Book review
N Nagaraj
The Book: Managing Knowledge -- Perspectives on cooperation and competition.
Edited by Georg von Krogh and Johan Roos
``Knowledge is Power'' says my old school badge. And so it is. And information is even more powerful. Skills and information; this is what success is all about. Where does knowledge fit in here? The answer is simple: How do you acquire skills? How do you acquire information? HOW DO YOU LEARN?
The book is in two parts: Part one is `Representationism: Traditional Approaches to Viewing Knowledge, Knowledge Transfer and Cooperative Strategies', consisting seven essays; and part two is `Anti-Representationism: New Perspectives on Knowledge and Knowledge Transfer in Organizational Cooperation', consisting four essays. The editors agree that not much is known about knowledge in organisations even now and that the book is basically about ideas. True. And simply because of problems in defining knowledge. And, that takes us to the first essay in the book.
This essay discusses the basis for the Representationistic stream of thought: that knowledge is a representation of a pre-given world. The cognitivistic perspective views knowledge as a mirror of reality. And because it represents reality, it is assumed to be universal, objective, transferable and, of course, that it facilitates problem solving. Strip the thing down to its barest detail and there you have it - the essence of the concept; the knowledge. The essay then includes an extensive survey of literature with respect to motives and contexts. This essay is perfect for research scholars in learning, organisational development and just anyone who would love to pick abstract arguments on knowledge.
The transferability of different types of knowledge is discussed. Patents, blueprints and design are one kind of knowledge that is easily transferable, in the sense that any engineer can read and understand what its all about. There is another kind of knowledge: HOW was something designed in the first place? WHY was it designed like that? WHAT was the WAY in which different capabilities were synergised? That's where the difficulty comes in. This is not something that holds true only for technology; it holds true for social behaviour and the arts. All the students in art school study the Great Masters. Only some become great artists. Why is that? Everyone knows that learning, in simple terms, takes place in three ways: observation, experience or authority. (Observation is the way you learn in the science lab; experience is the way you learn social behaviour; and authority is the way you learn history in school -- your teacher SAYS so). The authors discuss this in purely academic and sociological terms with an intensive basis in academic literature. They then go on to discuss transfer control and the impact on management and is, as expected by now, highly theoretical.
The second essay is on imitation of knowledge. The basis for this essay is the concept of unique resources. Unique resources have been variously known as core competencies, core capabilities, distinctive competencies, invisible assets, embedded knowledge etc. Of course, a resource is unique only if it provides the company with a competitive advantage. Intense competition in a category makes a source of competitive advantage less and less sustainable. So, what do companies, and their competitors do? Learn to wrest the advantage from the other by creating a new source of advantage. This is where Michael Porter's theory of competitive advantage has stood the test of time in at least academic circles: that any competence helps in making a company competitive in either of two ways: differentiated products or cost leadership. And this is the basis for argument in this essay. Well, where does imitation come in? How does a competitor reduce a unique resource to just another resource? The answer is simple: Imitate the leader's resources. This is where the book delivers insights into imitation; of how imitation is not the same as copying; how it is as important to imitate processes as imitating resources; and, what concepts help in effective imitation. Verdict: Perfect for academics; Thought provoking for practising managers.
Chapter 3 is `Towards a Theory of Knowledge Transfer in a Cooperative Context'. With increasing turbulence, more and more companies are forming joint ventures and getting into strategic alliances all over the world. And post-liberalisation, India, too, has seen a lot of co-operative ventures. The authors offer a theoretical background of co-operative strategies, developmental processes and knowledge transfer processes and also make a literature survey for the factors determining knowledge transfer. This is the first essay in the book in which some empirical research is presented. The approach is refreshing, though subjective, and the practicability in Indian conditions is doubtful. However, there are many ideas in this chapter just waiting to be taken up for research.
The next essay is on `The Impact of Individual and Organizational Learning on Formation and Management of Organizational Cooperation'. One main reason for co-operation is the need for knowledge; the strategic intent is knowledge transfer. The authors discuss the different levels of learning (individual, group, and organisational); the implications of learning at different levels; and how knowledge transfer is most effective from bottom up. This essay would be a boon to HRMs in companies that are thinking about organizational interventions to facilitate learning and also to people in companies that have formed or planning to form strategic alliances.
The next chapter is `Arguments on Knowledge and Competence'. Aha! The authors declare ``We do NOT aim to discover any form of omnipotent truth about the subject matter.'' The basis for their arguments is qualitative interviews with members of Group-10, a group of Human Resource Managers (HRMs). This chapter is by far most suited to the average reader with an interest in business strategy and very useful for HRMs in `progressive' Indian companies where such arguments (we assume) take place. There is a gem of an insight into the difference between knowledge and competence: ``... competence, unlike knowledge, implies ENACTMENT.'' There IS a world of difference between knowledge and competence: We could probably say that a critic is either knowledgeable or ignorant and the artist is either competent or incompetent (not that artists DON'T need knowledge. It's just that competence is more IMPORTANT for them).
The next essay is on `Knowledge-based Strategic Change'. This essay is the most inconsistent in terms of difficulty. Variables affecting knowledge transfer are easily understood but the implication for strategic change is abstract and not very easy to follow. The essay might be a joy to read for the academician and the research scholar but managers might have a nightmare trying to unravel all the threads to the mystery. The last essay of the first part of the book is about managing knowledge during corporate restructuring, which is, again, highly theoretical and probably of more use to the strategic and management theory enthusiast in a manager than the practical man in the manager.
The first essay in Part Two of the book lays down the basis for the Anti-Representationistic view, the autopoietic theory and its roots. The essay is highly theoretical, and expectedly, impressively researched. But what will the reader get out of it? One will know something about autopoietic theory, that it has something to do with knowledge, and that it offers a different (and probably, difficult to understand viewpoint). No effort has been made to be friendly to the average reader. There are sections titled `How does/will ..... help?' and that's for management theorists and not managers.
The second essay is on co-operative experimentation, which discusses the implications of autopoietic theory, and the control of co-operative experimentation. This essay, too, is highly theoretical and useful to the management theorist in the manager. One main reason why it would not be useful to Indian managers is the fact that: One, most Indian companies are not open enough to allow an outsider a free-hand; two, no strategic alliance has been formed with a strategic intent to experiment and learn; and three, even if there are exceptions to the above, the market does not allow for such vast experiments.
The last two essays in the book are basically concerned with language and communication. This is something that any book on learning and knowledge would have to tackle. The first of these is with special reference to globalising firms and the second is with respect to normal, operational and day-to-day conversations. These two essays make very interesting reading for anyone interested in language, communication and how they influence behaviour and learning.
The final verdict? A big yes for academics and research scholars; management theorists; HR managers with a high level of interest in interventions and organizational development. What you will get out of this book is lots of ideas for research, many concepts (popular and otherwise) to think about and argue about, and a treasure trove of literature survey for someone who is interested in the subject. And, a big no for the average reader; practising manager. What you will get out of this book is nothing radical; and there is no point in reading a book that might look as though it is relevant to any manager but is not written for any manager.
What it lacks is primarily simplicity, and examples or case studies. However, this review is about the book for what it is and not about what it could have been.