What do people want, when they want knowl-
Questions in
knowledge
management: defining
and conceptualising a
phenomenon
Roelof P. uit Beijerse
The author
Roelof P. uit Beijerse is a Researcher at EIM,
The Netherlands.
Keywords
Knowledge economy, Knowledge management,
Organizational performance
Abstract
This article examines and defines the main concepts in
knowledge management. Since our economy has evolved
over the last couple of years into a knowledge-based
economy, knowledge has become one of the main assets
of companies. Knowledge can be defined as: information;
the capability to interpret data and information through a
process of giving meaning to these data and information;
and an attitude aimed at wanting to do so. In making
these factors productive knowledge management can be
defined as achieving organisational goals through the
strategy-driven motivation and facilitation of (knowledge-
)workers to develop, enhance and use their capability to
interpret data and information (by using available sources
of information, experience, skills, culture, character, etc.)
through a process of giving meaning to these data and
information. Consultants and managers should ask
themselves strategic, organisational and instrumental
questions regarding knowledge management to stay
competitive in a highly dynamic and changing world.
Journal of Knowledge Management
Volume 3 . Number 2 . 1999 . pp. 94±109
# MCB University Press . ISSN 1367-3270
94
edge? Nothing more than this: something
strange must be converted into something
known [...] Is our need to know not just this
need for the known, the need to find something
that doesn't disturb us, between all the weird,
the unusual, the dubious? Couldn't it be the
instinct of fear that leads us to know? Couldn't
the cheering of him who knows, just be the
cheering over the feeling of a regained feeling of
safety? [..] The known is that which we are used
to; and that which we are used to, is the hardest
to know, that is to say, to see as a problem, that is
to say, to see as strange, as far away, and outside
us ?
(Friedrich Nietzsche (1882), Die froÈhliche
Wissenschaft)
Introduction
Background
The importance of knowledge management in a
knowledge-based economy
Since our economy has evolved over the last
couple of years from a managed economy into
an entrepreneurial economy (Audretsch and
Thurik, 1997), more commonly referred to as
a knowledge-based economy (OECD, 1996),
one of the main assets of companies has
become their stock of knowledge. Where
more traditional economies focused on land,
labour and capital as their main production
factors, in the knowledge-based economy
knowledge is becoming the primary produc-
tion factor on which competitive advantage
rests. This macro-level observation has im-
plications at a micro-level; companies have to
deal with this emphasis on knowledge in their
business. One way of doing this is through the
management of knowledge, which is one of
the hottest issues in literature on management
at present. Authors like Peter Senge (1990),
Peter Drucker (1993), Alvin and Heidi
Toffler (1993), Ikujiro Nonaka and Hirotaka
Takeuchi (1995), and in The Netherlands,
Dany Jacobs (1996) and Mathieu Weggeman
(1997) all emphasise the importance of deal-
ing intelligently with knowledge.
Purpose of this article
In this article the important concepts in
knowledge management are defined and the
process of knowledge management is con-
ceptualized. On that basis the questions
which play a role in knowledge management
are formulated.
 Questions in knowledge management
Roelof P. uit Beijerse
The model and the questions serve two
purposes. In trying to answer them the
manager or the consultant can:
(1) obtain an idea of the strengths and
weaknesses of an organization ± at a
strategic, organizational and instrumental
level ± with respect to knowledge man-
agement; and
(2) become sensitized to the points for
improvement in this field[1].
Another, more modest aim of this article, is to
offer an introduction into the highly interest-
ing field of knowledge management. I hope
that this article will encourage the reader to
think about the knowledge he or she does, but
mainly does not, use, and that this will lead
him or her to the most common human act of
asking questions.
The development of the knowledge-
based economy
In classical economic theories,
knowledge was seen as external to the
economic process
Over the last decades there has been a
continuous discussion between economists
about the role technology and knowledge play
in economic growth[2]. This discussion fo-
cused on the question of whether these factors
play any role in economic growth. It seems
that those who gave a positive answer to this
question have won the plea. Knowledge is not
only widely seen as a key asset in companies.
It is, at the same time, becoming the most
important determinant of economic growth.
In the classical theories of economic growth,
technological development was seen as
something that went on in an autonomous
way, outside economic processes. Economic
growth was explained only by the growth of
the world population (the quantity of labour
power) and by the technological development
(the quality of labour power). Hardly any
attention was paid to the role played by
knowledge in all this.
The resource-based theory of the firm
has shown that investments in knowledge
as a reproducible production factor lead
to economic growth
The new resource-based theory of the firm
recognizes knowledge as a new reproducible
production factor. Investments in intangible
assets can lead to economic growth without
needing any extra labour power. In the
95
Journal of Knowledge Management
Volume 3 . Number 2 . 1999 . 94±109
classical economic theory this labour power
meant an eventual stop to economic growth
(SER, 1995). Now it is accepted that knowl-
edge has spillover effects, which can lead to
knowledge created by company X being used
by company Y, and ``spillovers from the
existing stock of knowledge are crucial inputs
in the production of knowledge'' (Minne,
1996). The resource-based theory thus leads
to the point of view that knowledge and
technology add value to economic processes,
and it states that technology (i.e. knowledge)
is the most important driver in economic
growth (EIM, 1993). This value can be
stimulated by companies, but it can also be
stimulated and subsidized by the government.
Knowledge is seen as a company's key
asset
Knowledge is thus seen as a company's key
asset, or, as futurologists Toffler and Toffler
(1993) put it: ``The real value of companies
like Compaq or Kodak, Hitachi or Siemens,
depends more on the ideas, insights and
information in the heads of their employees
and in the data banks and patents these
companies control than on the trucks, as-
sembly lines, and other physical assets they
may have. Thus capital itself is now increas-
ingly based on intangibles.''
Western economies become more and
more knowledge-intensive
``Knowledge, as embodied in human beings
(as `human capital') and in technology, has
always been central to economic develop-
ment. But only over the last few years has its
relative importance been recognized, just as
that importance is growing. The OECD
economies are more strongly dependent on
the production, distribution and use of
knowledge than ever before'', says the OECD
in its study The Knowledge-Based Economy
(1996). In The Knowledge-Based Economy, the
OECD argues that politicians and policy
makers increasingly have to be aware of the
fact that contemporary society is an informa-
tion society, and that the contemporary
economy is a knowledge-based economy or
has to be a knowledge-based economy. The
OECD estimates that 50 percent of the GNP
of the largest OECD-countries is knowledge-
based. It also observes an increasing part of
export being knowledge-intensive, and it sees
a continuing rise in researchers being
educated.
 Questions in knowledge management
Roelof P. uit Beijerse
The most important source of wealth in
the contemporary post-capitalist society
is knowledge and information
Management guru Peter Drucker is very clear
in his conclusions when he analyzes this
knowledge-based economy; his plea is pas-
sionately in favour of the importance of
knowledge, and he says that the only ± or at
least the most important ± source of wealth in
the contemporary post-capitalist society is
knowledge and information (Drucker, 1993).
He observes three fundamental changes in
knowledge during the twentieth century (see
Table I). First, there was the industrial
revolution where knowledge was being ap-
plied to tools, processes and products. Next,
there was the productivity revolution when
people like Taylor and Ford began to apply
knowledge to human labour. The revolution
we see before us now is the management
revolution in which knowledge is being
applied to knowledge itself.
This is not to say that the traditional
production factors of land and labour have
disappeared. They have merely changed
position. As long as there is knowledge,
Drucker says, the other production factors are
easy to obtain. Drucker sees the most
important challenge of the knowledge-based
economy as being to find a methodology, a
discipline or a process with which information
can be made productive.
The managed economy has (to) become
an entrepreneurial economy, which is
better equipped to deal with knowledge
as input and as output
Another approach to the rise of a knowledge-
based economy is given by the economists
David Audretsch and Roy Thurik. In Sources
of Growth: the Entrepreneurial versus the Man-
aged Economy (1997), Audretsch and Thurik
build a framework of which the main thesis is
that there is a fundamental shift going on in
most OECD-countries from a managed
economy to an entrepreneurial economy.
The argument of Audretsch and Thurik
starts with their plea that the supposed trade-
off between the creation of jobs and the
Table I Revolutions in society
First Second
Revolution Industrial Productivity
Application of Tools, process Human labour
knowledge and products
Journal of Knowledge Management
Volume 3 . Number 2 . 1999 . 94±109
reduction of unemployment on the one hand
and the payment of lower wages and the
deterioration of a civil society on the other
hand is fiction. Although this trade-off is an
actual fact in the managed economy, in the
entrepreneurial economy this trade-off is no
longer real. The heart of the difference
between the managed versus the entrepre-
neurial economy is given in Table II.
According to Audretsch and Thurik,
growth and the creation of jobs are hampered
in most OECD-countries by the twin forces of
globalization: ``On the one hand the advent of
new competition has come from low-cost, but
relatively highly-educated and skill-intensive,
countries in Central and Eastern Europe as
well as in Asia. On the other hand, the
telecommunications and computer revolu-
tions have drastically reduced the cost of
shifting not just capital, but also information
out of the high-cost locations of Europe and
into lower-cost locations around the globe.''
This has put pressure on the managed
economy and has led to the importance of
knowledge in economic competition. Because
knowledge is uncertain as input and as out-
put, governments are forced to focus their
policy on rebuilding their economies into an
entrepreneurial economy.
New kinds of ± ``soft'' and immaterial ±
knowledge become important
Dany Jacobs writes in his Het kennisoffensief
(1996) about four stages in the development
of the knowledge-based economy, which
overlap to some extent. First, there is the
stage of the increasing importance of infor-
mation in which information and
communication technology are being broadly
applied. Owing to these technologies, it is
Table II Main characteristics of the managed versus the entrepreneurial
economy
Managed economy Entrepreneurial
economy
Input Land, labour and capital Knowledge
Output Manufactured products Knowledge
Features Certainty Uncertainty
Easy to shift around Costly to transact
the world
Symmetric across Asymmetric across
Third people people
Government Control Enabling
Management
Economy Economies of scale Economies of diversity
Knowledge
Industrial structure Large corporations Small enterprises
96
 Questions in knowledge management
Roelof P. uit Beijerse
possible to organize processes in the company
more efficiently; the transport and exchange
of information can go faster. Secondly, the
knowledge-based economy is marked by a
shortening of the life cycle of products and
technologies. As entrepreneurs use the tech-
nological possibilities to offer their customers
a broader spectrum of products, these custo-
mers use this variety to put emphasis on their
individuality and to strengthen their identity.
Competition by imitation therefore becomes
almost impossible.
These changes accompany the development
of the ``soft'' side of products becoming more
important. These soft sides demand an
entirely new kind of knowledge; about
changes in markets, tastes, values and life
style. This development is also closely related
to the third development, which is the
observed immaterialization of the economy.
The economy has evolved from a supply-side
economy to a demand-side economy where
the influence of consumers is greater. This
has led to the growing importance of mar-
keting, consumer research and product
design. These elements lead to a competitive
advantage for companies in the knowledge-
based economy. The fourth development
with which Jacobs deals is the rising of the
network economy. These are human net-
works that are necessary to deal with an
economy in which specialization and the
combination of different forms of knowledge
are crucial.
The demands of the knowledge-based
economy
In the discussion about the knowledge-based
economy it has so far become clear that its
challenges lie in making information produc-
tive (Drucker), in handling the uncertainty of
knowledge in a globalized world (Audretsch
and Thurik) and in coming to terms with the
growing importance of consumers and their
individual wishes (Jacobs). In this knowledge-
based economy, organizations increasingly
have to deal with such matters as:
. an increasing complexity of products and
processes;
. a growing reservoir of relevant knowl-
edge, both technical and non-technical;
. increasing competition in an economy
with shorter product life cycles, in which
case learning processes have to be
quicker;
97
Journal of Knowledge Management
Volume 3 . Number 2 . 1999 . 94±109
. an increased focus on the core compe-
tencies of the firm which have to be
coordinated, but letting go less relevant
tasks;
. companies will increasingly have the work
done by a flexible workforce, which leads
to a capricious, changing workforce,
which makes holding on to knowledge
and transferring knowledge all the more
difficult (Kalff et al., 1996).
The advantages of knowledge
management
The translation of these grand tasks at a
micro-level finds its beginning in knowledge
management, recently a common topic of
discussion. It is said that knowledge man-
agement can enable companies to face the
complexities accompanying the emergence of
the knowledge-based economy. By managing
knowledge, organizations can:
. improve efficiency;
. improve the market position by operating
more intelligently on the market;
. enhance the continuity of the company;
. enhance the profitability of the company;
. optimize the interaction between product
development and marketing;
. improve the relevant (group)
competencies;
. make professionals learn more efficiently
and more effectively;
. provide a better foundation for making
decisions like make-or-buy of new
knowledge and technology, alliances and
merges;
. improve communication between
knowledge-workers;
. enhance synergy between knowledge-
workers;
. ensure that knowledge-workers stay with
the company;
. make the company focus on the core
business and on critical company
knowledge.
Knowledge management as ``one''
answer to these demands
Research by the Dutch Knowledge Manage-
ment Network showed that the average
company only uses 20 percent of the knowl-
edge that is potentially available in the
company. In addition, the Dutch Bureau of
Industrial Property has estimated that Dutch
trade and industry spend three billion guilders
on a yearly basis on reinventing things that
 Questions in knowledge management
Roelof P. uit Beijerse
already exist (Weggeman and Cornelissen,
1997). These figures should suffice to em-
phasize the importance of dealing intelligently
with the knowledge offered by the knowledge-
based economy. As has already been stated:
one way of doing this is through the man-
agement of knowledge.
Managing knowledge
What is management?
The need for a clear definition of management
Just as with every crucial concept that is the
subject of human thought, the word man-
agement goes by many different definitions. A
philosopher once said ± in trying to make an
end to the endless discussion on what
philosophy is or should be ± that philosophy
should be defined as that which philosophers
do. Of course this ``solution'', though hu-
morous, did not satisfy the philosophical
world, and rightly so. To say that manage-
ment is that which managers do, would be
partly right ± i.e. in a descriptive sense ± but
for the greater part wrong ± i.e. in a
prescriptive sense. A great deal of manage-
ment is intuition, and a lot of success in
management finds its basis in intuition
(Rowan, 1989). However, when the aim is to
build a conceptual model of knowledge
management, such a definition does not make
things very clear. It is therefore necessary to
define management in a conceptually clear
way and examine some definitions of man-
agement and see what the crucial aspects of
the term are.
Management as a process of planning,
organizing, leading and controlling
Daft (1993) defines management as ``the
attainment of organizational goals in an
effective and efficient manner through plan-
ning, organizing, leading and controlling
organizational resources''. In this definition,
planning (defining goals for future organiza-
tional performance and deciding on the tasks
and resource use needed to attain them),
organizing (assigning tasks, grouping tasks
into departments and allocating resources to
departments), leading (the use of influence to
motivate employees to achieve the organiza-
tion's goals) and controlling (monitoring
employees' activities, keeping the organiza-
tion on track toward its goals and making
corrections as needed) are seen as the key
management functions. They are fed by
98
Journal of Knowledge Management
Volume 3 . Number 2 . 1999 . 94±109
human resources, financial resources, raw
materials, technological resources and infor-
mation. They lead to a certain performance
such as goals, products, services, efficiency
and effectiveness.
A similar definition is found with Schieman
et al. (1989). They see management as a
process of determining goals, determining
policies, planning, organizing, activating
employees and controlling processes, which
together lead to achieving goals. Schieman et
al. notice that management is an activity that
can be divided broadly into two activities:
(1) activities to determine strategies, i.e. goals
and policies; and
(2) activities to realize these strategies, i.e. the
organization, the activation of employees
and control of the processes.
Management as people's business
Where Daft and Schieman et al. lay the
emphasis on the processes of management ±
of which people are an important part ±
Reeves (1994) argues that the most important
thing in management is working with people.
According to Reeves, management is ``getting
things done through people. It is also deciding
what should be done and making sure that
what is being done is worthwhile doing''.
Reeves is not the only one who lays the
emphasis more on people than on the
processes. Swieringa and Wierdsma (1990)
notice that ``a key element in almost all
definitions [of management] is that the key
function of management is: activating people
to show the required behaviour''. The direct
activation of people, Swieringa and Wierdsma
call leadership, while indirect activation ± by
developing an effective organization consist-
ing of strategy, structure, culture and systems
± is called management.
Four central elements in most definitions of
management
When we look at these definitions of man-
agement, there are four elements that seem to
be important in defining management:
(1) The first function of management is the
formulation of a strategy ± doing the right
things.
(2) The second function of management is
making sure that this strategy is realized ±
doing things right.
(3) The third element is that the organization
is a tool in fulfilling these two functions
(see Appendix 1).
 Questions in knowledge management
Roelof P. uit Beijerse
(4) A central ± fourth ± element in manage-
ment ± which should not surprise us when
we look at what an organization is ± are
the people who manage and who are
managed. Management is people's busi-
ness.
Our definition
Having all this in mind we define manage-
ment here as follows:
Management is the strategy-driven motivation
and facilitation of people, aimed at reaching the
organizational goals.
The organizational resources that can be used
to reach this consist of the organizational
structure, the organizational culture and
specific systems.
So far as clarifying the management con-
cept is concerned, the second concept which
needs clarification when speaking of knowl-
edge management is, of course, the term
knowledge.
What is knowledge?
Focusing on key elements in knowledge
What has been said on the term management,
also holds true for the term knowledge, and
maybe more so. One of the important
discussions in the philosophy of knowledge is
the argument whether knowledge finds its
basis in perception and experience or whether
it finds its basis in ratio and reasoning. This
discussion has kept philosophers occupied for
over two millennia, and finds its origin in the
disagreement between the school of Aristotle,
the empiricists, and the school of Plato, the
rationalists. We shall not focus on that
discussion here[3]. Instead of that, we shall
present some definitions of knowledge and
see what the key elements of the concept are.
Knowledge as a basic human need
As we saw in the quotation from Nietzsche at
the beginning of this article, knowledge can be
seen as some basic need of human beings. It is
the need to structure the world around them,
to categorize it and to interpret it in certain
ways. Basically it is the need to reduce
uncertainty in their lives. In one well-known
model in psychology which deals with human
motives ± that of Abraham Maslow (1970) ±
different human needs and motives are
prioritized in order of importance in the lives
of people (see Figure 1). According to
Maslow, safety is the second important need
of human behaviour, immediately after the
biological needs.
99
Journal of Knowledge Management
Volume 3 . Number 2 . 1999 . 94±109
Figure 1 Maslow's hierarchy of needs
Knowledge has to do with information ...
The basic human need for knowledge, how-
ever, says nothing about what knowledge is.
Murray (http://www.ktic.com/topic6/
13_term2.html) says for instance: ``Knowl-
edge is information transformed into
capabilities for effective action. In effect,
knowledge is action.'' Something similar is
posed by Den Hertog and Huizenga (1997)
who define knowledge as ``a collection of
information and rules with which a certain
function can be fulfilled''. This aspect of
capabilities resulting from information is
something we also see at Weggeman (1997),
but he adds some other aspects: ``Knowledge
is a personal capacity that should be seen as
the product of the information, the experi-
ence, the skills and the attitude which
someone has at a certain point in time''.
... but is information ... plus ...what is under the
tip of the iceberg
As we see in all these definitions, knowledge is
something more than information. Knowl-
edge is seen as a capability, as something that
cannot be said, as information plus some-
thing. A well-known distinction in this respect
is that between explicit and tacit knowledge.
This difference was first introduced by the
Hungarian chemist, economist and philoso-
pher Michael Polanyi. He stated that personal
or tacit knowledge is extremely important for
human cognition, because people acquire
knowledge by the active (re)creation and
organization of their own experience (Polanyi,
1966). In this respect, the knowledge that can
be expressed in words and numbers is just the
tip of the iceberg (see Figure 2).
Whereas traditional epistemology[4] finds
its basis in knowledge creation as a result of
the difference between objects and subjects ±
 Questions in knowledge management
Roelof P. uit Beijerse
Figure 2 Explicit knowledge is just the tip of the
iceberg
human subjects acquire knowledge of (on)
human objects by processes of induction and
deduction ± Polanyi states that people create
knowledge by becoming involved in the
object. Tacit and explicit knowledge are
complementary to each other, and in the
creative actions of people they interact and
influence each other. A process model of
knowledge creation builds on the crucial
presupposition that human knowledge is
created and enlarged by means of a social
interaction between tacit and explicit knowl-
edge. This interaction is called a knowledge
conversion. It is further important to note that
this conversion does not take place within
individuals but between individuals ± within
an organization (Nonaka and Takeuchi,
1995).
Four kinds of knowledge creation
The interaction between tacit and explicit
knowledge can go in four different directions
(Table III):
(1) Socialization. The exchange of experi-
ences whereby personal knowledge is
being created in the form of mental
models. Examples of situations where this
happens are master-fellow-relationships,
on-the-job-training, trial-and-error-pol-
icy, imitating others, constructive
brainstorm sessions, practising and train-
ing, the exchanging of ideas and a lot of
talking.
Table III Four kinds of interaction between tacit and explicit knowledege
Into tacit Into explicit
knowledge knowledge
From tacit knowledge 1 Socialize 2 Externalize
From explicit 4 Internalize 3 Combine
knowledge
Source: Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995
100
Journal of Knowledge Management
Volume 3 . Number 2 . 1999 . 94±109
(2) Externalization. Personal or tacit knowl-
edge is made explicit in the form of
metaphors, analogies, hypotheses and
models, for example in language. One
usually finds externalization in the design
process when conversations and collective
consideration are used to boost this
design process. Nonaka and Takeuchi
find externalization the key process in
knowledge conversion because it is here
that from tacit knowledge new and
explicit designs are born.
(3) Combination. Notions are synthesized into
a knowledge system. People exchange
knowledge, and this knowledge is com-
bined through documents, meetings,
telephone conversations and the ex-
change of information via media like
computer networks. New knowledge can
also be created through the restructuring
of existing information by sorting, adding,
combining and categorizing explicit
knowledge. Combination is the kind of
knowledge creation which we usually
encounter in education and training.
Examples of combination are knowledge
and information systems.
(5) Internalization. A process in which explicit
knowledge becomes part of tacit knowl-
edge. This can happen through learning-
by-doing, and documented knowledge
can play a helpful role in this process.
Internalization can be seen when new
(knowledge-)workers ``relive'' a project by
studying the archives of the project.
Internalization can also be seen when
experienced managers or technicians give
lectures or when authors decide to write
the biography of an entrepreneur or
enterprise.
Four different kinds of knowledge being created
The four kinds of interaction between tacit
and explicit knowledge, i.e. the four ways of
creating knowledge, together form a kind of
spiral which goes from socialization to ex-
ternalization to combination to internalization
to socialization to externalization and so on.
In the four different situations, four different
kinds of knowledge are being created, over
and over again (see Table IV).
We thus have four different kinds of
knowledge. Of course there are many more
distinctions that can be made[5]; the main
focus of all these distinctions, however, is that
between tacit and explicit knowledge. The
 Questions in knowledge management
Roelof P. uit Beijerse
Table IV Different kinds of knowledge being created
Into explicit
Into tacit knowledge knowledge
From tacit knowledge 1 Socialize 2 Externalize
sympathized knowledge conceptual knowledge
From explicit 4 Internalize 3 Combine
knowledge operational knowledge system knowledge
Source: Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995
process model of knowledge creation which
Nonaka and Takeuchi developed has the
advantage that it is a dynamic model of
knowledge. We shall need that later in
conceptualizing the knowledge management
process. Furthermore, as we shall see later on,
the distinction between tacit and explicit
knowledge is crucial in dealing with the
management of knowledge.
Our definition
Having all this in mind, we define knowledge
here as follows:
Knowledge is seen here as information; the
capability to interpret data and information
through a process of giving meaning to these
data and information; and an attitude aimed at
wanting to do so.
New information and knowledge are thus
being created, and tasks can be executed. The
capability and the attitude are of course the
result of available sources of information,
experience, skills, culture, character, person-
ality, feelings, etc.
What is knowledge management?
Knowledge management is a specification of
management as such
Now we know what knowledge is and we
know what management is. It is now time to
look at what it means to manage knowledge.
We defined management as the strategy-
driven motivation and facilitation of people,
aimed at reaching the organizational goals.
The organizational resources which can be
used to reach these, consist of the organiza-
tional structure, the organizational culture
and specific systems. Knowledge was defined
as the capability to interpret data and
information through a process of giving
meaning to these data and information. New
information and knowledge are thus being
created, and tasks can be executed. This
capability is the result of available sources of
information, experience, skills, culture, char-
acter, personality, feelings, etc.
101
Journal of Knowledge Management
Volume 3 . Number 2 . 1999 . 94±109
When we look at these two definitions it
becomes clear that knowledge management is
somewhat more specific than management as
such. Whereas management focuses on mo-
tivating and stimulating people, knowledge
management focuses on a certain aspect of
people, i.e. their knowledge.
In trying to define knowledge management
it is important to see what we regard as
knowledge, because it is this definition which
determines the way we look at knowledge
management (Allee, 1997). Let us look at
some examples of how knowledge manage-
ment is defined by others.
Different definitions of knowledge management
Sveiby (http://www.sveiby.com.au/
knowledgemanagement.html) for instance
puts the emphasis on intangible assets when
defining knowledge. He therefore defines
knowledge management as ``the art of creat-
ing value from an organization's intangible
assets''. Den Hertog and Huizenga (1997)
emphasize the choice organizations have to
make regarding their core competencies. With
these core competencies, companies can
distinguish themselves from others. The
choice for certain core competencies Den
Hertog and Huizenga call ``the knowledge
ambition''. Thus, knowledge management
according to them is ``using instruments to
realize the knowledge ambition''.
Another good example of the link between
the definition of knowledge and the way to
look at the management of knowledge is the
work of Mathieu Weggeman (1997). Central
to Weggeman's work is ``the knowledge value
chain''. In the process of knowledge manage-
ment, Weggeman distinguishes four
successive constituent processes (Figure 3).
First, the strategic need for knowledge
needs to be determined. Second, the knowl-
edge gap needs to be determined. This is the
quantitative and qualitative difference be-
tween the knowledge needed and that
available in the organization. In the third
place, this knowledge gap needs to be
narrowed by developing new knowledge, by
buying knowledge, by improving existing
knowledge or by getting rid of knowledge that
is out of date or has become irrelevant.
Fourth, the available knowledge is dissemi-
nated and applied to serve the interest of
customers and other stakeholders. It is
important to notice that knowledge manage-
ment here does not refer to information
technology only. Attention is also being paid
to strategic, personal, organizational and
 Questions in knowledge management
Roelof P. uit Beijerse
Figure 3 The knowledge value chain
cultural aspects, which are at least as im-
portant as the technological side of the story.
With this in mind, Weggeman defines
knowledge management as ``arranging and
managing the operational processes in the
knowledge value chain in such a way that
realizing the collective ambition, the targets
and the strategy of the organization is being
promoted''.
Our definition
The definition of knowledge we developed
here puts more emphasis on the importance
of tacit knowledge, and we see this as its
added value. Given our definitions of man-
agement and knowledge, we define
knowledge management as follows.
Knowledge management is achieving organiza-
tional goals through the strategy-driven
motivation and facilitation of (knowledge-)
workers to develop, enhance and use their
capability to interpret data and information (by
using available sources of information, experi-
ence, skills, culture, character, personality,
feelings, etc.) through a process of giving
meaning to these data and information.
Explaining the crucial concepts of our definition
Let us look at the crucial concepts of this
definition in more detail:
. Organizational goals: These organizational
goals can be anything that the organiza-
tion in question strives for. It can be
increasing sales, making more profit or
enhancing the competitive advantage.
But it can also be better service for the
customer, increasing the learning cap-
ability of the (knowledge-) workers or
having more job satisfaction.
. Strategy-driven: It is important that policy
regarding knowledge management is
strategically reflected upon. A strategy
can be a benchmark against which the
policy can be tested.
102
Journal of Knowledge Management
Volume 3 . Number 2 . 1999 . 94±109
. Motivation and facilitation of (knowledge-)
workers: knowledge management should
be aimed at motivating and facilitating
(knowledge-) workers in their dealing with
knowledge. It is something which cannot
be extorted. Motivation is the responsi-
bility of management, facilitating is the
responsibility of the (technological) staff.
. Capability to interpret data and information:
giving meaning to data and information
to create knowledge is seen here as the
core of the knowledge management pro-
cess. We are in agreement with authors
such as Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) and
Van der Spek and Spijkervet (1996) when
they say that knowledge is a dynamic
human process in which ``truth'' is
created. In other words, it is implicitly
stated that there is no such thing as one
truth and one possibility of knowing the
truth. This is not just a sophisticated
philosophical discussion. It also holds
true for dealing with knowledge in a day-
to-day business. Knowledge should be
judged on its true merits. What is
knowledge for company A can be worth-
less data (if at all) for company B.
. Organizational resources: The organiza-
tional resources which can be used to
motivate and stimulate people are as we
saw in defining the organization ± the
organizational structure ± and, as a part of
that, a knowledge infrastructure; the
organizational culture, including a certain
style of management; and certain systems
and procedures.
A conceptual knowledge management
model
Some building blocks
Various sources are used here to provide
blocks to build the conceptual knowledge
 Questions in knowledge management Journal of Knowledge Management
Roelof P. uit Beijerse Volume 3 . Number 2 . 1999 . 94±109

management model. Some of these sources Figure 4 The knowledge infrastructure

have already been dealt with ± we shall
recapitulate them briefly ± others will be
described somewhat more extensively in this
section.
Strategy and mission statement
The first building block is the fact that the
management process is strategy-driven. A
strategy is ``a general plan for the way the
company will deploy its competence and
resources in order to achieve overall goals''
(European Community, 1995). The strategy
of an organization is usually something that is
formulated for a short- and medium-term
period. In terms of knowledge management, of the organization. The knowledge policy
the strategy should result in some sort of determines what is to be learned, where
knowledge policy. learning will take place, who will learn and
Besides strategy, we can distinguish a when learning will take place. The culture of
mission statement or vision, which is formu- the organization determines above all the not
lated over a longer period of time. In a unimportant question of how learning will
mission statement an organization expresses take place.
what distinguishes it from other companies
and where it wants to go over a longer period Instruments: knowledge creation and learning
of time. Ideally the mission statement leads to The third important building block in
a shared vision (Ackoff, 1987) or a collective knowledge management is formed by the
ambition (Weggeman, 1997). instruments used to manage the tacit and
explicit knowledge. Different instruments can
Organization be used, not only to facilitate the knowledge
A second important building block is the
management process, but also to facilitate the
organization which is seen here as an instru-
important aspect of learning within organiza-
ment in knowledge management. In an earlier
tions. Van Heijst and Kruizinga (1998) for
section we saw that an organization consists of
instance distinguish different sources of
the elements strategy, structure, culture, style
learning. Each source has its own specific
of management, personnel and systems. The
element or instrument in the knowledge
structure of the organization is the result of
infrastructure (Table V).
the division of labour, tasks and responsibil-
In this article, we have chosen to classify the
ities in both horizontal and vertical directions.
instruments according to the interaction
An important part of the structure is the
between tacit and explicit knowledge on the
knowledge infrastructure. A knowledge in-
one hand, and the processes in the knowledge
frastructure is the sum of those organizational
value chain on the other hand. What results is
structures and guidelines, as well as technical
a clear chart in which every instrument which
and non-technical expedients, of which the
organization has disposal. These structures, is aimed at managing knowledge can be
guidelines and expedients support and facil- placed (see Table VI).
itate the learning process within the
organization. With them, the goals of the Table V Sources of learning in the knowledge infrastructure
organization are to be reached in the most
Source of learning Element in the knowledge infrastructure
efficient way (Van Heijst and Kruizinga,
1998). Experts ? Educational programme
The idea behind this model is (Figure 4) Competition ? Business intelligence
that a knowledge infrastructure ± which has as Customers ? Helpdesk
goal enabling the organization to learn in an Each other ? Informal meetings
optimal way ± has both a facilitating and an Organization ? Knowledge counter
organizational dimension. The knowledge Shop floor ? (Virtual) suggestion box
infrastructure is being fed by the knowledge Past ? Archive
policy of the organization and by the culture Research ? R&D department

103
 Questions in knowledge management Journal of Knowledge Management
Roelof P. uit Beijerse Volume 3 . Number 2 . 1999 . 94±109

Table VI Chart of knowledge management instruments left to right, because this is also the temporal
Socialize Externalize Combine Internalize way in which the model should be used:
. It is important that views and ideas about
Determining
knowledge management in an organiza-
knowledge
tion start by looking at the market and the
gap
competition. It is crucial that the man-
Developing/
agement of the company knows what the
buying
market needs, what customers want and
knowldege
what the competition does.
Knowledge . On this basis, the management of an
sharing
organization should develop a long-term
Evaluating
vision in which the company expresses
knowledge
where it wants to go in the future.
Together with a long-term vision, the
In Appendix 2 we have added an entire list of
company should formulate a short- and
various knowledge management instruments medium-term strategy. This strategy says
which were found in an empirical study on 12 how certain set goals should be achieved.
SME-companies (Uit Beijerse, 1997). The long-term vision should ideally result
in a collective ambition which the mem-
A conceptual knowledge management bers of the organization share with each
model other. The medium-term and short-term
In this section a conceptual knowledge man- strategies should be laid down in some
agement model is developed. The model which kind of knowledge policy which is acces-
is presented here has had its first experience in sible to, and known by, all members of
diagnosing an organization which is planning to the organization.
introduce a policy in knowledge management . The core of the knowledge management
(Uit Beijerse et al., 1998). The results of this process is the instruments with which
experience were positive, in that the model learning is being stimulated and knowl-
seems to cover all the important aspects of edge is being managed. These
knowledge management. instruments are classified according to the
The model is shown in Figure 5. The kind of interaction between tacit and
important elements will be dealt with from explicit knowledge ± i.e. socialization,

Figure 5 A conceptual knowledge management model

104
 Questions in knowledge management
Roelof P. uit Beijerse
Table VII Examples of knowledge management instrumentsa
Socialize
Determining knowledge gap Management by
walking around
Developing/buying knowldege Traineeship
Knowledge sharing Project teams
Evaluating knowledge Informal evaluation
a
Note: A full list of instruments is given in Appendix 2.
These orginate from an empirical study on 12 SME-companies (Uit Beijerse, 1997)
externalization, combination and inter-
nalization ± and the four main aspects of
the knowledge value chain ± i.e. deter-
mining the knowledge gap (between
needed and available knowledge), devel-
oping and/or buying knowledge, sharing
knowledge and evaluating (the use of)
knowledge. To make things somewhat
clearer this is shown in Table VII.
. These instruments together form the
knowledge infrastructure of the organi-
zation, being the entire range of
instruments and systems which the
organization wishes to use to stimulate
learning and to manage knowledge.
. The knowledge infrastructure is part of
the overall organizational structure. It is
important that this organizational struc-
ture facilitates the knowledge
management practices.
. Above and beyond the organizational
structure and the knowledge infrastruc-
ture of the organization, is the culture of
the organization. A stimulating and mo-
tivating culture ± for which rules are very
hard to give[6] ± is an indispensable
element in a successful knowledge man-
agement policy. It is important that the
culture of the organization is focused on
the sharing of knowledge among (knowl-
edge-) workers.
. An element closely linked to the organi-
zational culture yet worthwhile and
important enough to mention separately,
is the style of management in the orga-
nization. Despite the very personal
character of this element, it can be
influenced to some extent. Like the
culture, the style of management also has
to be stimulating and motivating and
focused on sharing knowledge.
. When the process of knowledge manage-
ment runs as it should run, it leads to the
105
Journal of Knowledge Management
Volume 3 . Number 2 . 1999 . 94±109
Externalize Combine Internalize
Intranet Internet Detachment
Electronic R&D External training
boardrooms
Brainstorming Computer Cooperation with
networking others
Debriefing Benchmarking Reading reports
organizational goals which were set dur-
ing the ``strategic stage''. Of course, this is
not a linear process. Goals will be
constantly modified and updated. We
have therefore drawn a feedback loop
which makes the organization aware of
possible corrections needed in the short-
and medium-term vision of the knowl-
edge policy.
The important questions in knowledge
management
The elements in this conceptual knowledge
model all need attention when diagnosing and
implementing knowledge management.
Above all, they lead to some questions which
managers and consultants can and should ask
themselves. These questions can be divided
into four main parts:
(1) questions regarding the strategy of the
organization;
(2) questions regarding organizational
matters;
(3) questions regarding the instruments used
in knowledge management; and
(4) questions regarding the output of the
entire process.
In answering these questions, managers and
consultants should get a feeling about the
important issues in knowledge management
in their organization. Tailor-made solutions
in implementing knowledge management in
this respect cannot be given, because every
situation requires its own specific solution.
Through using the model and its questions,
however, the main topics in knowledge
management become clear. These are the
topics which can be the focus of possible
problems, or the source of potential solutions.
 Questions in knowledge management
Roelof P. uit Beijerse
Strategic questions
(1) Does the management of the organization
know what kind of market activities
competing companies undertake with
regard to the development of knowledge?
(2) Does the management of the organization
know what the core competencies of the
organization are in terms of knowledge
assets?
(3) Does the management of the organization
have a long-term vision about the
knowledge which will be needed in the
future? Given this, does the management
of the organization actively try to build a
collective ambition regarding this?
(4) Does the management of the organization
formulate short and medium-term stra-
tegies with regard to the acquisition,
sharing and evaluation of knowledge?
Given this, has the management formu-
lated a knowledge policy?
Organizational questions
(1) Does the organization have a knowledge
management-friendly organizational
structure that facilitates the acquirement,
the sharing and the evaluation of knowl-
edge between (knowledge-)workers?
(2) Does the organization have a knowledge
management-friendly organizational cul-
ture that motivates the acquisition, the
sharing and the evaluation of knowledge
between (knowledge-)workers?
(3) Is the style of management within the
organization such that it stimulates the
acquirement, the sharing and the evalua-
tion of knowledge between (knowledge-)
workers?
(4) Is there some kind of integrating knowl-
edge infrastructure within the
organization which secures the necessary
continuing steps to determine knowledge
gaps, develop and buy knowledge, share
knowledge and evaluate knowledge?
Instrumental questions
(1) Are there instruments within the organi-
zation which are specifically aimed at the
determination of the difference between
the available and the needed knowledge?
(2) Are there instruments within the organi-
zation which are specifically aimed at
decisions regarding the make-or-buy of
knowledge?
(3) Are there instruments within the organi-
zation which are specifically aimed at the
106
Journal of Knowledge Management
Volume 3 . Number 2 . 1999 . 94±109
development of knowledge based on the
determination of the knowledge gap?
(4) Are there instruments within the organi-
zation which are specifically aimed at
buying knowledge based on the determi-
nation of the knowledge gap?
(5) Are there instruments within the organi-
zation which are specifically aimed at the
sharing of the developed and bought
knowledge among the (knowledge-)
workers?
(6) Are there instruments available with
which the use of knowledge is (con-
stantly) monitored?
(7) Are there instruments available with
which the use of knowledge can be
evaluated?
(8) Are the instruments which are used to:
. determine the difference between the
available and the needed knowledge;
. take make-or-buy decisions;
. develop knowledge;
. buy knowledge;
. share knowledge;
. monitor the use of knowledge; and
. evaluate knowledge
in some way intertwined?
Output
(1) Were the goals which were set ``at the
beginning[7]'' reached? If not, how
should the knowledge infrastructure be
changed to achieve these goals?
(2) Were these goals reached due to the use
of instruments of knowledge manage-
ment?
(3) If so, what was the best practice in this
sense, and what can we learn from that?
Notes
1 For this purpose, a list of different knowledge
management instruments is added as Appendix 2.
These instruments were found in an empirical study
on 12 SME- companies (Uit Beijerse, 1997).
2 This dsicussion is described in more detail in Uit
Beijerse (1997).
3 That is done in Uit Beijerse (1996).
4 Epistemology is another word for the theory of
knowledge, and entails the philosophical examina-
tion of the origins, the problems and the conditions
for acquiring knowledge and the processing of that
knowledge. Important questions in epistemology
deal with problems regarding observation, con-
sciousness, memory, truth, doubt and the forming
of judgements.
 Questions in knowledge management
Roelof P. uit Beijerse
5 See for instance Uit Beijerse (1997) for an overview
of different ways of looking at knowledge.
6 As previously stated, an organizational culture is
determined by many factors, most of which are very
hard to influence. The culture of an organization is
determined by factors such as the products or
services, the location of the company, the size of
the company, the legal form of the organization, the
history of the company and the structure and the
strategy of the company.
7 Inverted commas are added because this whole
process is cyclical ± ans some times even chaotic ±
by nature. Therefore, there is no real beginning.
References
Ackoff, R.L. (1987), ``Mission statements'', Planning
Review, July/August.
Allee, V. (1997), ``Twelve principles of knowledge
management'', Training & Development, November.
Athos, A. and Pascale, R. (1981), The Art of Japanese
Management, New York, NY.
Audretsch, D.B. and Thurik, A.R. (1997), Sources of
Growth: the Entrepreneurial versus the Managed
Economy, London.
Beijerse, R.P. uit (1996), Macht is Kennis. Over Sociologie,
Wetenschap en Samenleving, doctoraalscriptie
Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.
Beijerse, R.P. uit (1997), Kennismanagement in het
midden- en kleinbedrijf. Een state-of-the-art studie,
EIM, Zoetermeer.
Beijerse, R.P. uit et al. (1998), Kennis is kracht.
Strategische notitie over kennismanagement bij
EIM, EIM, Zoetermeer.
Daft, R.L. (1993 [1988]), Management, Orlando, Fort
Worth, TX.
Drucker, P.F. (1993), Post-Capitalist Society, New York,
NY.
EIM (1993), Kleinschalig ondernemen 1993. Dynamiek en
ondernemersklimaat, EIM, Zoetermeer.
European Community (1995), The European Handbook of
Management Consultancy. Strategic Innovation ± a
European Approach to Management Consultancy,
Dublin.
Giddens (1993 [1989]), Sociology, Cambridge/Oxford.
Heijst, G. van and Kruizinga, E. (1998), Kennisinfrastruc-
tuur. De ruggengraat van de lerende organisatie,
CIBIT, Utrecht.
Hertog, F. den and Huizenga, E. (1997), De kennisfactor.
Concurreren als kennisonderneming, Deventer.
Jacobs, D. (1996), Het kennisoffensief. Slim concurreren in
de kenniseconomie, Alphen aan den Rijn/Diegem.
Kalff, P., Bouman, M., Holland, Ch. and van der Weele, E.
(1996), Kennismanagement in kleine en middel-
grote ondernemingen, TNO-STB, Apeldoorn.
Lahey, B.B. (1986 [1983]), Psychology. An Introduction,
Dubuque, IA.
Maslow, A. (1970), Motivation and Personality, New York,
NY.
Minne, B. (1996), ``Investments in the creation and
diffusion of knowledge'', CPB Report, nr.4.
Mintzberg, H. (1998), Mintzberg on Management,
Amsterdam.
107
Journal of Knowledge Management
Volume 3 . Number 2 . 1999 . 94±109
Murray, Ph.C. (not dated), ``Core concepts of knowledge
management'', article on website http://www.ktic.-
com/topic6/13_term2.html
Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995), The Knowledge-
Creating Company, New York, NY.
OECD (1996), The Knowledge-based Economy, Paris.
Peters T. and Waterman, R. (1982), In Search of
Excellence: Lessons from America's Best-Run Com-
panies, New York, NY.
Polanyi, M. (1966), The Tacit Dimension, Gloucester, MA.
Reeves, T. (1994), Managing Effectively: Developing
Yourself Through Experience, Oxford.
Reimann, B.C. and Wiener, Y. (1988), ``Corporate culture:
avoiding the elitist trap'', Business Horizons, March/
April.
Rowan, R. (1989 [1986]), The Intuitive Manager, Boston,
MA.
Schieman, C.J., Huijgen, J.H. and Gosselink, F.J. (1989),
Beheersing van bedrijfsprocessen, Leiden/Antwer-
pen.
Senge, P. (1990), The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice
of the Learning Organisation, New York, NY.
SER (1995), Kennis en economie, Den Haag.
Spek, R. van der, and Spijkervet, A. (1996), Kennisman-
agement. Intelligent omgaan met kennis, CIBIT,
Utrecht.
Sveiby, K.E. (not dated), ``What is knowledge manage-
ment?'', article on website http://
www.sveiby.com.au/knowledgemanagement.html
Swieringa, J. and Wierdsma, A.F.M. (1990), Op weg naar
de lerende organisatie. Over leren en opleiden van
organisaties, Groningen.
Toffler, A. and Toffler, H. (1993), War and Anti-War.
Survival at the Dawn of the 21st Century, London.
Watson, T.J. (1987 [1980]), Sociology, Work and Industry,
London/New York.
Weggeman, M.C.D.P. (1997), Kennismanagement. In-
richting en besturing van kennisintensieve
organisaties, Schiedam.
Weggeman, M.C.D.P. and Cornelissen, V.B.J. (1997),
``Kennismanagement'', HRM in de praktijk, Issue
article, nr. 8, Deventer.
Appendix 1
It is worthwhile to say a few words on
organizations here. A key element in defining
an organization seems to be its social char-
acter. Daft (1993) for instance defines an
organization as ``a social entity that is goal
directed and deliberately structured''. Watson
(1987) says something similar, but he also
focuses on the more structural aspects when
he defines formal organizations as ``social and
technical arrangements in which a number of
people come or are brought together in a
relationship where the actions of some are
directed by others towards the achievement of
certain goals''. Weggeman (1997) draws
attention to the voluntary character of the
institution: ``An organization [is] a collection
 Questions in knowledge management
Roelof P. uit Beijerse
of people of which most of them have chosen
to pursue a testable ideal or goal together''.
Last but not least, Mintzberg (1998) puts it as
follows: ``Organizing means [...] collective
action to fulfil a common mission, which is an
elegant way to say that a bunch of people
came together under a recognizable name to
produce certain services or products''.
A well-known and broadly used organiza-
tional model (Athos and Pascale, 1981; Peters
and Waterman, 1982; Weggeman, 1997;
Swieringa and Wierdsma, 1990) distinguishes
in the organization the elements strategy,
structure, culture, style of management,
personnel and systems. In an instrumental
sense, an organization therefore is a series of
instruments. Management has four instru-
ments to use to influence behaviour in such a
way that it focuses on that which the
economic environment wants or needs. These
instruments are strategy, structure, culture
and systems (see Figure A1).
In a strategic sense the important question
is how certain goals or targets of the organi-
zation are going to be achieved. This deals
with determining the situation required or
about changing an existing situation. It also is
about determining, changing or supplement-
ing the means used to reach the ideal situation
(Schieman et al., 1989). Strategy is sometimes
called the ``collective ambition'' of an organi-
zation (Weggeman, 1997). The structure of
the organization is what results from the
division of labour, tasks and responsibilities in
both horizontal and vertical directions. Cul-
ture is being defined as the revulsion of the
values and opinions which the members of an
organization share with each other. These
values become manifest in shared symbols
and patterns such as myths, rituals, stories,
anecdotes, legends and a special language
(Reimann and Wiener, 1988; Giddens,
1993). Systems, lastly, are the procedures and
Figure A1 An organizational model
108
Journal of Knowledge Management
Volume 3 . Number 2 . 1999 . 94±109
guidelines with which the work and the
cooperation of the (knowledge-) workers are
facilitated.
Key aspects in organizations thus are their
social nature ± which finds its expression in
the organizational culture ± the fact that it
usually is strategy-driven, the fact that is has a
certain organizational structure and the fact
that it uses certain systems to reach the goals
which have been set.
Appendix 2. Knowledge management
instruments
1. Determining the knowledge gap
. Develop knowledge information system.
. Organize meetings for knowledge sharing.
. Interview (knowledge-)workers.
. Organize brainstorm sessions (for in-
stance through using Group Systems).
. Draw up an inventory of personnel and
their qualifications.
. Search for best practices.
. Carry out knowledge mapping.
. Carry out case-studies into the own
organization.
. Develop scenarios.
. Hire researchers and consultants.
. Carry out strategic studies.
. Develop an intranet.
. Install Internet.
. Detach personnel.
. Assess customers.
. Assess markets.
. Manage by walking around.
. Manage by wandering around.
. Assess product developments.
. Assess competition.
2. Developing and buying knowledge
. Carry out strategic technology study.
. Carry out R&D.
. Install electronic boardroom.
. Use external training.
. Use business intelligence.
. Install helpdesk.
. Carry out customer satisfaction research.
. Carry out market research.
. Draw up an inventory of the need for
training and education of personnel, both
strategically as well as personal.
. Develop training and education plan.
. Educate and train personnel.
. Learn from projects, for instance by
evaluating them.
 Questions in knowledge management
Roelof P. uit Beijerse
. Develop career paths for personnel.
. Build a network of relations.
. Give personnel time to develop ideas.
. Facilitate streams of information.
. Facilitate training-on-the-job.
. Facilitate learning-by-doing.
. Facilitate job rotation.
. Create an open culture.
. Send personnel to conferences.
. Give personnel time to read professional
literature.
. Organize seminars with external speakers.
. Obtain knowledge from customers.
. Obtain knowledge from suppliers.
. Organize mentorship in units.
. Organize mentorship between units.
. Look for traineeships.
. Hire research and consultancy.
. Organize detachments.
. Install (virtual) suggestion box.
. Buy knowledge and information hard-
ware.
. Monitor the environment (benchmarks).
. Manage networks.
3. Knowledge sharing
. Archive projects.
. Use intervision.
. Install computer networks.
. Stimulate cooperation.
. Make project- or fact-sheets.
. Organize mentorship in units.
. Organize mentorship between units.
. Install helpdesk.
. Install knowledge counter.
. Look for traineeships.
. Organize task groups.
109
Journal of Knowledge Management
Volume 3 . Number 2 . 1999 . 94±109
. Organize theme groups.
. Stimulate teambuilding.
. Organize work meetings.
. Install knowledge management system.
. Work with databases.
. Appoint an information broker.
. Carry out internal audits.
. Debrief personnel.
. Enhance communication between per-
sonnel (for instance by lunchbreak
meetings).
. Facilitate job rotation.
. Organize autonomous work groups.
. Install an intranet.
. Facilitate exchanging of tasks.
. Use video conferencing.
. Use information technology.
. Facilitate internal detachment.
. Facilitate training-on-the-job.
. Facilitate informal gatherings.
. Organize cocktail hours.
. Facilitate culture of deliberation.
. Install electronic networks.
4. Evaluating knowledge
. Carry out internal audits.
. Carry out external audits.
. Carry out (informal) project evaluations.
. Interview suppliers.
. Interview customers.
. Carry out strategic studies.
. Organize workshops.
. Debrief leaving personnel.
. Use benchmarking.
. Read reports.
. Use handbooks.