Vista Equipo: Exploring knowledge management maturity from funcionalist and interpretivist perspectives

Exploring knowledge management maturity from funcionalist and interpretivist perspectives

The purpose of this article is to explore the Knowledge Management Maturity Model (KMMM) in big companies that are pioneers in the implementation of KM practices in Medellin, Colombia. The KMMM integrates the Funcionalist and Interpretivist perspectives on knowledge management and consists of four k...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores Principales:	Arias-Pérez, José Enrique, Durango-Yepes, Carlos Mario
Formato:	Artículo (Article)
Lenguaje:	Español (Spanish) Español (Spanish)
Publicado:	Universidad Libre 2015
Materias:	Gestión del conocimiento Gestión de innovación Modelos de madurez modelos de madurez gestión de innovación madurez de gestión del conocimiento prácticas de gestión del conocimiento

id	ir-10901-12880
recordtype	dspace
institution	Universidad Libre de Colombia
collection	DSpace
language	Español (Spanish) Español (Spanish)
topic	Gestión del conocimiento Gestión de innovación Modelos de madurez Gestión del conocimiento modelos de madurez gestión de innovación madurez de gestión del conocimiento prácticas de gestión del conocimiento
spellingShingle	Gestión del conocimiento Gestión de innovación Modelos de madurez Gestión del conocimiento modelos de madurez gestión de innovación madurez de gestión del conocimiento prácticas de gestión del conocimiento Arias-Pérez, José Enrique Durango-Yepes, Carlos Mario Exploring knowledge management maturity from funcionalist and interpretivist perspectives
description	The purpose of this article is to explore the Knowledge Management Maturity Model (KMMM) in big companies that are pioneers in the implementation of KM practices in Medellin, Colombia. The KMMM integrates the Funcionalist and Interpretivist perspectives on knowledge management and consists of four key areas: Organization and People, Processes, Technology, and Interpretation. Cluster analysis helped establishing the ranges of the five maturity levels: Initial, Awareness, Defined, Managed, and Optimized. The results showed that only two companies overcame the “Defined” level, and the best performance was achieved in the Technology key area. In conclusion, the companies have difficulties at going further the implementation of basic KM initiatives and achieving a higher level of maturity associated with the articulation of KM practices with business processes and a higher degree of appropriation and usage by individuals. This may occur because of the preponderance of the Functionalist approach in the business context and the low level of penetration and integration with the Interpretivist perspective of KM.
format	Artículo (Article)
author	Arias-Pérez, José Enrique Durango-Yepes, Carlos Mario
author_facet	Arias-Pérez, José Enrique Durango-Yepes, Carlos Mario
author_sort	Arias-Pérez, José Enrique
title	Exploring knowledge management maturity from funcionalist and interpretivist perspectives
title_short	Exploring knowledge management maturity from funcionalist and interpretivist perspectives
title_full	Exploring knowledge management maturity from funcionalist and interpretivist perspectives
title_fullStr	Exploring knowledge management maturity from funcionalist and interpretivist perspectives
title_full_unstemmed	Exploring knowledge management maturity from funcionalist and interpretivist perspectives
title_sort	exploring knowledge management maturity from funcionalist and interpretivist perspectives
publisher	Universidad Libre
publishDate	2015
_version_	1741872139237064704
spelling	ir-10901-128802022-03-24T23:45:42Z Exploring knowledge management maturity from funcionalist and interpretivist perspectives Aproximación a la madurez de gestión del conocimiento desde las perspectivas funcionalista e interpretativa Arias-Pérez, José Enrique Durango-Yepes, Carlos Mario Gestión del conocimiento Gestión de innovación Modelos de madurez Gestión del conocimiento modelos de madurez gestión de innovación madurez de gestión del conocimiento prácticas de gestión del conocimiento The purpose of this article is to explore the Knowledge Management Maturity Model (KMMM) in big companies that are pioneers in the implementation of KM practices in Medellin, Colombia. The KMMM integrates the Funcionalist and Interpretivist perspectives on knowledge management and consists of four key areas: Organization and People, Processes, Technology, and Interpretation. Cluster analysis helped establishing the ranges of the five maturity levels: Initial, Awareness, Defined, Managed, and Optimized. The results showed that only two companies overcame the “Defined” level, and the best performance was achieved in the Technology key area. In conclusion, the companies have difficulties at going further the implementation of basic KM initiatives and achieving a higher level of maturity associated with the articulation of KM practices with business processes and a higher degree of appropriation and usage by individuals. This may occur because of the preponderance of the Functionalist approach in the business context and the low level of penetration and integration with the Interpretivist perspective of KM.   El propósito del artículo es analizar la madurez de gestión del conocimiento (GC) de grandes empresas que han sido pioneras en la implementación de prácticas de GC en Medellín, Colombia. Para ello, se desarrolla un modelo de madurez que integra las perspectivas de GC: funcionalista e interpretativa; además, comprende cuatro áreas claves: Organización y Personas, Procesos, Tecnología, e Interpretación y una escala de madurez. En cuanto a lo metodológico, el análisis Clúster permitió establecer los rangos de los cinco niveles de madurez: Inicial, consciencia, definido, gestionado y optimizado. Los resultados muestran que sólo dos empresas superaron el nivel definido, y los mejores resultados se obtuvieron en el área clave Tecnología. En conclusión, las empresas tienen dificultades para ir más allá de la implementación de las prácticas básicas de GC, y lograr un mayor nivel de madurez asociado a la articulación de las prácticas de GC con los procesos de negocio, y a un mayor uso y apropiación por parte de los individuos. Lo anterior, puede derivarse de la preponderancia del enfoque funcionalista de GC y el bajo nivel de penetración e integración con la perspectiva interpretativa. 2015-06-01 http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 https://revistas.unilibre.edu.co/index.php/entramado/article/view/1212 10.18041/entramado.2015v11n1.21112 spa spa https://revistas.unilibre.edu.co/index.php/entramado/article/view/1212/940 /ref/ALAVI, Maryam; LEIDNER, Dorothy E. Review: Knowledge manage- ment and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. En: MIS quarterly, 2001, p. 107-136. /ref/ARIAS PÉREZ, José Enrique; ARISTIZÁBAL BOTERO, Carlos Andrés. Influencia de la estructura organizacional en la creación de cono- cimiento, estudio del caso EPM Medellín. En: Semestre Económico, 2011, vol. 11, no 22, p. 161-184. /ref/BLOOM, B. S., et al. Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classifica- tion of education goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain (Vol. 1). New York, NY: David McKay Company. 1956. /ref/BUENO CAMPOS, Eduardo. El capital intangible como clave estra- tégica en la competencia actual. En: Boletín de estudios económicos, 1998, vol. 53, no 164, p. 207-229. /ref/CAVUSGIL, S. Tamer; CALANTONE, Roger J.; ZHAO, Yushan. Tacit knowledge transfer and firm innovation capability. En: Journal of busi- ness & industrial marketing, 2003, vol. 18, no 1, p. 6-21. /ref/CHEN, Chung-Jen; HUANG, Jing-Wen. How organizational climate and structure affect knowledge management—The social interaction perspective. En: International Journal of Information Management, 2007, vol. 27, no 2, p. 104-118. /ref/CHEN, Le; FONG, Patrick SW. Revealing performance heterogeneity through knowledge management maturity evaluation: A capability-ba- sed approach. En: Expert Systems with Applications, 2012, vol. 39, no 18, p. 13523-13539. /ref/DAVENPORT, Thomas; PRUSAK, Laurence. Working Knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Boston: Harvard Busi- ness School Press, 1998. /ref/DESOUZA, Kevin. Knowledge Management Maturity Model: Theore- tical development and preliminary empirical testing. Chicago: Univer- sity of Illinois, 2006, 386 p. /ref/DETIENNE, Kristen Bell, et al. Toward a model of effective knowledge management and directions for future research: culture, leadership, and CKOs. En: Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 2004, vol. 10, no 4, p. 26-43 /ref/DRUCKER, Peter. Post-capitalist Society. (1st Ed.). New York: Harper- Collins, 1993. /ref/EWING, Michael; WEST, Dick. Advertising knowledge management: strategies and implications. En: International Journal of Advertising, vol. 19, no 2, p. 225-243. /ref/GALLAGHER, Simon; HAZLETT, Scott. Using the Knowledge Mana- gement Maturity Model (KM3) as an Evaluation Tool. Paper presented at the Conference on . Conference on Knowledge Management Con- cepts and Controversies, University of Warwick, Conventry, United Kingdom, 1999. /ref/GOLD, Andrew H.; MALHOTRA, Arvind; SEGARS, Albert H. Knowle- dge management: an organizational capabilities perspective. En: J. of Management Information Systems, 2001, vol. 18, no 1, p. 185-214. /ref/GOTTSCHALK, Petter; SOLLI-SÆTHER, Hans. Maturity model for IT outsourcing relationships. En: Industrial Management & Data Systems, 2006, vol. 106, no 2, p. 200-212. /ref/GOTTSCHALK, Petter; KHANDELWAL, Vince. Stages of growth for Knowledge Management Technology in Law Firms. En: The Journal of Computer Information Systems, 2004, vol. 44, no 4, p. 111-124. /ref/HOLSAPPLE, Clyde W.; JOSHI, Kshiti D. Knowledge management: a threefold framework. En: The Information Society, 2002, vol. 18, no 1, p. 47-64 /ref/HSIEH, Ping Hsieh; LIN, Binshan; LIN, Chinho. The construction and application of knowledge navigator model (KNMTM): An evaluation of knowledge management maturity. En: Expert Systems with Applica- tions, 2009, vol. 36, no 2, p. 4087-4100. /ref/KALE, Serdar; KARAMAN, Erkan A. Evaluating the knowledge mana- gement practices of construction firms by using importance–compa- rative performance analysis maps. En: Journal of Construction Engi- neering and Management, 2011, vol. 137, no 12, p. 1142-1152. /ref/KAST, Freemont; ROSENZWEIG, James. Administración en las or- ganizaciones: Enfoque de sistemas y contingencias. México: McGraw Hill, 1988. /ref/KATZ, Daniel, et al. Psicología social de las organizaciones. México: Editorial Trillas, 1977. /ref/KLIMKO, Geral. Knowledge Management and Maturity Models: Buil- ding Common understanding. Paper presented at Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Knowledge Management, Bled, Slove- nia, 2001. /ref/KULKARNI, Uday R.; RAVINDRAN, Sury; FREEZE, Ronald. Deve- lopment and validation of a knowledge management capability as- sessment model. Paper presented at Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth International Conference on Information Systems, Washington, D.C. USA, 2004. /ref/LEE, Heeseok; CHOI, Byounggu. Knowledge management enablers, processes, and organizational performance: an integrative view and empirical examination. En: Journal of management information sys- tems, 2003, vol. 20, no 1, p. 179-228. /ref/LEE, Young-Chan; LEE, Sun-Kyu. Capabilities, processes, and perfor- mance of knowledge management: a structural approach. Human Fac- tors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 2007, vol. 17, no 1, p. 21-41 /ref/LEE, Jeehae; SUH, Eui-ho; HONG, Jongyi. A maturity model based CoP evaluation framework: A case study of strategic CoPs in a Korean company. En: Expert Systems with Applications, 2010, vol. 37, no 3, p. 2670-2681. /ref/LEMA, Álvaro. Elementos de Estadística Multivariada. Medellín: Silvano Ltda, 2002. /ref/LIN, Chinho; WU, Ju-Chuan; YEN, David C. Exploring barriers to knowledge flow at different knowledge management maturity sta- ges. En: Information & Management, 2012, vol. 49, no 1, p. 10-23. /ref/LU, Yang; MENGJUN, Wang; ZHANG, Zhensen. Maturity Evalua- tion for Highway Site Standardization Management Based on AHP- FUZZY. En: Advances in Information Sciences & Service Sciences, 2012, vol. 4, no 22. /ref/MOHANTY, Santosh; CHAND, Manish. 5iKM3 knowledge manage- ment maturity model. TCS, 2005. /ref/NONAKA, Ikujirō; TAKEUCHI, Hirotaka. The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innova- tion. Oxford university press, 1995. /ref/PEE, Loo Geok; KANKANHALLI, Atreyi. A model of organisational knowledge management maturity based on people, process, and te- chnology. En: Journal of Information & Knowledge Management, 2009, vol. 8, no 02, p. 79-99. /ref/PEE, Loo Geok; TEAH, Huan Ying; KANKANHALLI, Atreyi. Develo- pment of a General Knowledge Management Maturity Model. Paper presented at Korean Knowledge Management Society Conference, Seoul, Korea, 2006. /ref/PEINADO, Sofía, et al. Actitud hacia el uso de la computadora en docentes de educación secundaria. En: Revista universitaria arbitrada de investigación y diálogo académico, 2011, vol. 7, no 1, p. 86-105. /ref/POLITIS, John D. The relationship of various leadership styles to knowledge management. En: Leadership & Organization Develop- ment Journal, 2001, vol. 22, no 8, p. 354-364. /ref/RAMAPRASAD, Arkalgud; AMBROSE, Paul. The semiotics of knowled- ge management. Paper presented at Workshop on Information Tech- nology & Systems, Charlotte, USA, 1999. /ref/RUGGLES, Rudy. Knowledge management tools. Oxford: Butterwor- th-Heinemann, 1997. /ref/RUGGLES, Rudy. The state of the notion: Knowledge Management in Practice. En: California Management Review, 1998, vol 40, no 3, p. 80- 89. /ref/SABHERWAL, Rajiv; SABHERWAL, Sanjiv. Knowledge Management Using Information Technology: Determinants of Short-Term Impact on Firm Value. En: Decision Sciences, 2005, vol. 36, no 4, p. 531-567. /ref/SAFÓN, Vicente; PERFEITO, Juarez. La flexibilidad en la pequeña em- presa: un estudio respecto al desarrollo de un concepto operativo y cuantitativo. Revista de Negócios, 2006, vol. 11, no 4, p. 39-81. /ref/DE SAUSSURE, Ferdinand. Course in general linguistics. Columbia University Press, 2011. /ref/SCARBROUGH, Harry. Knowledge management, HRM and the inno- vation process. En: International Journal of Manpower, 2003, vol. 24, no 5, p. 501-516. /ref/SCHULTZE, Ulrike. Investigating the Contradictions in Knowledge Management. Paper presented at IFIP WG8.2 & WG8.6 Joint Wor- king Conference on Information Systems: Current Issues and Future Changes, Helsinki, Finland, 1998. /ref/SERNA, Edgar. Maturity model of Knowledge Management in the interpretativist perspective. En: International Journal of Information Management, 2012, vol. 32, no 4, p. 365-371. /ref/STRASUNSKAS, Darijus; TOMASGARD, Asgeir. In quest of ICT value through integrated operations: assessment of organisational–tech- nological capabilities. En Business Information Systems Workshops. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009. p. 159-170. /ref/TIWANA, Amrit. The Knowledge Management Toolkit: Orchestrating IT, Strategy and Knowledge Platform. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2002. /ref/VENTERS, William James. The introduction of knowledge manage- ment technology within the British Council: an action research study. 2003. Tesis Doctoral. University of Salford. /ref/WEERDMEESTER, Ron; POCATERRA, Chiara; HEFKE, Mark. VISION: Next Generation Knowledge Management: Knowledge Management Maturity Model. Information Societies Technology Programme, 2003. /ref/WONG, Kuan Yew; ASPINWALL, Elaine. Development of a knowled- ge management initiative and system: A case study. En: Expert Systems with Applications, 2006, vol. 30, no 4, p. 633-641. /ref/XU, Yang; BERNARD, Alain. Quantifying the value of knowledge within the context of product development. En: Knowledge-Based Systems, 2011, vol. 24, no 1, p. 166-175. /ref/ZHAO, Jingyuan. School knowledge management framework and strategies: The new perspective on teacher professional develop- ment. En: Computers in human behavior, 2010, vol. 26, no 2, p. 168-175 Revistas - Ciencias Sociales y Humanas http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/co/ Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 2.5 Colombia application/pdf Universidad Libre Entramado; Vol 11 No 1 (2015): Entramado; 94-104 Entramado; Vol. 11 Núm. 1 (2015): Entramado; 94-104 Entramado; v. 11 n. 1 (2015): Entramado; 94-104 2539-0279 1900-3803
score	12,111491

Exploring knowledge management maturity from funcionalist and interpretivist perspectives

Ejemplares similares