History of Knowledge Management

Module 2
 The 1970’s

 The 1980’s

 The 1990’s

 The 2000’s

 Generations of Knowledge Management

The 1970’s

 growing importance of information and explicit knowledge as valuable

assets of organizations are noticeable during this period
 focused on the “learning organization” and emphasis within the cultural
dimension of managing knowledge is observed (P. Senge)
 KM’s growth and practices were examined and assessed thru their
publications
 due to volume of knowledge computer technology started to become
part of the solution in a variety of ways (AUGMENT and www)
The 1980’s

 importance of knowledge as a competitive asset was already well-

recognized during this time, in particular - its expression in professional
competence
 most organizations still did not have the strategies and methods for
managing knowledge
 late 1980’s - artificial intelligence and expert systems gave rise to such
concepts as “knowledge acquisition”, “knowledge engineering” and
“knowledge-based systems” and other computer-based ontologies
(leading to the growth of systems for managing knowledge)
The 1980’s

 As more thinkers and scholars publish their work, the phrase “knowledge
management” formally became part of the lexicon of management –
resulting to books published for this specific matter.
The 1990’s

 growing number of academics and consultants had started talking about

knowledge management as the new business practice; at the same time,
a significant number of large management consulting firms had begun in-
house knowledge management activities and programs
 more articles on knowledge management began to appear in an
increasing number of business journals
 “Brainpower” by Tom Stewart (1991 article in Fortune Magazine) solidify the
introduction of KM as a formal topic of discussion
The 1990’s

 1995 when knowledge management in its current form first received

significant attention among corporations and organizations
 Mid-1990s, it became widely recognized that the competitive edge of
some of the world’s leading companies was for the most part due to the
robust knowledge assets of those companies (having KM as mainstream
business objective)
 At the same time, nurturing knowledge assets such as competencies,
customer relationships and innovations became a focus of attention of
many corporations
The 1990’s

 KM groups were established - International Knowledge Management

Network (IKMN/ Europe) and Knowledge Management Forum (USA)
 late 1990’s - big businesses started implementing “knowledge
management solutions” - Knowledge management became a rage and
came to be seen as a highly desirable alternative to the failed Total
Quality Management (TQM) and business process re-engineering
initiatives.
Generations of Knowledge Management

 A. First Generation KM
 early knowledge management initiatives met with only limited success –
looks great on paper but failed to deliver on application
 for a while, it looked as if KM was destined to be confined to the
“management fad graveyard”
 due to scrutiny - companies realized that it was not the concept of
knowledge management that was the problem as such, but rather the
way that they had gone about approaching it
Generations of Knowledge Management

 dawn of the new millennium, knowledge management mysteriously vanished from

the agenda of the top corporations
Reasons of Confidence Loss with KM:
1. The hype associated with knowledge management was too much with
consultants and technology vendors making too much money on the latest
management fad.
2. Many corporations spent too much financial resources usually on
exotic technologies with little or no return on their investments.
3. Most published materials on knowledge management were very
conceptual and lack practical applications.
Generations of Knowledge Management

 B. Second Generation KM
 In the light of the many practical failures of first generation knowledge
management techniques theorists began to study and scrutinize more
closely the ways by which knowledge is created and shared
 a link between learning theory and management started to develop and
more organic models began to replace hierarchical models of
organizational structure
Generations of Knowledge Management

 Due to previous failures companies have started to take a different

approach to KM - In this new approach the emphasis is more on people,
behaviors and ways of working rather than on the application of
technology.
 Skeptics who believed that KM was just a fad became minority.
 The more popular view is that KM may not remain a distinct discipline but
may become an integral part of the way organizations work (This
happened to TQM but its principles and practices have become integral
part of how organizations operate)