TOO MANY RIVERS TO CROSS – By Paul H.J. Hendriks
Review by : Enlightened Group – Teri, Raju, Clements, Madalin, Denis, Satish
SUMMARY
This article attempts to explain the idea that ICT and Knowledge management are concepts that are quite different, but have some connectedness. The general perception amongst some commentators and indeed the literature, suggests that ICT enhances and to some extent “creates knowledge” as well as valuable knowledge management tools. The supporters of this view see ICT as having critical importance.
The author takes a position of caution and suggests that the relationship between ICT and Knowledge Management should be carefully considered, because knowledge is more than just codified information or information processed through some form of software or data disseminating exercise – the explicit side of knowledge. This is not enough, and it’s a perception according to the author, that needs to be corrected. How do we correct that position? The suggestion is that ICT is of potential value to knowledge management and that potential value should be tested against 5 dimensions, which must all be addressed under the following questions; as the response to these questions determines the points of mutual value or “symbiosis” between the two:
1. What is the relationship between ICT and KM strategy and the overall KM policy?
2. Are there any relationships between ICT and all aspects of knowledge through identifying some distinctions or differences?
3. What relationships are seen from an organizational and individual / group, perspectives?
4. What is the relationship between ICT and the dynamic nature of knowledge in terms of processes and flows?
5. Are there any relationships between ICT and KM measures ( as in Human Resource The author Management and organizational perspectives)?Finding a symbiotic rekationship between the
The overarching consideration is that when the responses to these 5 dimensions have been considered, it becomes easier to explain why some aspects of ICT in a particular KM context were applied and not others.
REVIEW
The article is written around the views of various commentators and literature on the subject. Although it read well and much is said about the views of others, it would have been interesting to see whether or not the same perceptions might have been reflected through a set of questions and answers through a survey of organizations and groups. The article would be of special interest to other academics rather than business strategic planners.