborative performancesto its users and to enhance the adoption and use of argument mapping technologies tofoster knowledge sharing among remote collaborators. The Debate Dashboardintegrated with online AMTs provides three different kinds of visual feedback about:participants to the conversation, interaction processes and generated contents. Thisallows overcoming some criticalities in the adoption and use of AMTs while retainingtheir advantages. Especially the integration of Debate Dashboard with online AMTsaims at enabling further improvements more specific of online deliberation, such as:reduction of misunderstanding; reduction of cognitive effort required to use AMTs;improvement of deliberation performances as better and more efficient exploration andanalysis of the problem space, usability of the generated knowledge object (the map),and increase of consensus.

In their contribution Vuori and Okkonen discuss how traditional knowledgerefining processes differ from those enabled by using social media applications. Byaddressing topic with practical examples the authors outline how collaborative worksetting and social media tools are used in refining of unstructured and unmanagedknowledge for value adding purposes. The paper proposes that collaborative settingprovided by social media applications enables sharing of different insights: combiningmutual insights as well as discussing conflicting insights helps to form a moremultifaceted and truthful understanding on issues. Especially, utilizing social mediaapplications as collaborative tools enriches information, as it can also contain elementsthat are not predestined as in common business information systems. Social mediaapplications also empower the employees to collaborate and contribute tointra-organizational information flows in a more informal manner.

The last two contributions focus respectively on knowledge transfer process and therole of intangible resources in firm’s global initiatives.

Landry and Amara develop a conceptual framework identifying and differentiatinghow knowledge and technology transfer organizations (KTTOs) create value from howthey capture value. First, they conceptualize the knowledge and technology transferprocess as a value chain. Then, they extend the internal KTTO’s value chainperspective by integrating the knowledge and technology transfer value chain into abusiness model conceptual perspective in order to emphasize the value captured by theclients of KTTOs. They examine how KTTO managers could describe, benchmark andimprove their business models by altering or reinforcing how they are positioned withrespect to the interdependent elements of their business model. Finally, they use the

VINE42,1

10

Dow

nloa

ded

by K

ING

MO

NG

KU

T U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F T

EC

HN

OL

OG

Y T

HO

NB

UR

I A

t 08:

19 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Page 9: Managing knowledge processes for value creation

elements of the conceptual framework to derive emblematic types of business modelsand provide exemplary cases for each emblematic case.

Finally Ling presents empirical evidences on the relationships among intellectualcapital, business environment, and global initiatives using a sample of firms located inTaiwan but competing in the global market. The findings of the study have confirmedthat intellectual capital is positively associated with a firm’s global initiatives. There isalso moderating effect of business environment on the relationship between intellectualcapital and global initiatives. The important role of intellectual capital is highlightedfor firms intend to compete in the international arena. The importance of human capital(top management teams’ visionary leadership) also increases as environment becomesmore dynamic.

4. ConclusionsNowadays to get gains private and public organizations must to be able to transformtheir knowledge domain into profitable artefacts and/or services, but also todynamically renew their capabilities. For this purpose they have to continuously andactively acquire, organise, share and apply their knowledge resources.

Generally there is a wide range of knowledge resources which resides within anorganisation. One of the challenges of organisations is to extract the greatest valuefrom these resources. The full potential of knowledge resources is realised when theyare efficiently and effectively managed through proper knowledge processes. In such aperspective effectively executing processes such as creating, organising, codifying,disseminating, transferring, applying and using knowledge, just to name few, is crucialto an organisation.

The effectiveness of efforts of managing knowledge processes basically depends onthe alignment of these processes with the organisation’s infrastructure and processes,in a manner that supports the achievement of the organisation’s goals and valueproposition.

Furthermore, several individual, organisational and technological factors intervenein determining a successful management of knowledge resources, such as a propersupportive culture, support systems, teams, structures, collaboration, ICT tools and soon.

Currently the debate on knowledge management processes is still lively. Thedynamics which link knowledge processes to value creation, the valuation of theirimpact on organizational performance and, the role of some organizational andtechnological resources as enablers or hampers of a successful knowledgemanagement, emerge as relevant topics to be investigated more in depth.

The contributions to this special issue reflect this emerging debate about the role ofknowledge processes in value creation.

This discussion was largely focused on the importance of managing knowledgeprocesses for achieving business excellence, highlighting approaches and tools orapplication in different contexts of analysis.

References

Adams, M. (2008), “Management 2.0: managing the growing intangible side of your business”,Business Strategy Series, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 190-200.

Managingknowledge

processes

11

Dow

nloa

ded

by K

ING

MO

NG

KU

T U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F T

EC

HN

OL

OG

Y T

HO

NB

UR

I A

t 08:

19 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Page 10: Managing knowledge processes for value creation

Anderson, A. and and The APQC (1996), The Knowledge Management Assessment Tool, ArthurAnderson and The American Productivity & Quality Center, Houston, TX.

Andriessen, D. (2004), Making Sense of Intellectual Capital: Designing a Method for the Valuationof Intangibles, Elsevier Butterworth, Heinemann, Stoneham, MA.

Carlucci, D. and Schiuma, G. (2007), “Exploring intellectual capital concept in strategicmanagement research”, in Joia, L. (Ed.), Strategies for Information Technology andIntellectual Capital: Challenges and Opportunities, Idea Group, London, pp. 10-28.

Carlucci, D., Marr, B. and Schiuma, G. (2004), “The knowledge value chain – how intellectualcapital impacts business performance”, International Journal of Technology Management,Vol. 27 Nos 6-7, pp. 575-90.

Carmel, A. and Tishler, A. (2004), “The relationships between intangible organisational elementsand organisational performance”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 25 No. 13,pp. 1257-8.

Chase, R. (1998), “The people factor”, People Management, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 38-40.

Chong, C.W., Holden, T., Wilhelmij, P. and Schimdt, R.A. (2000), “Where does knowledgemanagement add value?”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 366-80.

Cuganesan, S. (2005), “Intellectual capital-in-action and value creation”, Journal of IntellectualCapital, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 357-73.

Daum, J.H. (2002), Intangible Assets and Value Creation, Wiley, New York, NY.

Davenport, T.H. and Prusak, L. (1998), Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage WhatThey Know, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Ernst and Young (1998), Consulting Methodology for Knowledge Management, Ernst & YoungManagement Consulting, London.

Glot, M. and Berrell, M. (2003), “The dual paradigm of knowledge management: implications forachieving quality outcomes in human resource management”, Journal of KnowledgeManagement, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 78-89.

Hamel, G. (1994), “The concept of core competence”, in Hamel, G. and Heene, A. (Eds),Competence Based Competition, Wiley, Chichester, pp. 11-34.

Lee, J.H. and Kim, Y.G. (2001), “A stage model of organizational knowledge management: a latentcontent analysis”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 20, pp. 299-311.

Lev, B. and Daum, J.H. (2004), “The dominance of intangible assets: consequences for enterprisemanagement and corporate reporting”, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 8 No. 1,pp. 6-17.

Liebowitz, J. (2004), “Getting the most out of your organization’s knowledge management”,Competitive Intelligence Magazine, Washington, DC, Vol. 7 No. 5, September/October, p. 27.

Little A.D. (1998), “Knowledge management: reaping the benefits”, Prism, 2nd quarter.

McGaughey, S.L. (2002), “Strategic interventions in intellectual asset flows”, Academy ofManagement Review, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 248-74.

March, J.G. (1991), “Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning”, OrganizationScience, Vol. 2, pp. 71-87.

Marr, B., Schiuma, G. and Neely, A. (2003), “Intellectual capital: defining key performanceindicators for organizational knowledge assets”, Business Process Management Journal,Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 551-69.

Marr, B., Schiuma, G. and Neely, A. (2004), “The dynamics of value creation: mapping yourintellectual performance drivers”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 312-25.

VINE42,1

12

Dow

nloa

ded

by K

ING

MO

NG

KU

T U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F T

EC

HN

OL

OG

Y T

HO

NB

UR

I A

t 08:

19 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Page 11: Managing knowledge processes for value creation

Mills, J., Platts, K., Bourne, M. and Richards, H. (2002), Competing through Competences,Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Nahapiet, J. and Ghoshal, S. (1998), “Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizationaladvantage”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 242-66.

Peteraf, M.A. and Bergen, M.E. (2003), “Scanning dynamic competitive landscapes: amarket-based and resource-based framework”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 24,pp. 1027-41.

Porter, M. (1985), Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, FreePress, New York, NY.

Sanchez, R. (2001), “Managing knowledge into competences: the five learning cycles of thecompetent organization”, in Sanchez, R. (Ed.), Knowledge Management and OrganizationalCompetence, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 3-37.

Schiuma, G., Lerro, A. and Sanitate, D. (2008), “Intellectual capital dimensions of Ducati’sturnaround – exploring knowledge assets grounding a change management program”,International Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 161-93.

Schiuma, G., Pablos, P. and Spender, J.C. (2007), “Foreword: intellectual capital and company’svalue creation dynamics”, International Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital, Vol. 4No. 4, pp. 331-41.

Srivastava, R., Fahey, L., Sharon, J.S. and Smith, D.E. (2001), “Linking e-business and operatingprocesses: the role of knowledge management”, IBM Systems Journal, Armonk, NY, Vol. 40No. 4, pp. 889-907.

Sullivan, P.H. (1999), “Profiting from intellectual capital”, Journal of Knowledge Management,Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 132-43.

Sveiby, K.E. (1997), The New Organizational Wealth: Managing and Measuring KnowledgeBased Assets, Berrett Koehler, San Francisco, CA.

Teece, D.J. (2000), “Strategies for managing knowledge assets: the role of firm structure andindustrial context”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 35-54.

Teece, D.J. (2007), “Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of(sustainable) enterprise performance”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 28 No. 13,pp. 1319-50.

About the authorsGiovanni Schiuma is Professor in Innovation and Knowledge Management and ScientificDirector of the Center for Value Management at Universita degli Studi della Basilicata, Italy, andVisiting Professor at Institute for Manufacturing, University of Cambridge. He is also VisitingResearch Fellow at Cranfield School of Management and Adjunct Professor at TampereUniversity of Technology, Finland. He received his PhD in business management from theUniversity of Rome Tor Vergata, Italy. Giovanni’s research, training and consulting focus onlinking knowledge assets and organization behavior to strategic performance management andorganization value creation. Giovanni is a leading international expert of Arts in Business, andparticularly of how to use arts for organisational development and change management andinnovation. For further information please visit www.gschiuma.com

Daniela Carlucci is Assistant Professor at the University of Basilicata in Italy. She works atthe Center for Value Management, University of Basilicata. She has been Visiting Scholar atCranfield School of Management (UK) and Visiting Professor at Tampere University ofTechnology (Finland). Her research interests focus on knowledge management, knowledgeassets and intellectual capital assessment and management, innovation, business performancemeasurement and management, knowledge intensive service, decision making in organizations

Managingknowledge

processes

13

Dow

nloa

ded

by K

ING

MO

NG

KU

T U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F T

EC

HN

OL

OG

Y T

HO

NB

UR

I A

t 08:

19 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Page 12: Managing knowledge processes for value creation

and decision support methods. She has authored and co-authored several publications, includingchapters of books, articles and research reports on a range of research topics particularlyembracing knowledge assets and intellectual capital management. Daniela Carlucci is thecorresponding author and can be contacted at: [email protected]

Antonio Lerro is a Research Fellow at the University of Basilicata, Italy, where he joins theCenter for Value Management. Antonio received his degree in Economics at the University ofRome “Tor Vergata” and his PhD at University of San Marino. He also joined Cranfield School ofManagement, UK, and the Centre for International Competitiveness at the University of WalesInstitute Cardiff, UK, as visiting research fellow. His research centres on the management andthe measurement of the Intellectual Capital, innovation and change management, clusters,regional development and regional innovation systems. He is a regular speaker at national andinternational conferences and author of over 25 academic and practitioner papers.

VINE42,1

14

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Dow

nloa

ded

by K

ING

MO

NG

KU

T U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F T

EC

HN

OL

OG

Y T

HO

NB

UR

I A

t 08:

19 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Page 13: Managing knowledge processes for value creation

This article has been cited by:

1. Livio Cricelli, Michele Grimaldi, Musadaq Hanandi. 2014. Decision making in choosing informationsystems. VINE 44:2, 162-184. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

2. Young Wook Seo, Seong Wook Chae, Kun Chang Lee. 2014. The impact of absorptive capacity,exploration, and exploitation on individual creativity: Moderating effect of subjective well-being.Computers in Human Behavior . [CrossRef]

3. Kalsom Salleh, Siong Choy Chong, Syed Noh Syed Ahmad, Syed Omar Sharifuddin Syed Ikhsan. 2013.The extent of influence of learning factors on tacit knowledge sharing among public sector accountants.VINE 43:4, 424-441. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

4. Michele Grimaldi, Ivana Quinto, Pierluigi Rippa. 2013. Enabling Open Innovation in Small and MediumEnterprises: A Dynamic Capabilities Approach. Knowledge and Process Management 20:4, 199-210.[CrossRef]

5. Jutta Haider, Isto Huvila, Andrew Cox, Helena Francke, Hazel Hall. 2012. Transformation or continuity?:The impact of social media on information: implications for theory and practice. Proceedings of theAmerican Society for Information Science and Technology 49:1, 1-4. [CrossRef]

6. Marco GiulianiCreating and Destroying Knowledge 220-233. [CrossRef]7. Knowledge Management 169-199. [CrossRef]

Dow

nloa

ded

by K

ING

MO

NG

KU

T U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F T

EC

HN

OL

OG

Y T

HO

NB

UR

I A

t 08:

19 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)