Change Paradigms in the Setting of Knowledge Management Systems

Beschreibung

Culture is widely acknowledged as a most prominent make-or-break factor of knowledge management systems implementation projects. Behavioral and organizational change management are critical to achieve a good fit between human factors and technology.

Hauke Heier examines how technology-facilitated knowledge management initiatives can establish supportive knowledge-intensive cultures. Based on an explorative case study of a four-year implementation and change management project in the electrical engineering and electronics industry, he investigates the explanatory power of two complementary change management frameworks in the new setting of knowledge management systems. Thus, this study contributes to the development of theory and managerial practice - toward a culture change-based implementation framework.

1. 1 Research Problem and Relevance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 l. 2 Key Concepts and Significant Prior Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1. 2. 1 Definitions and Basic Concepts in Knowledge Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1. 2. 2 Refining the Research Question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 l. 3 Research Objectives and Expected Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l3 1. 4 General Research Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 1. 4. 1 Research Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 1. 4. 2 Site Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 1. 4. 3 Unit of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 l. 4. 4 Data Collection, Analysis, and Exposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 2. Conceptual Foundations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 2. 1 Change Paradigms Guiding KMS Implementations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 2. 2 Linear,Staged Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 2. 2. 1 Lewin-Schein's Conceptualization of Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 2. 2. 2 Unfreezing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2. 2. 3 Cognitive Restructuring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 2. 2. 4 Refreezing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 2. 3 Circular, Continuous Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 2. 3. 1 Sathe's Conceptualization of Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 2. 3. 2 Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 2. 3. 3 Justifications of Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 2. 3. 4 Cultural Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 2. 3. 5 Hiring, Socializing, and Replacing Employees . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 3. Case Study: Siemens ShareNet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 3. 1 Project Prologue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 3. 2 Definition and Proto typing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 3. 3 Setup and Piloting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 3. 4 Global Rollout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 3. 5 Operation, Expansion, and Further Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 3. 6 Shifting to a Multi-Community Concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 4. Case Discussion: Change Paradigms Revisited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 4. 1 A Linear, Staged Perspective to Explain Success and Failure . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 VIn Content 4. 1. 1 Revealing Critical Success Factors for Unfreezing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 4. 1. 2 Revealing Critical Success Factors for Cognitive Restructuring . . . . . . . . .
Culture is widely acknowledged as a most prominent make-or-break factor of knowledge management systems implementation projects. Behavioral and organizational change management are critical to achieve a good fit between human factors and technology.

Hauke Heier examines how technology-facilitated knowledge management initiatives can establish supportive knowledge-intensive cultures. Based on an explorative case study of a four-year implementation and change management project in the electrical engineering and electronics industry, he investigates the explanatory power of two complementary change management frameworks in the new setting of knowledge management systems. Thus, this study contributes to the development of theory and managerial practice - toward a culture change-based implementation framework.

Autor*in

Hauke Heier

Themen in »Change Paradigms in the Setting of Knowledge Management Systems«

Behavioral change Change Management Knowledge Management Systems Leiden University Management Research Series Organizational change knowledge management management

Stimmen zu »Change Paradigms in the Setting of Knowledge Management Systems«

Details

Link teilen