Tusman, M , Tushman and Scanlan [1981 a,b] further examined development activities, both at the departemental level and ay the project level, he introduce and added the concept of “Boundary Spanning” or boundary spanner to describe very much the same phenomenon that described as gatekeeping. He extended Allen’s work by distinguishing between two types of communication stars, “Internal communication stars” and “external communication stars”, and definding boundry spanners as those who ware both internal and external communication stars. In the context of KM, this tradition relates very directly to the development of Communities of Practice (Cop). Given the relative non-aligment of organizational structure and informationflow and sharing, CoP’s can be seen as the setting up of an alternative structure to facilitate information flow and sharing.
Research Productivity and Knowledge
The more productive companies were characterized by ;
1. A relatively egalitarian managerial structure with unobtrusive status indicators in the R&D enviroment
2. Less concern with protecting proprietary information
3. Greater openness to outside information, greater use of their libraries and information centers, specifically, greater attendance by employees at profesional meetings.
4. Greater information system development effort.
5. Greater technical and subject sophisticated of the information service staff.
Lack of recognition of these findings in the business community
particularly striking was the finding that not only did information related management behaviour tend strongly to discriminate between “high-performance” and “low-performance” companies, but also that none of the non information related management behaviours measured bad any discriminatory value. the given inability to find any significance for other managerial factors, the failure to remark upon the importance of information and knowledge factors can truly be described as remarkable.
The information Systems Literature points to an abundance of KM strategies in the category of Computer Medicated Communication (CMC). Such systems provide the infrastucture for enabling the interactions needed for a group’s knowledge synergies and interactive activities. [Maier, R., 2002]. Further, such CMC interactions allow for the creation of persistentrecord records. [Robins, J., 2002]
Another issues with conversational records, Twitter transcripts, and email exchanges as opposed to more traditional knowledge representations in books and journal articles, is that discourse records are not traditional are not by nature indexed unless a research has chosen a set of records for study.
So it’s differences in the knowledge derived from the literature are usually easier in the canand note, as compared to access it via social networks, email, etc. this is due to anysuch knowledge can not be found on a particular index, use only the use of certainkeywords. As with other studies in the literature that further facilitates access to aninformation
It’s model that emphasizes the creation of quality knowledge content in online repository with re-use as a goal. [Markus, M., 2001] argues that the purpose and content of knowledge records in reposotories often differ depending on who needs the documentation : the content producer, similar orther, or dissimilar other. Proposes the rule of human intermediaries in what the terms as “repurposing” of repositories to make them more appropriate for use by others. Markus looks to an expanded role for technological support of core competencies of librarians, archivist, dat curator, and other information professionals.
this is article not yet finished
Based on such a historical-cultural perspective of activity, Hasan, H.[ 2003] proposed rudiments of a KM system influenced by activity-based models that would link work activites eith people and content. Continued development of the model would focus on the motivation of people to contribute content and the meaningfulness of information workflow support with a knowledge repository, Kwan and Balasubramanian .
Chapter 4. Conceptualizing Knowledge Emergence, that was writen by Claire R. McInerney and Michael E.D. Koenig