Guest editorial

Guest editorial

Article Type: Guest editorial From: VINE, Volume 45, Issue 4

The place of knowledge in strategic thinking

The strategic meaning of knowledge

The relationship between “strategy” and “knowledge” appeared in the managerial literature decades ago. The idea that knowledge should be explicitly seen as a critical resource for competitiveness is, certainly, not new. Many studies – such as Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) or Davenport and Prusak (2000) just to cite some of the most well-known works – have long emphasised the role of knowledge in developing the company’s capability for improving business performances and are now often cited as the foundations of this new discipline that we call knowledge management (KM). But even earlier works had attempted to set the grounds of a new theory of the firm where knowledge becomes one – if not the most important – of its core constituents (Grant, 1996; Spender and Grant, 1996; Barney, 1996). Being aware that we live in an increasingly turbulent environment where uncertainty dominates (Spender, 2014), we must therefore recognize that, along with the tangible assets we possess or control, it is the knowledge of the world we have and the capability to learn that make a difference.

These studies have raised a number of important issues and have given inspiration to a flourishing literature. In particular, if knowledge is a critical resource for competitiveness, it should have a special collocation in the strategic planning of a company. But how can knowledge be incorporated in a company’s strategy? Should executives formulate their vision of a company’s business based on what a company already knows (i.e. known knowns), or on what the company knows that does not know (i.e. known unknowns)? In other words, should a company develop strategies for knowledge exploitation or exploration? What processes of organizational learning and knowledge creation have to be performed to implement such kind of strategies?

This explicit consideration of knowledge as an integral part of the strategic formulation in a company implies a new mind set and cultural attitude of executives, and new conceptual and prescriptive framework for strategic planning. In the past decade, this topic has been at the center of analysis in the KM literature. First of all, attempts have been made to provide appropriate definitions (Zack, 1999; Kasten, 2007; von Krogh et al., 2001) or to classify possible categories of knowledge strategy that companies may apply (Greiner et al., 2007; Kumar and Ganesh, 2011). However, there is still no absolute consensus on what a knowledge strategy is (Denford and Chan, 2011; Donate and Canales, 2012), and several theoretical and practical aspects still remain unresolved and open: what should be the practical content of a knowledge strategy? How should a knowledge strategy be formulated? Separately or in connection with what we call corporate or business strategy? Is there an appropriate approach to knowledge strategy planning? It is obvious that a knowledge strategy represents an intersection of strategic thinking and KM, but how to explain such an intersection and how to implement it remain open for further research. As Edvinsson (2002, p. 106) remarks, we need “New metaphors, new models, new organizations”.

In addition, in a context characterized by increasing turbulence and uncertainty, and in a world where today we even do not know what we know and how much we know, formulating a strategy about what we should know in the future can become extremely challenging (Bratianu and Bolisani, 2015). Here, new sensibilities to weak signals, new capabilities to reach distant sources and to learn even from intimate experiences, new abilities to “see beyond” the rational and “tangible” manifestations of reality may become necessary for executives and top managers. They should understand the new dynamics across all the various dimensions that are implied, and between the fields of rational knowledge, emotional knowledge and also spiritual knowledge. They should be able to change the classical managerial paradigm of command-and-control with the new one based on chaos and complexity (Bratianu, 2015).

All this also implies new reflections and fresh approaches to establishing a direct connection between strategic planning and KM capabilities in companies. If a knowledge strategy requires a vision of what a company should know, this also implies the implementation of those technical tools and organizational measures that can enable a company to learn quickly and to exploit the acquired knowledge effectively. So, a knowledge strategy implies proper planning and implementation of processes of knowledge generation, transfer and sharing, the adoption of measures to reduce knowledge loss, to prevent leakages or to protect intellectual production. In addition, as the necessity to exchange knowledge with external partners is an integral part of the modern economic activities, organizations need to develop strategies not only to generate and process knowledge internally but also to acquire and deliver knowledge from/to the external environment. From this perspective, organizations should be open systems with respect to knowledge fluxes, enabling them to cross their interface with the external business environment.

All of these aspects will increase the chances of success in achieving a competitive advantage which, in turn, will reinforce the capability to manage knowledge resources. But on the other hand, it calls for new ways of strategic thinking and strategic formulation in the business arena.

A variety of viewpoints

The aim of this special issue was to propose a collective reflection about the notion of knowledge strategy, seen under any possible perspective. We were eager to understand, from the voice of the community of KM researchers, the feelings and viewpoints about the state and prospect of this notion and its possible future in the theory and in the business practice. How would the notion of knowledge strategy be expressed more clearly? What studies and investigations would have inspired? Is the concept of knowledge strategy still fruitful, or have we reached a point where nothing really new can be said?

Indeed, the small sample of papers that we were able to collect, after a challenging process of selection and review, shows that the topic of knowledge strategy is not yet “the past” but is well “the future”. The ideas themselves of knowledge strategy and KM strategy still stimulate varied and differentiated reflections, research efforts, theoretical interpretations and formulations of practical guidelines.

For example, some scholars still treat the issue of the relationship between knowledge strategy and corporate strategy, particularly strategy for growth. In their paper “Two Knowledge Perspectives to Growth Management”, Harri Laihonen, Antti Lönnqvist and Juha Metsälä examine the connections between knowledge strategies (or more precisely KM strategies) and growth strategies. In other words, by assuming that growth strategies are essential for the future competitiveness of a company, the study examines how an appropriate KM strategy can contribute to growth. In addition, the authors provide empirical evidence derived from a case study analysis of a company aiming at rapid growth in the construction industry. According to the authors, it is possible to recognize that there are different KM perspectives under which the issue of growth can be seen. First, a perspective of knowledge assets concerns whether an organization has the needed knowledge resources to enable growth. Second, to make informed decisions, the management needs relevant and up-to-date knowledge of the internal and external environment. By developing these viewpoints, the paper derives the case-specific cornerstones of growth-oriented KM, provides food for though to practitioners and also opens a new field of research.

Talking of knowledge strategy also raises the issue of whether and how its planning is possible. This is still a relatively unexplored topic in the KM literature. In “Strategic Planning Approaches to Knowledge Management: a Taxonomy” (Enrico Scarso and Ettore Bolisani), there is a discussion about strategic planning applied to knowledge strategy and KM. As the conditions for the successful implementation of KM can change from a company to another and in relation to the external context, this may call for appropriate approaches to planning. The awareness that companies can follow different approaches to KM planning is important for executives that consider KM as a primary activity for their companies. By drawing inspiration from the classic literature about strategic planning and combining it with the KM literature, four possible approaches to KM strategic planning are developed, based on the combination of two dimensions (the nature – rational versus emergent – of the planning process and the competitive factors – internal versus external – that drive the strategy formulation). A case study exploration of four different companies is used to depict the features of each KM strategic planning approach and to asses the consistency and usefulness of the formulated taxonomy. This can provide important food for thought for strategic thinking applied to KM and can also reinforce the link between KM and other areas of management.

As the notion of knowledge strategy is not well-established in the management practice, it is likely that some companies and sectors are more advanced than others in dealing with it. This is what Pietro Evangelista and Susanne Durst demonstrate in their paper “Knowledge Management in Environmental Sustainability Practices of Third-party Logistics Service Providers”, an industry that is a good example of context where KM implementation can be potentially fruitful but is still in its infancy. The paper provides a literature review of KM and KM strategy in environmental sustainability practices of logistics companies. This accurate survey makes it possible to identify the basic elements through which building up appropriate KM approaches and KM strategies can be enhanced in this industry. The analysis reveals that the body of knowledge regarding the topic chosen is rather poor, which also witnesses that, in this sector, there is a big opportunity to work both for KM researchers and practitioners. By analysing the extant literature, the authors suggests three fundamental issues (i.e. customer relationship, quality of human resources and ICT adoption) about which the definition of appropriate KM strategies may have a great potential in this particular industry. Even though the study is narrow in scope, it is clear that the research question and the proposed methodology can be extended to other sectors, even in comparative terms.

Different from the previous one, the paper “Knowledge Elicitation and Mapping in the Design of a Decision Support System for the Evaluation of Suppliers’ Competencies” (Lorella Cannavacciuolo, Luca Iandoli, Cristina Ponsiglione and Giuseppe Zollo) shows a case where the reflection about the strategic role of knowledge has reached a significant intensity. The study describes the design of a knowledge-based system whose aim is to assess and manage organizational competencies of suppliers. The ability to measure the strategic capabilities of suppliers is particularly crucial, especially in the case of large integrated production systems (such as in the case of Aerospace industry, which is the one analysed in the paper). In particular, the authors reflect on the notion itself of “organizational competence” and attempt to combine an analysis of tangible and intangible assets – including know-how and managerial capability. With this regards, what a supplier “knows” or “can learn” becomes a central element of assessment. The study provides not only the theoretical framework on which the authors ground their argumentation but also the mathematical details on which a computational “decision support system” is developed. All this can provide inspiration for the design of advanced computer systems that can help executives to take important strategic decisions based on KM-related principles.

The last two studies in our collection turn their attention to some KM elements that can be potentially crucial in the knowledge strategy of an organization. The paper “Strategies to Enhance Intergenerational Learning and Reducing Knowledge Loss: An Empirical Study of Universities” by Constantin Bratianu and Ramona Diana Leon focuses on the issue of transferring knowledge from senior to junior members. Indeed, the implementation of appropriate strategies for reducing the risk of losing organizational knowledge is a key issue for companies. The paper analyzes the strategies to enhance intergenerational learning and reduce knowledge loss with an emphasis on universities which are, indeed, knowledge-intensive organizations and, at the same time, have a typical age-layered structure. A combination of literature review and empirical data collection through interviews at sample universities is proposed. The paper allows to discuss suitable strategies for enhancing intergenerational learning and reducing knowledge loss, and provides valuable insights into how organizations experiencing a workforce ageing phenomenon can enhance intergenerational learning to reduce knowledge loss. For this reason, the findings are valuable not only for universities but, more generally, for all companies that have ageing employees and want to reduce the risk of losing their precious knowledge, painfully built over time.

Finally, Susanne Durst, Helio Ferenhof and Lena Aggestam in their “Understanding knowledge leakage: A review of previous studies” analyze the issue of knowledge leakage or, in other words, the situation where a firm’s private knowledge is appropriated by or transferred, even unintentionally, to others. Despite the effort that companies make to protect their “private” knowledge, knowledge can leak away in different ways and circumstances; sometimes these leakages are beneficial (for example, between collaborating partners) and, in other cases, detrimental because this can supply competitive weapons to rivals. For a company, it is therefore important to distinguish between the different situations and to develop appropriate strategies to manage knowledge and protect it from undesired leakages. The authors conducted a thorough literature survey that aim to reach an advanced understanding of the topic, which can also make it possible to develop more effective KM strategies. Indeed, the study underlines that forward-looking organizations take a strategic approach to KM and have knowledge strategies in place that enable them to better manage and distribute their knowledge to increase the likelihood that the positive outcomes of knowledge leakage outperform the negative ones.

Knowledge strategy: autonomous concept or ancillary notion?

Our small collection does not allow to draw general conclusions about the state of the art and the future of the notion of knowledge strategy. A remark is however possible.

In practical terms, there are at least two different positions on this issue, that are apparently not compatible. The first position is that of those that see the notion of knowledge strategy as an autonomous notion, that needs treating with specific analytical frameworks and special approaches. Under this perspective, planning a knowledge strategy, implementing it by means of operative KM approaches, even incorporating it into the general strategic thinking of a company require a new consideration of the meaning of knowledge as a key economic resources, with all the peculiarities that it may have as corporate asset.

A second position is that of the people that see the concept of knowledge strategy as a mere component of the more classic notion of corporate or business strategy. In practice, from this viewpoint, knowledge is just one of the many assets on which a company has to formulate its strategic vision. The notion of knowledge strategy loses its “independence”, being just framed or mixed into a more general view of strategic thinking.

Our opinion is closer to the first position: treating knowledge as a strategic asset implies a new approach to strategic thinking. However, as this special issue clearly shows, there is much work to do for elaborating this concept, conducting empirical validations and developing practical operative tools. The good news, at least for us as researchers, is that the topic is on the developing part of its life cycle, and there is still room for creativity and imagination in this research field.

Finally, being at the end of a long journey, it is time to gratefully thank all those that supported the production of this special issue, in particular, Frada Burstein, co-editor of VINE journal, for her enthusiasm, constant encouragement and valuable advice; Laura Wilson, Emma Bruun and Jessica Yip of Emerald staff, for their precious and factive help; and finally all the anonymous reviewers that generously accepted to devote their time and expertise to the critical process of paper selection.

Constantin Bratianu

Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania

Ettore Bolisani

DTG - University of Padova, Padua, Italy

References

Barney, J.B. (1996), “The resource-based theory of the firm”, Organization Science, Vol. 7 No. 5, pp. 469-469.

Bratianu, C. (2015), Organizational Knowledge Dynamics: Managing Knowledge Creation, Acquisition, Sharing, and Transformation, IGI Global, Hershey, PA.

Bratianu, C. and Bolisani, E. (2015), “Knowledge strategy: an integrated approach for managing uncertainty”, Proceedings of the 16th European Conference on Knowledge Management, Udine, 3-4 September, pp. 169-177.

Davenport, T.H. and Prusak, L. (2000), Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Denford, J.S. and Chan, Y.E. (2011), “Knowledge strategy typologies: defining dimensions and relationships”, Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 102-119.

Donate, M.J. and Canales, J.I. (2012), “A new approach to the concept of knowledge strategy”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 22-44.

Edvinsson, L. (2002), Corporate Longitude: What You Need to Know to Navigate Economy, Prentice Hall, London.

Grant, R.M. (1996), “Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17, pp. 109-122.

Greiner, M.E., Böhmann, T. and Krcmar, H. (2007), “A strategy for knowledge management”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 3-15.

Kasten, J. (2007), “Knowledge strategy and its influence on knowledge organization”, North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization, Vol. 1, available at: http://dlist.sir.arizona.edu/1907

Kumar, J.A. and Ganesh, L.S. (2011), “Balancing knowledge strategy: codification and personalization during product development”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 118-135.

Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995), The Knowledge Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.

Spender, J.C. (2014), Business Strategy: Managing Uncertainty, Opportunity, and Enterprise, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Spender, J.C. and Grant, R.M. (1996), “Knowledge and the firm: overview”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17, pp. 5-9.

von Krogh, G., Nonaka, I. and Aben, M. (2001), “Making the most of your company’s knowledge: a strategic framework”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 34, pp. 421-439.

Zack, M.H. (1999), “Developing a knowledge strategy”, California Management Review, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 125-145.

About the guest editors

Constantin Bratianu is a Professor of Strategic Management and KM at the Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romania. He is the founding Director of the Research Centre for Intellectual Capital and Entrepreneurship, and the former Director of the UNESCO Department for Business Administration, Bucharest University of Economic Studies. He was a Visiting Professor at Universities in USA, Japan, Austria, Hungary and Egypt. He is a member of the American Academy of Management, International Association for KM and Society for Business Excellence. He is Co-Editor of the international journal Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Society and Co-President of the International Conference STRATEGICA, Bucharest, 2015. He is Chair Program of the European Conference on Management, Leadership and Governance, Bucharest, 2016. His main academic interests are: knowledge dynamics, KM, intellectual capital, learning organizations and strategic management.

Ettore Bolisani (Laurea in Electronic Engineering, PhD in Innovation Studies – Padua University) after being an EU “Marie Curie” Research Fellow at the University of Manchester and Researcher at the Universities of Trieste and Padua, is currently an Associate Professor at the Department of Management and Engineering – University of Padua. His research centres on ICT management and KM. He also was a Visiting esearcher at Coventry University, Visiting Lecturer at Kaunas Technological University, Chair of the European Conference on KM, University of Padua, 2009, and Editor of Building the Knowledge Society on the Internet: Sharing and Exchanging Knowledge in Networked Environment, IGI Global. He is Co-Founder and first President of the International Association for KM (www.iakm.net) and a Series Co-Editor (with Meliha Handzic) of the IAKM Book Series on KM and Organizational Learning, Springer. Ettore Bolisani is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: ettore.bolisani@unipd.it