Into the Wild Music Video by Eddie Vedder

Strategoc Leadership for Me.

Strategic Leadership for Me.

Recruitment Agencies

Management---------------------àStudent <-----------------Family

Colleagues and Friends

Positioning Map:

The positioning was expounded by Harris (1982), in which language exists only as concrete occasions of language in use. La langue is said to be an intellectualizing myth - only la parole is psychologically and socially real (DAVIES & HARRE, 1990).

In any literate societies instances of this writing can be drawn upon as concrete prototype of how to talk. We regard an immanentist stance with various similar theories about the sources of patterned human productions, specifically towards social rule sets (DAVIES & HARRE, 1990).

Since 'positioning' is mainly a conversational phenomenon we must clear at what level of analysis speaking together has to be taken as relevantly conversation. We take conversation to be a form of social interaction the products of which are also social, such as interpersonal relations. We must therefore, select analytical concepts that helps to reveal conversation as a structured set of speech-acts that is as sayings and doings of types defined by reference to their social (illocutionary) force. This level of analysis must be extended to include non-verbal contributions to conversation (DAVIES & HARRE, 1990).

Levels of analysis are based on entities and objects of study in the group. Entities are typically arranged in such an order that higher levels (groups) are included in lower level (individuals) and lower levels are embedded in higher levels too (Dansereau et. Al 1984; Yammarino 1996; Yammarino and Bass ,1991) (Yammarino, Dionne, Chun, & Dansereau, 2005).

There are 4 levels of human analysis that are necessary for Leadership purposes (Yammarino, Dionne, Chun, & Dansereau, 2005).

First, human beings can be seen as person, independent of one another.We can focus on certain groups like follower and subordinates; leaders who dominate the group or followers who follow their leaders can differentiate within themselves. Individual differences are of interests here (Yammarino, Dionne, Chun, & Dansereau, 2005).

Second, human beings over are seen as dyads that means that they’re interdependent within same organisation. Dyads are 2 people groups and they can be focused as superior and subordinates dyads or leader follower personal relationship independent of formal work groups(Yammarino, Dionne, Chun, & Dansereau, 2005).

Third, human beings are seen as groups and teams even though there are potentials differences amongst themselves yet they’re independent and interdependent on face to face or virtual basis (Yammarino, Dionne, Chun, & Dansereau, 2005).

Fourth individuals can be seen as a whole means like a cluster of people irrespective of their hierarchy levels based on some common expectations and goals. Collective groups need not be directly interacting but they are held together as group via echelons and hierarchies (Yammarino, Dionne, Chun, & Dansereau, 2005).

Beyond this single level analysis we do (Individuals, Dyads, Groups and collectives viewed separately) multiple analysis of the same as well. Means levels can be seen simultaneously or in combinations (Yammarino, Dionne, Chun, & Dansereau, 2005).

In this case we are concerned with multi level and cross levels effects and mixed determinants and mixed effects as well (Dansereau et. Al 1984; Danseareau and Yammarino 2000, Klien et al 1995, Rousseau 1984). For the purpose of study multi level model depicts the relationship between independent variables and dependent variables; that operate at different levels of analysis that are called cross models. It can also be patterns of relationships replicating at different levels (Yammarino, Dionne, Chun, & Dansereau, 2005).

Even though concept of relationship-oriented behaviour has been the earliest formal studies of leadership in organizations (Stogdill & Coons, 1957), but yet Relational Leadership is surprisingly new (Brower, Schoorman, & Tan, 2000; Drath, 2001; Murrell, 1997; Uhl-Bien, 2003, 2005). Because of which meaning is still uncertain (Uhl-Bien, 2006).

In comparison to traditional orientation, which considers relationships from individual’s point of view as independent, discrete entities (i.e individual agency) (Bradbury & Lichtenstein, 2000; Hosking et al., 1995), a “relational” orientation begins with processes and not persons, and views persons, leadership and other relational realities as made in processes (Hosking, in press) (Uhl-Bien, 2006).

As such, the “knowing” individual is taken as the architect and Controller of an internal and external order which makes sense with respect to the area of their self “possessions” (their mind contents) (Dachler & Hosking, 1995). This view approaches relationship-based leadership by focusing on individuals (e.g., leaders and followers) and their perceptions personalities, expectations, intentions, behaviours and evaluations relative to their relationships with one another (e.g., Hollander, 1978; Lord, Brown, & Freiberg, 1999; Uhl-Bien et al., 2000) (Uhl-Bien, 2006).

Dachler & Hosking (1995) one can call this approach a “subject–object” understanding of relationships: “Social relations are enacted by subjects to achieve knowledge about, and influence over, other people and groups” (p. 3) (Uhl-Bien, 2006).

Storytelling:

Sir ken Robinson once gave a presentation where he talked on 'Do we ever think that kids have creativity too'. He gave an example of a six year old girl who was doing poor in her studies but was terrific in painting. Her teacher asked her what she was drawing and she said that she was drawing a picture of god. The Teacher told her that nobody knows that what god looks like. Then girl answered now they'll. Being wrong is not as being creative but what if being wrong is the right way of thinking. It is something that requires out of the box thinking (Robinson, 2007).

Kids are not scared of being wrong. Kids will take a chance on creativity, if every time they don't know what's going to be next. They're not afraid to make a different story altogether if they don't remember the next line or pages. But we kill their creativity by telling them what to do and what not to do while studying or thinking and never let them express or define what exactly they have in their own mind about the world, people, values and customs (Robinson, 2007).

Picaso once said that 'All children are born artists. The problem is to remain an artist as we grow up'. You see we kill creativity of kids starting from their childhood. We don't let them think creatively but rather get them to think out of the creativity. Creativity is as important as literacy in modern world. If we see our education system today we have Maths and Science at the top and Arts at the bottom of every education system in the world. Nobody wants their kids to be a Dancer or Musician or a DJ. They all want Engineers and Doctors and Lawyers so that they can have a successful living (Robinson, 2007).

What we don't know is that if we are not prepared to be wrong then we'll never come up with anything original. Why we have same set of principles of profit making in business and same sets of civil engineering rules and practices, same sets of medicinal practices on worldwide basis. Today our Education systems are so rigid that we stigmatize people to be creative. We stigmatize people to be wrong in Business and never let them think creatively. Our systems are based to get us educate out of creativity rather than getting educated to be creative (Robinson, 2007).

We start to educate kids starting from their body to their heads and later on just their heads only. If you ever see people who're highly intellectuals or thinkers they're always thinking and they live their whole life right on top of their shoulders and in their heads only. We educate kids to be like professor or doctors rather than what they really like and can do creatively (Robinson, 2007).

Our systems are made in such way that they are meant to be like university professors. Thinking just from one side of the brain; slightly to the left I guess. There body is the way to transport their heads. If you want to see the real life out of the body experience of these senior academics then get to their conference meetings and take a look at them at final night of that conference in the night club. They would be dancing off the beat and then at the end of the party going back to their desks at home writing a whole bunch of article about last night experience in the club. They're the people who come out on top. We can't put them in high water mark of achievement (Robinson, 2007). They're just a form of living life and everybody doesn't necessary need to be like them.

There was no education system before prior to 19^th century. They all came up to meet the needs of industrial revolution and thus so they are based on commercial purpose rather than creative purpose. So most of the subjects are the things that are meant for business and not for fun. So we are benignly keeping the children away from their favourite activity because our systems are not meant to serve that (Robinson, 2007).

We need to radically change our view our thinking towards intelligence. Intelligence is diverse, dynamic, distinct. The brain isn't divided into compartments but rather it is the combination of all the activities from various disciplines. Creativity comes from the whole rather from one or two sections. We need to think about the fundamental principles on which we are teaching our children's (Robinson, 2007).

Cognitive Mapping:

Cognitive science taught us about decision making and in particular about cognitive biases and error which rational thinkers are bound to make while attempting to speed up the decision with heuristic and other cognitive short-cuts (Rodhain).

Scientists suggest that relying on intuitive heuristics such as scripts and schemas, simplifies and speed up routine decisions; these cognitive short-cuts are based on past experience while leading to impending biases in novel, unstructured situations (Rodhain).

Cognitive mapping and assumption analysis helps us to avoid biases.

Cognitive maps and assumption analysis prior to selecting one course of action or other is likely to hinder the decision speed and the exact outcome that use of cognitive short cuts is trying to avoid. Alternative cognitive tools that facilitate decisions speed have not been explored much (Rodhain).

Usually a map is a graphical representation of an individual's or several individuals’ mental models. It is made up of ideas and links between those ideas. Most of the links are casual links between ideas.

For example:

X is an explanation of Y and Y is the consequence of X.

If X is a mean and Y is the goal.

Process of transforming tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge is known as externalization process. Process of externalization is not neutral. It is difficult to articulate and develop the mental models on papers (Rodhain).

He also says that the power impulse has 2 forms explicit, in leaders; implicit in followers. Men follow leader in order to acquire power of group which leader commands ( Rodhain).

It is also seen in various research that intuiting is also having subconscious. The conscious part takes a large amount of knowledge and its difficult to keep it in focal awareness simultaneously; finally it is kept in subconscious memory. Intuitive processing involves both storing knowledge in the subconscious and retrieving it simultaneously. Thus whatever is stored is affected by experience; so people with a lot of experience may perceive lot more and better intuition (Woiceshyn, 2009).

But Burns defines the difference between transformational leadership and what transforming leader trying to accomplish transactional leadership targets immediate goals like economic, political. Transformational leadership is the ability to sustain growth and momentum into the future. Transformational leadership is more concerned with end values, such as independence, justice, equableness (Simola, Barling, & Turner, 2009).

Transforming leader 'raise' their followers up through levels of morality, while insufficient attention to means can corrupt the ends. So both kinds of leadership have moral implications (Simola, Barling, & Turner, 2009).

To find a correlation between burns transactional leadership as materialistic thinking while transformational leadership focus on spiritual thinking; while transformational entails both materialistic and spiritual end value attainments (Simola, Barling, & Turner, 2009).

Various studies help checking the relationship between transformational leadership and moral reasoning and justifies that transformational and transactional leadership are related to cognitive moral reasoning (Simola, Barling, & Turner, 2009).

Within this a person develops three levels of moral reasoning namely individual interest is high and follow up of order to authority is to avoid punishment at first stage (Simola, Barling, & Turner, 2009).

On the second stage of post conventional moral and at third and highest level moral decisions are based on universal moral decisions (like respect is important than bribe) (Simola, Barling, & Turner, 2009).

Even though a lot of fresh research comes up in spiritual leadership with alternate leadership style yet one need to understand the perspective that it have for ‘genuine care, concern and appreciation for both self and others’ (Simola, Barling, & Turner, 2009).

It also have various aspects about things like moral bases of spiritual leadership which have concern and if yes, then training on ethic of care could enhance grace of spiritual leadership (or vice versa) (Simola, Barling, & Turner, 2009).

Leadership in social form of settings had various definitions too. Early treatment of social network research states ' both social network approach views organizations in society as a system of objects (e.g. people, groups, organizations) joined by a variety of relationships' (Balkundi & Kilduff, 2005).

‘Human beings are by their very nature gregarious creatures, for whom relationships defining elements of their identities and creativeness. The study of such relationship is therefore the study of human nature itself' (Balkundi & Kilduff, 2005).

Even though I found a lot of articles on rest of leadership issues but research on ethical leadership is hardly found. It has been written down in broader form with various fields of leadership theories mostly with transformational leadership (Iles & Macaulay, 2007).

Van wart's (2003) public sector leadership survey denotes a dedicated yet very little has been done on ethics. Couple of studies stressed on ethical leadership roles within local government as one aspect of a broader study but no such treatment as specifically. Specific studies were done regarding the impact on ethical environment of an organisation (Iles & Macaulay, 2007).

Recent studies indicated that ethical leadership in private sector is concerned with relational leadership; Maak & Pless (2006) for example, argued leadership concern with sustaining relations and leader needs to play multiple roles like moral individual, servant, steward, coach etc (Iles & Macaulay, 2007).

Crosby and Bryson (2005) also studied leadership for common good framework which suggests that for valid competing interest, adjudication and education of people relational leadership is important in a collaborative team (Iles & Macaulay, 2007).

In recent years various leadership academy has come up using 360 degree feedback, psychometric personality tests and various discussions with CEO's of strategic plan, coaching, action learning project and completion of a leadership development journal. It's a case study developed in San Diego County (Iles & Macaulay, 2007).

Conclusion:

Think of life without Leaders. You would not be able to think of anything.

Who leads your life and mine is not the only reason to do this study and writing this article. This article is to empathize and to use a lot of new ideas. I see gandhi as a ethical leader but never as a politician. I see kiran bedi as transformational leader.

A lot of people who come to my mind have one way or the other gave something so the society, people, themselves. People around them know why they have done what they did; Making them more approachable, transparent and readable. I don’t think there is any leader who didn’t want to contribute to the society or group or who just had limited influence within their group and didn’t want to expand it.

I have turned myself more rational while understanding the group dynamics and accepting the reason for that difference within group. It is helpful in looking things from different perspective and applying same in this article.

I believe leadership is not just one word it has a lot of meanings for a lot of people whether formal or informal, social or ethical, relational or transformational. These all have one thing in common that is they all want the leadership in picture for common purpose.

Abstract:

Leeds Metropolitan University students of Executive MBA had given their exams in open book manner which was applied this year as on Trial and Error basis in whole Business and Finance Department. Earlier their used to be weekly Articles or assignments submission by students individually and collectively. The management was pretty keen on using this system to enhance the quality of response while avoiding the plagiarism in the response of students.

Students were mostly from worldwide countries India, Pakistan, African Nations like Malawi, Kenya, and Nigeria. Just a couple were local students from that country itself. All of them were working before, who came here to pursue their dream course in the middle of their career path for adding an extra value to their CV.

Students were conscious of this open book exams as nobody has ever attempted such kind of new Trial and Error thing ever before in their whole life. Couple of students had conversation with their respective families about it and they were themselves amused by this new concept of studies. Some of them were rather tight lipped over this whole new thing as they didn’t know whether it will be in the benefit of the child or not but still they were in full support of it.

Outcome of this Trial and Error: Most of the students were pretty disappointed as they had some common issues like:

· Lesser time for Response.

· Questions were not matching with case study material at all.

· Referencing the whole answer was impossible.

· Notes tend to be lengthy.

· Most of the students were in dilemma that whether they should finish all three questions according to time management or just write two in proposed time as questions response would come lengthy anyways.

Now as all the students had the real exams they didn’t know how to mention this thing to their Friends and Families about it.

· Some said exams were ok and hope to get passing marks.

· Some said it was easy but lengthy.

· Some had a new point of view that management had this Medicine tested on us that they never tested themselves and things like that.

· Some said that the test was horrible and they don’t want it again. It was better with submission of Articles and assignments.

Students Decision:

2 Students nominated by the whole group named X and Y as their class representatives went to the Management with signed documents of more than 80% of the class containing that the exams should only be taken in Assignment submission instead of open book as this exams had certain problems and management should either cancel the previous exams for the whole class or just give them average passing marks instead of being pass or fail depending upon the outcome of the results. Rest 20% kept themselves in silent as they don’t want to come in front or just didn’t thought it to be appropriate at this stage as exams had already gone.

Management Response:

Now management is in dilemma whether to quit on this new method of exams and knowledge testing of students as they thought it would help the cause of avoiding plagiarism and now they’re in controversy for new method of exam. They had applied the same on other Business and Finance courses as well. They know that if this issue arise in students of other groups as well then they might have to face an overall criticism from all sides. So they’re playing safe right now instead of being rejecting student’s view; they have asked for some time to review the new method of study and previous exams will be having a reappear if in case anybody fails it.

Family Situation:

Those students who told their families about his whole issue have their reservations as well. They had spent thousands of pounds of their hard earned money and they don’t want it going in drain just because of management Trial and Error system of new exam procedure.

If their son or daughter fails in these exams because of this new Trial and Error system of exam, they might take the University Management to court saying that the management was rather forceful on applying such exam procedures on whole student groups even though majority of them are against it since its inception and most of them were in doubts already before it actually started it.

All the students are in one voice against this whole issue and hoping to resolve it peacefully rather than making this issue a big thing as they have their future in stake as well.

We are studying the relation of each one of the group in relation to the student and evaluating them from students point of view and using positioning and cognitive map and placing leadership theory in the form explicit and tacit knowledge using the story telling technique.

ANALYSIS

a. I believe that..

Theory placed by me in this article is based on my own interpretation and it has sufficient evidence cited for it.

b. I believe that..

Story telling is based on my own real life ecperience of such issues faced in by each one of us during our childhood. It has immense affect on our development and growth as a leader too.

c. I believe that..

Conclusion placed by me is more of a generalised staement on my part. There is no eveidence or research is supported as its my own perception of people and society.

Bibliography

Balkundi, P., & Kilduff, M. (2005, September 4). The ties that lead: A social network approach to leadership. Science Direct , 241-261.

DAVIES, B., & HARRE, R. (1990). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory Social Behaviour , 20, 43-63.

Iles, P., & Macaulay, M. (2007). Putting Principles into Practice – Developing Ethical Leadership in Local Government. The International Journal of Leadership in Public Services , 3, 15-29.

Robinson, S. K. (2007, janaury 6). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY. Retrieved janaury 14, 2010, from www.Youtube.com: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY

Rodhain, F. (n.d.). Tacit to Explicit: Transforming Knowledge Through Cognitive Mapping - An experiment. 51-56.

Simola, S., Barling, J., & Turner, N. (2009). Transformational leadership and leader moral orientation: Contrasting an. Sciencedirect , 10.

Woiceshyn, J. (2009). Lessons from ‘‘Good Minds’’: How CEOs Use Intuition, Analysis and Guiding Principles. Long Range Planning , 298-319.

Yammarino, F. J., Dionne, S. D., Chun, J. U., & Dansereau, F. (2005). Leadership and levels of analysis: A state-of-the-science review. The Leadership Quarterly , 879-919.

Uhl-Bien, M. (2006). Relational Leadership Theory: Exploring the social processes. The Leadership Quarterly , 654-676.

Knowledge Sharing through various Viable Systems

Viable systems in context of knowledge sharing

Abstract:

I’m going to write this article about various viable systems of Knowledge sharing. I will put emphasis on viable systems but a large part of it will also include the basics of knowledge and it’s sharing with rest of the group or world. There are effective ways of sharing it starting from Ancient civilisation till date. My emphasis is not just on how knowledge sharing is done today but even on how it all started. All my research was based on certain articles and blogs and websites which are authentic way of sharing knowledge. It will give us effective information about how knowledge sharing is done and what are the reasons for it and future of knowledge sharing.

Introduction:

When we use knowledge we use it in such a way we put two things into it. First is the ‘Facts and Information’ and second is ‘The ability to do something’ (http://www.trans4mind.com/).

I can use the example like sometimes, we use the knowledge to identify that we have got information; we know that James drinks Alcohol, for example. When we have this type of knowledge then we are able to express it. I cannot say that I know when the Battle of Panipat took place, if I cannot, under any circumstances, say the date. This is not true of knowing how’ (http://www.trans4mind.com/).

If I know how to Dance, then when finding myself in the dance room I make certain moves and shakes and I do not look like an amateur! However, I may be unable to say how, exactly, I am able to Dance. Knowing how does not always mean I know that ... If I cannot say the date of the Battle of Panipat, I cannot be said to know it. But if, Dancing, I cannot tell you exactly how I did it; you cannot say I don't know how to Dance. If we failing to understand the same can take us into certain deception’ (http://www.trans4mind.com/).

We know knowledge in two forms Explicit and Tacit. Explicit knowledge can be codified and specifically, properly articulated. It helps in documentation, transfer and sharing with various groups within and outside the organisation as well. Whereas, tacit knowledge is explained as an understanding or application subconsciously, difficult to articulate, developed from direct direction or experience or from shared conversation and story telling etc.

Morisini argument is against this very notion. He believes that all knowledge is Tacit by nature as once delivered by a person it is information for other person. It is knowledge when it’s in the mind. According to Pan and Scarbrough(1999 p362) "Tacit knowledge is not available as a text. It involves intangible factors embedded in personal beliefs, experiences, and values." Once this issue is resolved we can say that knowledge is organisational specific or individual specific who wants to share it with others. ‘People will be the biggest factor in determining the success or failure of knowledge management by the quality of their decisions’ (Taylor 199 (OR Topics Knowledge Management)).

Knowledge is shared on the basis of certain reasons or grounds that make us aware that it must be shared with others. The reasons could be; when we regard that ‘knowledge is power’ and it is necessary for team or group success in common goals. When it is regarded useful in problem solving and we want to help others in same issues and situations and ready to help them to get rid of that issue. When we trust the individual or group whom with we can share this information and we do it on that basis rather than anything else. When we have sufficient time and that usually lacks in today’s organisation for sharing information time is the biggest constraints (Skyrme).

Why do we need to share information this is the reason that always comes to our mind.

‘We needed to change the perception of information sharing, give staff easy access to vital documents, and improve communication among key groups.’ This is the statement of Chris Berrington, Information and Communications technology Development Manager, University Hospitals Bristol. Benefits were visible they were able to use more intuitive tools and communication was improved. The information could be accessed fast and it was reliable as well. It helped in reducing the IT maintenance and support cost. Finally it helped them serving the society in a better manner (Foundation Trust Set to Boost Patient Care).

The days of sharing information involving nothing more sophisticated than forwarding e-mails are long gone. Smart companies are turning the management of information into a business advantage; where every department and business activity is build on the foundation of clear, current searchable knowledge (Microsoft).

This is the statement in the beginning of one of the articles on Microsoft again and clearly defines how effectively information or knowledge sharing is become part of every organisation culture. According to research for Economist intelligence unit,’ A full 85% of C suite executive see the sharing and collaboration aspects of Web 2.0 primarily as an opportunity to increase their company’s revenue and or margins’ (Microsoft).

To understand the economic imperatives of knowledge sharing we need to understand when it actually started and how it affected our use of knowledge sharing in modern day. The initial efforts of knowing the Economy of China and Russia (former soviet Union) came in aura and wonder of Marco Polo’s account of his first visit to China in 13^th Century. The economies of that period were terra incognita in the economic landscape and become focus of everybody (Danning).

Someone regards the major international consulting firms as the early adaptors of knowledge sharing. Some point out towards communities of practice like at Xerox PARC and the institute for Research on Learning. Wherever the origin was but the popularity of such programs spread rapidly across sectors of business (Danning).

Various factors had transformed the way in which knowledge is view but the critical development took place through know how of new information technology. It helped in rapidly in decreasing costs of communication and computing. Finally, easy availability of such products due to mass production made it possible in extraordinary growth and accessibility to the World Wide Web gave new opportunity for knowledge based organisations to share more rapidly and widely and not to forget cheaply than ever before. So now organisation with operations all across the world are now able to mobilize their expertise from whatever point of origin with changing their locations. Rapid action can be taken on their views can applied on new situations. Due to that clients are coming from across the world. Global organisations have now the best to offer than before (Danning).

Knowledge sharing is thus enabling and forcing the institutions that international operations are truly becoming global in character of transfer of knowledge across distant places within short period of time. Once client realized that global sharing of knowledge is possible then nothing less than that would be desired by clients as we have habit of getting the best in cost effective and time saving manner. Now one organisation doesn’t provide speedy information than client may turn into to other for that. As a result knowledge sharing ceases to become an option and necessity of business survival. In a real sense, the strategic choice facing an organisation is now knowledge sharing or death of the organisation (Danning).

During mid-1990’s many large organisation were facing the similar problem and challenges. So information need to be managed in a structured way and disciplined fashion, consolidating multiple information systems into the single integrated comprehensive system. So now all the time knowledge needs to be shared across the world or nations could be shared through communities and can connect people who need to know and collecting what is known so that existing enterprise is widely accessible to those who need it (Danning).

Now in recent years of 2007 more and more firms recognize the need to manage their knowledge. The factors creating massive change were dissimilar: Increasing competition in the global economy, resulting imperatives for ever closure innovation, emerging global markets every year and rapidly growing roles of intangibles in this materialistic market which cannot be controlled like physical goods. So one is moving towards the increasing knowledge of workers to control it and managing more of knowledge workers and customers. So now there is rapid rise in diversity not only at consumer market but at work place too. All this imply vast role of knowledge and leadership in it (Danning).

Why leadership in knowledge sharing as massive challenges of better knowledge will depend upon skills of leadership too. The capacity to mobilize the energy to exploit that knowledge is very important now. Leadership will be at least important as management of knowledge. Executive will depend upon the capacity to inspire the enthusiasm in people over whom they have no hierarchical control (Danning).

Ben Ramlingam is a member of Research and Policy in Development programme (Rapid) at the Overseas Development Institute (ODI), London. He has explained the tool kit for knowledge sharing (RamaLingam, 2006).

Strategy Development: What’s the use of running if you are not running on the right road (Indian Proverb)? This tool helps us in different framework which can be used in plan, monitor & evaluation knowledge and learning initiatives. It works on the principles of effective learning & knowledge and helping in 5 areas important for competency strategy:

Strategy development, Management Techniques, Collaboration Mechanisms, Knowledge sharing & learning processes, Knowledge capturing & storage are part of same strategy. Parcell & Collison developed the framework on these criteria to fix the effectiveness and efficiency level of the groups and teams (RamaLingam, 2006).

Knowledge Audit:

Audit helps us to understand what information is needed in the environment in current scenario within the organisation and what is available and trying to find out the gaps in the form of inconsistencies, duplications or false information etc (RamaLingam, 2006).

A well developed knowledge and learning strategy for development and humanitarian organisations will help to improve system of organisation with current and historical knowledge. The goal of the strategy would be to work the organisation in more coordinate and coherent manner. The methodology based on cases and theoretical grounds were used to get the better utilisation of knowledge (RamaLingam, 2006).

A well developed knowledge system helps in understanding the core task & processes, understanding the usefulness and capability of knowledge for task & processes and then storage, retrieval and renewal of the same. Understanding of the relationships between each and every processes and task then understanding the effects of existing tasks and procedures too so that key relationships can be understood in the context of the organisation (RamaLingam, 2006).

Knowledge Audit helps us in step by step of the organisation:

Stage 1: To explore the questions in combination of approaches including face to face and telephonic interviews, workshop and focus groups; finally electronic consultations and discussion groups.

Stage 2: Using the same approach or framework to produce recommendations as to how learning tools can be incorporated to improve efficiency and effectiveness in overall organisation.

Stage 3: Focusing on iterating the strategic conclusions with recommendations presented to the stakeholders (interested groups) and refined as well.

Stage 4: Implementation of strategy is engaged on certain basis with a number of divisions or teams along with watchful monitoring.

Social Network Analysis: Most systematic way of understanding the relationships within groups or teams and or individuals. It helps us in concentrating the data within themselves for organisational objectivity. It can also be called an organisation X ray. Outcomes of the Social Network Analysis can be applied to:

Identify individuals or groups playing centralised roles like leaders, brokers, information managers etc.

Identifying the bottlenecks and those isolated.

To spot the opportunity for improving the flow of knowledge.

Targeting those areas where knowledge flow has affected better.

To increase awareness of importance of informal networks.

These all steps of Social Network Analysis (RamaLingam, 2006).

Most Significant Changes: this technique is a form of participatory monitoring and evaluation. It helps us in analysing the data whether from participatory or participant stakeholders’ point of view. It helps us in preparing the program cycle and managing the people. It helps us to evaluate the data and outcome impact on various groups. Storytelling and group discussions are part of it (RamaLingam, 2006).

Understanding the Key Points or practical tips:

Davies and Dart (2005) have explained it better in 10 steps:

• How to start and raise interest

• Defining the domains of change

• Defining the reporting period

• Collecting SC stories

• Selecting the most significant of the stories

• Feeding back the results of the selection process

• Verification of stories

• Quantification

• Secondary analysis and meta-monitoring

• Revising the system

Each step is based on serial order and cannot be change for better understanding of issue (RamaLingam, 2006).

Outcome Mapping: It helps to build a vision of human, social and environmental goos to which the every organisation hopes and focus monitoring and evaluation on factors and actors within that programmes direct field of authority. Intentional design helps to build and come to the consensus level to bring plans to the changes. Outcome and performance monitoring provides a framework for existing monitoring of programme’ actions and boundary partners in favour of achievements of outcome. It is principally based on systematic self assessment. Evaluation planning helps the programme in identifying the evaluation priorities and develops an evaluation plan (RamaLingam, 2006).

Scenario Testing and Vision: ‘Scenario testing’s greatest use is in developing an understanding of the situation, rather than trying to predict the future’ (Caldwell, 2001).

It helps in knowledge strategy paper to outline 3 possible scenarios for the organisation a optimistic, pessimistic and neutral. It helps participants in identifying the general, broad, driving forces which are applicable to all scenarios. It also helps identify the possible trends or issue so you can understand the positive or negative perspective. It helps combine the trends so you can get series of scenarios identified (RamaLingam, 2006).

Vision is parallel to scenario planning. Vision is a joint exercise but can also be tailored and used in different other communication activities. The main objective is to make problem and solution visual. It follows the age old communication suggestion: ‘Show, don’t tell’ (RamaLingam, 2006).

Management Techniques:

Tell me and I’ll forget. Show me, and I may not remember. Involve me, and I’ll understand going by this Native American Proverb there are various other approach to understand (RamaLingam, 2006).

SECI Approach: In the influencing book called ‘The knowledge creating company’ Japanese academics Mr. Nonaka and Mr. Takeuchi examines the processes required for effective knowledge creation. They define knowledge creation as the result of spiralling process of interaction between tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge. These 4 processes through which Tacit knowledge interacts with explicit knowledge are as follows.

SECI principles provide set of pointers that can be used by managers to make certain that they are facilitating effective knowledge and learning in their incomplete projects and programmes.

Socialisation consists in sharing Tacit Knowledge with others by way of mentoring. Tacit knowledge can be socialised by mentoring, imitations or observation and practice. Finally it results into the explicit knowledge.

Externalisation creates conceptual knowledge and is the process of converting tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge. Tacit knowledge is conceptualised through images or words; this externalisation mode of knowledge conversion is produced as a result of dialogue tacit knowledge turns into the explicit knowledge.

Combination is a mode of knowledge conversion which involves combining different types of explicit knowledge. It happens when people exchange knowledge via documents, telephone or internet, meetings etc.

Internalisation converts explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge. It consists in learning by doing’, which is a process happening when previous mode of knowledge conversion is internalised by people as knowledge model or images of tacit knowledge.

One need to understand and use the SECI rationally (RamaLingam, 2006).

Blame vs. Gain Behaviour: If we follow this process we can understand it and apply it in 5 steps.

Step 1: Creating a flipchart or projector of Blame vs. Gain behaviour

Step 2: Asking participants to provide volunteer examples where one was at receiving end of blame behaviour and or gain behaviour, and asking them to provide reasoning for why it happened and with what consequences. Finally, capturing all information on flipchart sheets.

Step 3: Repeating step 2 when participant has shown blame or gain behaviour. We need to ask for reason for the same.

Step 4: Getting the groups to provide whether blame or gain behaviours are justified at all grounds. You must try to find the idea of making the balance between the two.

Step 5: Using brainstorming technique to come up with multiple ideas to same problem across organisation.

It is for better understanding of organisation from employee’s point of view (RamaLingam, 2006).

Force Field Analysis:

It was developed by Kurt Lewin (1951) and is widely used for decision making, particularly in planning and implementing change management programmes in organisation. It is a powerful method of gaining a comprehensive overview of the different forces acting on a potential organisational change issue, and for assessing their resources and strength (RamaLingam, 2006).

Activity based Knowledge Mapping: It helps us to link knowledge inputs with output in a systematic fashion to ongoing organisational activities and processes from official mail to strategic reviews. It helps us in tracking the task and activities as well as requirements and dependencies for an activity (RamaLingam, 2006).

Creating series of diagrams which display knowledge flow and gives us in-depth knowledge about processes and sources of information and pointing out the areas of improvements as well.

First step is to determining the process to be analysed. The workshop should start open discussion of process and brainstorming session with various activities making up that process.

Second step is to prioritising the key activities and focus the discussion around key activities. Prioritising depends largely on no. of various factors (using tacit knowledge).

Third step is to map all this activities using templates and analysing each of the priority activity and filling the relevant boxed.

Fourth step is to analyse the findings of activity based knowledge map, using probing questions like: what knowledge is the most critical for this process? Which knowledge is missing? Etc.

Final step is to applying the findings across the organisation about using the knowledge maps for further improvements in the organisation. One need to identifying applications in the form of groups, individuals and organisations for concluding with action plan, documenting tasks, owners in a specified timeframes (RamaLingam, 2006).

Structured innovation:

It is also mentioned by Mckinsey in 21^st Century Organisation Project that in modern world nobody can save the company from fall that doesn’t have creativity and innovation (Chaudhary, 2007).

It is a term to describe combination of 2 simple and common approaches to think about elements of a particular problem or issues which formed together can generate the basis of systematic innovation or generating new ideas (RamaLingam, 2006).

These techniques are attribute listing and morphological analysis. It was developed by Swis scientist called Fritz Zwicky suring 1940’s and 1950’s for systematic structuring and investigating total set of potential combinations and approaches to solve multi dimensional and non quantifiable problems (RamaLingam, 2006).

Attributes can be listed in a systematic manner like: Layout & Design, Content, Accessibility, Format, Quality, Relevance and applicability. Attributes need to be combined in such a way so that various combination or alternates can be made. Selections can be made either on random or step by step process (RamaLingam, 2006).

Reframing the Matrix:

It is a technique that helps in looking at organisational problems from a number of different viewpoints and expands the range of creative solutions that can be generated by you. This approach relies on the fact that different people with different problems use different approach towards the solutions. This techniques helps us in putting the mindsets of different people and imagine the solutions, or problems, they would come up with regards to a key questions or problems (RamaLingam, 2006).

First approach is called 4 P’s. It looks at problems from different perspective that may exist within a development of an organisation:

Whether there is issue with programme or service we are delivering?

Whether business or plans are appropriate?

Whether our potentials are scalable or replicable?

What is the thinking of the people at different level?

Second approach is to reframe the matrix from the point of view of various specialists starting from top to bottom from engineer to doctor etc.

Conclusion:

One need to understand that Hofstede said Culture is a pattern that determines the thinking, feeling and behaviour of individuals (Critical Success Factors for Effective Knowledge Sharing, 2008). Swidler mentioned that culture a complex and nested phenomenon as well (Critical Success Factors for Effective Knowledge Sharing, 2008).

One of the research study show that UK is third after Denmark and Sweden when it comes to knowledge based employment opportunity in its economy. One can also see that new challenges that are faced by Western world are not from European countries but from Asian countries like India, China and Singapore (Chaudhary, 2007).

“A physical or virtual environment designed to make workers as effective as possible in supporting business goals and providing value. A high-performance workplace results from continually balancing investment in people, process, physical environment and technology, to measurably enhance the ability of workers to learn, discover, innovate, team and lead, and to achieve efficiency and financial benefit.” As mentioned by Gartner (Chaudhary, 2007)

“Many issues in China are new and particular. There is no precedent to follow. Knowledge sharing is actually to solve problems. We must learn those we don’t understand’ as mentioned by Japanese during the interview in that seminar (Critical Success Factors for Effective Knowledge Sharing, 2008).

Biblography:

(n.d.). Retrieved January 28, 2010, from http://www.trans4mind.com/: http://www.trans4mind.com/personal_development/Philos/WhatIsKnowledge.htm

(n.d.). Retrieved January 28, 2010, from Knowledge Management: http://www.orsoc.org.uk/about/topic/projects/kmwebfiles/km_article2.htm

Chaudhary, S. A. (2007). Evolution of the UK Force. (Microsoft) Retrieved Jan 28, 2010, from Microsoft: http://www.microsoft.com/uk/everybodysbusiness/howmany/collaborate.aspx?wt.srch=1

Xiong, S., & Deng, H. (Eds.). (2008). Critical Success Factors for Effective Knowledge Sharing. Christchurch.

Danning, S. (n.d.). The economic imperative to manage knowledge. Retrieved January 28, 2010, from Radical Management: http://www.stevedenning.com/Knowledge-Management/economic-imperative-to-share-knoweldge.aspx

Foundation Trust Set to Boost Patient Care. (n.d.). Retrieved January 28, 2010, from http://www.microsoft.com/uk/everybodysbusiness/howmany/collaborate.aspx?wt.srch=1

Microsoft. (n.d.). Sharing Information. Retrieved January 28, 2010, from www.microsoft.com: http://www.microsoft.com/uk/everybodysbusiness/howmany/collaborate.aspx?wt.srch=1

RamaLingam, B. (2006, July). Tools for knowledge & Learning. (B. Ramalingam, Ed.) RAPID .

Skyrme, D. J. (Ed.). (n.d.). The 3 C's of Knowledge sharing: Culture, Cooperation and Commitment. Retrieved January 28, 2010, from http://www.skyrme.com/updates/u64_f1.htm