The Journal of Information Systems (한국정보시스템학회지:정보시스템연구)

Korea Association of Information Systems (한국정보시스템학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Dynamic Value Chain Modeling of Knowledge Management

지식경영의 동태적 가치사슬 모형 구축

  • 이영찬 (동국대학교 경영.관광대학 경상학부)
  • Published : 2008.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study suggests the dynamic value chain model, that will be able to not only show changing processes to organization's significant capital by integrating an individual, implicit, and explicit knowledge which affect organizational decision making, but also distinguish the key driver for raising organizational competitive power because it makes possible to analyze sensitivity of performance along with decision making alternatives and policy changes from dynamic view by connecting knowledge management capability, knowledge management activity, and relations with organizational performance with specific strategic map. Recently, a lot of organizations show interest in measuring and evaluating their performance synthetically. In organizations taking knowledge management, they introduce effective value chain model like a dynamic balanced scorecard (DBSC), and therefore they can reflect their knowledge management condition as well as show their changes by checking performance of established vision and strategy periodically. Furthermore, they can ask for their inner members' understanding and participation by communicating with and inspiring their members with awareness that members are one of their group, present a base of benchmarking, and offer significant information for later decision making. The BSC has been a successful framework for measuring an organization's performance in various perspectives through translating an organization's vision and strategy into an interrelated set of key performance indicators and specific actions. The BSC, while having significant strengths over traditional performance measurement methods, however, has its own limitations, due to its static nature, such as overlooking two-way causation between performance indicators and neglecting the impact of delayed feedback flowing from the adoption of new strategies or policy changes. To overcome these limitations, this study employs SD, a methodology for understanding complex systems where dynamic feedback among the interrelated system components significantly impact on the system outcomes. The SD simulation model in the form of DBSC would serve as a useful strategic teaming tool for facilitating an organization's communication process through various scenario analyses as well as predicting the dynamic behavior pattern of their key performance measures over a future time frame. For the demonstration purpose, this study applied the DBSC model to Prototype of Korea manufacturing and service firm.

Keywords

References

  1. 민재형․이영찬․하창훈, "전략적 학습의 촉진을 위한 균형 성과측정시스템의 개발", 한국경영과학회지, 제27권, 제3호, 2002, pp. 93-114.
  2. 박상현․연승준․김동호․김상욱, "전략적 지식경영을 위한 시스템 다이내믹스 모델 구축 사례 연구", Information Systems Review, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2005, pp. 101-115.
  3. 유성호, "조직의 지식경영 동인과 성과의 연계에 관한 연구," KAIST 박사학위논문, 2003.
  4. 조현웅․연승준․김상욱, "BSC의 한계 극복을 위한 시스템 다이내믹스의 활용", 한국시스템 다이내믹스 연구, 제8권, 제1호, 2007, pp. 211-227.
  5. Alavi, M. and Leidner, D. E., "Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues," MIS Quarterly, Vol. 25, No. 1, 2001, pp. 107-136. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250961
  6. Alavi, M., Kayworth, T. R. and Leidner, D. E., "An Empirical Examination of the Influence of Organizational Culture on Knowledge Management Practices," Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 22, No. 3, 2006, pp. 191-224. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222220307
  7. Arora, R., "Implementing Knowledge Management- A Balanced Scorecard Approach," Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2002, pp. 240-249. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270210434340
  8. Aydin, A., "An Exploratory Investigation of the Self-Assessment Implementation Process Using the EFQM Excellence Model," unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of East Anglia, Norwich, 2006.
  9. Bock, G.-W., Zmud, R. W., Kim, Y.-G. and Lee, J.-N., "Behavioral Intention Formation in Knowledge Sharing: Examining the Roles of Extrinsic motivators, Social-psychological Forces, and Organizational Climate," MIS Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 1, 2005, pp. 87-111.
  10. Davenport, T. H., "Knowledge Management and the Broader Firm: Strategy, Advantage, and Performance," In J. Liebowitz (ed.), Knowledge Management Handbook, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 1999, pp. 2-1-2-11.
  11. Demarest, M., "Understanding Knowledge Management," Long Range Planning, Vol. 30, No. 3, 1997, pp. 374-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-6301(97)90250-8
  12. Drury, C. and El-Sishini, S., Divisional Performance Measurement: An Examination of the Potential Explanatory Factors, Research Report, CIMA, London, 2005.
  13. Elenkov, D. S., "Effects of Leadership on Organizational Performance in Russian Companies," Journal of Business Research, Vol. 55, No. 6, 2002, pp. 467-480. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00174-0
  14. Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A., and Segars, A. H., "Knowledge Management: An Organizational Capabilities Perspective," Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 18, No. 1, 2001, pp. 185-214.
  15. Gooijer, F. D., "Designing a Knowledge Management Performance Framework," Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 4, No. 4, 2000, pp. 303-310. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270010379858
  16. Hudson, M., Smart, A., and Bourne, M., "Theory and Practice in SME Performance Measurement Systems," International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 21, 2001, pp. 1096-1115. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005587
  17. Jasimuddin, S. M., Klein, J. H., and Connell, C. "The Paradox of Using Tacit and Explicit Knowledge: Strategies to Face Dilemmas," Management Decision, Vol. 43, No. 1, 2005, pp. 102-112. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740510572515
  18. Kaplan, R. and Norton, D., The Balanced Scorecard : Translating Strategy into Action, Harvard Business School Press, 1996.
  19. Kaplan, R. and Norton, D., The Strategy-Focused Organization, Harvard Business School Press, 2001.
  20. Keskin, H., "The Relationships Between Explicit and Tacit Oriented KM Strategy, and Firm Performance," The Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge, Vol. 7, No. 1, 2005, pp. 169-175.
  21. Kirkwood, C. W., System Dynamics Methods: A Quick Introduction, System Dynamics Resource Page, Arizona State University, 1998.
  22. Lawrie, G. and Cobbold, I., "Development of the 3rd Generation Balanced Scorecard," Working Paper, 2GC Active Management, 2004, pp. 1-15.
  23. Lee, H. and Choi, B., "Knowledge Management Enablers, Processes, and Organizational Performance: An Integrative View and Empirical Examination," Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 20, No. 1, 2003, pp. 179-228.
  24. Mackay, A., "A Practitioner''s Guide to the Balanced Scorecard," Research Report, CIMA, London, 2005.
  25. Mooray, S., Oyon, D., and Hostettler, D., "The Balance Scorecard: A Necessary Good of and Unnecessary Evil," European Management Journal, Vol. 17, 1999, pp. 481-491. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-2373(99)00034-1
  26. Norreklit, H., "The Balance on the Balanced Scorecard - A Critical Analysis of Some of its Assumptions," Management Accounting Research, Vol. 11, 2000, pp. 65-88. https://doi.org/10.1006/mare.1999.0121
  27. O'Dell, C. and Grayson, J., "Knowledge Transfer: Discover Your Value Proposition," Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 27, No. 2, 1999, pp. 10-15.
  28. Sarvary, M. "Knowledge Management and Competition in the Consulting Industry," California Management Review, Vol. 41, No. 2, 1999, pp. 95-107. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165988
  29. Simonin, B., "The Importance of Collaborative Know-How: An Empirical Test of the Learning Organization," Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 40, No. 5, 1997, pp. 509-533.
  30. Soo, C. W., Midgley, D. F. and Devinney, T. M., "Knowledge Creation in Organizations: A Multiple Study Overview," in Davis, J., Subrahmanian, E. and Westerberg, A. (eds.) Knowledge Management: Organizational and Technological Dimensions, NewYork: Springer-Verlag, 2005.
  31. Spek, R. and Spijkervet, A., "Knowledge Management: Dealing Intelligently with Knowledge," In J. Liebowitz, and L. Wilcox (eds.), Knowledge Management and Its Integrative Elements, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 1997, pp. 31-59.
  32. Sterman, J. D., Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World, Irwin/McGraw-Hill, 2000.
  33. Stonehouse, G. H. and J. D. Pemberton, "Learning and Knowledge Management in the Intelligent Organization," Participation & Empowerment: An International Journal, Vol. 7, No. 5, 1999, pp. 131-139. https://doi.org/10.1108/14634449910287846
  34. Warren, K. and Langley, P., "The Effective Communication of System Dynamics to Improve Insight and Learning in Management Education," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 50, 1999, pp. 396-404. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600679
  35. Witcher, B. J. and Chau, V. S., "Balanced Scorecard and Hoshin Kanri: Dynamic Capabilities for Managing Strategic Fit," Management Decision, Vol. 45 No. 3, 2007, pp. 518-538
  36. Yip, G. S., "Using Strategy to Change Your Business Model," Business Strategy Review, Vol. 15 No. 2, 2004, pp. 17-24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0955-6419.2004.00308.x

Cited by

  1. Case Study on the Enterprise Microblog Usage: Focusing on Knowledge Management Strategy vol.21, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.13088/jiis.2015.21.1.47
  2. The Effects of Cultural Characteristics on IT Infrastructure and Knowledge Management Activities vol.19, pp.3, 2010, https://doi.org/10.5859/KAIS.2010.19.3.149
  3. The Framework for the Classification of KM Strategies in Manufacturing Firms Based on Target Costing and IT Infrastructure vol.21, pp.3, 2012, https://doi.org/10.5859/KAIS.2012.21.3.45
  4. The Adoption Degrees of Social Capital and IT Infrastructure, and Their Effects on Knowledge Management Processes vol.18, pp.3, 2009, https://doi.org/10.5859/KAIS.2009.18.3.183