The ISO 30401 Knowledge Management Systems PDF

Knowledge Management Research & Practice ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tkmr20 The ISO 30401 Knowledge Management Systems: a new frame for managing knowledge. Conceptualisation and practice Daniela Carlucci, Dmitry Kudryavtsev, Francesco Santa...

Knowledge ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: The ISO 30401 Knowledge Management Systems: a new frame for managing knowledge. Conceptualisation and practice Daniela Carlucci, Dmitry Kudryavtsev, Francesco Lagrutta & Achille Claudio Garavelli To cite this article: Daniela Carlucci, Dmitry & Achille Claudio Garavelli (2022): The for managing knowledge. Conceptualisation Practice, DOI: 10.1080/14778238.2022.2118637 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/14 Published online: 05 Sep 2022. Submit your article to this journal View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions https://www.tandfonline.com/action/jour KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH & PRACTICE https://doi.org/10.1080/14778238.2022.2118637 ORIGINAL ARTICLE The ISO 30401 Knowledge Management Systems: knowledge. Conceptualisation and practice Daniela Carluccia, Dmitry Kudryavtsevb, Francesco a Department of European and Mediterranean School of Management, St. Petersburg University, Basilicata, Italy; dDepartment of Mechanical ABSTRACT The implementation of ISO Knowledge Management attention among practitioners and scholars investigate, such as reasons and ways and benefits of implementing the standard. standard for KM, the paper provides a some conceptual and mind maps that systematise ISO. Such conceptualisation offers a fresh ables, and dimensions that an organisation implement a KM system consistent with literature review results, the study sheds to the implementation of ISO 30401 in investigation. 1. Introduction Knowledge became the key resource in the contempor- ary economy. To be competitive and survive in the knowledge economy, companies must be more and more knowledge-driven, and to continuously improve the way they create value and make wealth out of knowledge. They need to nurture key capabilities such as acquiring new knowledge, applying up-to-date knowledge, retaining current knowledge and handling outdated or invalid knowledge (e.g., Carlucci et al., 2004; Lam et al., 2021; Lin & Tseng, 2005; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995, 2007, 2019; Soto-Acosta & Cegarra- Navarro, 2016; Takeuchi & Shibata, 2006). This requires systematic and strategic management of knowledge (e.g., Carayannis et al., 2021; Ferreira et al., 2020; Ioannis & Belias, 2020; Schiuma et al., 2012). Nowadays, managing knowledge has become very chal- lenging, as knowledge is more and more abundant, global, complex, connected, deeper and open (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 2019) and digital technologies and digital transformations, respectively, offer and require innova- tive and faster ways of mobilising and managing knowl- edge. Despite this, the strategic relevance of knowledge and its management remain unquestionable. The rela- tively recent inclusion of Knowledge Management (KM) within the ISO 9001:2015 further proves the importance of KM. In 2015 for the first time, one of the global business standards explicitly mentioned CONTACT Daniela Carlucci [email protected] Department of European and Mediterranean Cultures, Environment, and Cultural Heritage Matera, Italy information technology (IT) within organisations (ISO/IEC 38500:2015), the cybersecurity (ISO/IEC 27032). Recently the development of management stan- dards encompassed also the KM field. The ISO 9001:2015 and, particularly the ISO 30401:2018, pro- vided guidelines for establishing, implementing, main- taining, reviewing and improving an effective management system for KM in organisations (ISO 30401, 2018). These standards are not a standard approach to KM, but a standardised set of require- ments and statements for effective management of knowledge The application of standards for KM is gaining increasing attention among practitioners and certification bodies. Moreover, the “standardisation” of KMSs has begun capturing researchers’ attention. However, as already pointed out, to date scholarly papers that deal with the ISO 30401 standard are still very few (Maximo et al., 2020). They address various features regarding the application of the standard. Collison et al. (2019), in their book “The KM Cookbook: Stories and Strategies for Organisations Exploring Knowledge Management Standard ISO 30401”, provide a “menu” of success stories and stra- tegies for organisations interested in ISO 30401 KM Standard, whether organisations intend to achieve certification, or simply use ISO as a framework to revise their existing programme and strategy. The scholars illustrate the standard by exploring 16 differ- ent examples of KM in practice around the world. Kudryavtsev and Sadykova (2019) investigate how to embed KM requirements of ISO into frameworks for enterprise architecture modelling and manage- ment. The scholars analyse KM-oriented enterprise modelling frameworks and compare them against ISO requirements. The comparison demonstrates fragmented support of ISO requirements for oriented enterprise modelling approaches. Maximo et al. (2020), through an exploratory descriptive study based on an integrative literature review, describe the difficulties of the adoption of ISO 30401 and propose solutions for effective imple- mentation and use of ISO standard guidelines for KM in organisations. Herdmann (2020) focuses on the link between ISO for KM and risk management. The scholar recommends to apply “ISO 31000:2018 Risk Management – Guidelines” to determine risks and opportunities requested by ISO 30401:2018, that need to be addressed to assure that KMS can achieve its intended results. He suggests a road map for mana- ging knowledge risk and highlights some aspects to remember in order to effectively determine risks and opportunities. Pawlowsky et al. (2021), analyse how the ISO 30401 relates to the theoretical origins of KM and Intellectual Capital research and provides directions for its further KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH & PRACTICE 3 Environmental management systems. The structure utilises common text, terms, and definitions, which according to ISO can help organisations, that operate a single or integrated management system, meet the requirements of two or more management system standards simultaneously. To date, KM-related ISO requirements are provided in ISO 9001:2015 and ISO 30401:2018. The ISO 9001 was revised in 2015. The revised standard ISO 9001:2015 includes the new clause 7.1.6 Organisational knowledge. The requirements of this clause are: “Determine the knowledge necessary for the operation of its processes and to achieve confor- mity of products and services. This knowledge shall be maintained and made available to the extent neces- sary. When addressing changing needs and trends, the organization shall consider its current knowledge and determine how to acquire or access any necessary additional knowledge and required updates. NOTE 1: Organizational knowledge is knowledge specific to the organization; it is generally gained by experience. It is information that is used and shared to achieve the organization’s objectives. NOTE 2: Organizational knowledge can be based on: a) Internal Sources (e.g., intellectual property, knowledge gained from experi- ence, lessons learned from failures and successful pro- jects, capturing and sharing undocumented knowledge and experience; the results of improve- ments in processes, products and services); b) External Sources (e.g., standards, academia, confer- ences, gathering knowledge from customers or exter- nal providers)” (ISO 9001:2015, 2015; p. 13). Referring to the clause 7.1.6, Nick Milton of Knoco Limited pointed out that “this new clause is not a Knowledge Management standard, nor does it require an organi- zation to have Knowledge Management in place as a formal requirement. As a clause in a quality stan- dard, it simply requires that sufficient attention is paid to knowledge to ensure good and consistent quality of goods and services” (Fry, 2015, p. 3).. Table 1 reports a text analysis of clause 7.1.6 in ISO 9001–2015. ISO 30401:2018 “Knowledge management sys- tems – Requirements” was published in November 2018. Several KM principles lead these ISO standards, that is, nature of knowledge; value; focus; adaptive; shared understanding; environment; culture; iterative. According to the standard, knowl- edge is “human or organizational asset enabling effec- tive decisions and action in context... the management with regard to knowledge is knowledge management” (ISO 30401, 2018, p. 4). The KMS is “part of a management system with regard to knowl- edge” (ISO 30401, 2018, p. 5). The management sys- tem according to ISO 30401 (2018) is “a set of interrelated or interacting elements of an organization to establish policies, and objectives and processes to achieve those objectives” (p. 2). The definition of KMS KM-oriented enterprise modelling language. Some fragments of ISO standards text were considered explanatory and were not used for extracting required Required activities Determine necessary concepts (objects and activities). knowledge Required KM-oriented (or knowledge-related) ele- ments of organisational management system, reported in Tables 1 and 2 were arranged in the form of a concept map in Figure 1 mind map in Figure 2 (parts 1 and 2). The main groups of KM-oriented (or knowledge- related) elements systematised in the maps are: (1). Organisational and external context for KM and KMS; (2). Knowledge and its’ status (current and neces- sary knowledge; new and outdated; priority); Maintain knowledge Make knowledge (3) KM principles; available (4) Management activities to establish, implement, maintain and continually improve KMS (or any other Consider its management system); [organisation] current (5) Knowledge management system: knowledge Determine how to acquire any (a) Knowledge development activities; necessary (b) Knowledge conveyance and transformation additional types; knowledge Determine how to (c) Activities, behaviours, means for knowledge access any development and knowledge conveyance and necessary additional transformation. knowledge (d) KM enablers. Determine required knowledge The maps shown in Figures 1 and 2 offer updates a comprehensive conceptualisation of KM-oriented ISO requirements that clearly highlights the key fac- tors, variables, and dimensions to consider in order to design and implement a KMS. It can contribute to reduce individuals’ cognitive load and enhance learn- ing on the subject, as well as to improve the analysis of organisational situations and description of activities, problems and projects connected to standards imple- mentation (Balaid, 2012; Balaid et al., 2016; Eppler, 2006; Schiuma & Carlucci, 2015). Indeed, mapping has two main functions. The first one is the descriptive function. A map provides a visual representation that can help individuals elaborate a problem statement, avoid unnecessary cognitive work, and, eventually create possible solutions (Larkin, 1989; Scaife & Rogers, 1996; Vekiri, 2002). The second function is related to a map as a “thinking tool”. A map can support the processes of generation and elaboration of ideas. Mapping is, indeed, a useful tool for opening “mind’s eye”. Conceptualising the KM oriented requirements in ISO standards through mapping, makes the complex body of ISO requirements and statements more easily and immediately accessible, for managers as well as for practitioners involved in certification and auditing bodies. It can help managers reflect on real organisation’s KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH & PRACTICE 5 management system in ISO 30401:2018. Required objects and activities Establish a KMS maintain and continually improve a knowledge Implement a KMS needed and their interactions, in accordance with the Maintain a KMS (Continually) Improve a KMS representing a dimension of the knowledge management system, Dimension of the KMS and incorporating these dimensions within the knowledge place through a managed change process is required for the knowledge management system within the organisation. Knowledge development the knowledge management system covers the following Stages of knowledge development through its stages of development through systematic Activities and behaviours the knowledge management system objectives and covering the KMS objectives Prioritised knowledge domains the organisation with knowledge that was previously New knowledge Acquiring new knowledge Means knowledge effective, integrating the current relevant Current knowledge to enable improved actions and decision making. Applying current knowledge Means safeguard the organisation from the risks of knowledge loss. Current knowledge Retaining current knowledge Means means to protect the organisation from making mistakes or Outdated knowledge use of knowledge inappropriate within the current organisational Invalid knowledge Handling outdated or invalid knowledge Means Knowledge conveyance and system shall include activities and behaviours, supporting all transformation systematic activities and behaviours, supporting the Activities and behaviours and covering the prioritised knowledge domains defined in Types of knowledge flows KMS objectives Prioritised knowledge domains of knowledge through conversations and interactions; Human interaction the organisation. through demonstrating, recording, documenting and/or [Knowledge] representation structuring or classifying of codified knowledge, making the [Knowledge] combination assessing and absorbing knowledge; incorporating it into [Knowledge] internalisation and learning KM enablers system shall include and integrate elements of all the KMS objectives knowledge management system. This shall support the Prioritised knowledge domains and cover the prioritised knowledge domains defined in 4.3: including all knowledge management system stakeholders; Human capital is encouraged within the organisation (covered in detail in Roles and accountabilities KM stakeholders applied and embedded within organisational processes, Processes and measures (covered in Clause 8). Knowledge activities Organizational processes channels, virtual and physical workspace and other tools. Technology and infrastructure Digital channels Virtual workspace Physical workspace means of ensuring the knowledge management system is Governance in Clauses 5 to 10). KM strategy KM expectations KM policy (from clause 5.2) and norms regarding sharing, learning from mistakes KM culture Attitudes [regarding sharing, learning from mistakes...] Norms [regarding sharing, learning from mistakes...] KM culture across the organisation is critical for sustained application connections and knowledge activities are encouraged, and will support the establishment and application of the knowledge elements in organisation according to ISO. & Sadykova, 2019; Maximo et al., 2020) highlighted that even though the main aim of ISO 30401 is improving organisation’s performance by leveraging the potential value of knowledge, it gives only limited advice on how to achieve it. The lack of implementa- tion details, such as guidelines or best practices, makes it challenging for managers to implement the standard and to assess KMS against it (Maximo et al., 2020; Pawlowsky et al., 2021). As highlighted by Wagner (2020), the standard cites some well-established meth- ods of KM and provides some suggestions for devel- oping KM culture, but it does not enucleate what works under which circumstances, making it difficult for managers and auditors to assess the quality of KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH & PRACTICE 7 elements in an organisation according to ISO, part 1. Figure 2. Mind map of required to ISO, part 2. As previously highlighted, to date the implementa- tion of ISO KM standard remains still scarcely ana- lysed in management literature. Some studies analysed benefits and criticisms of the overall structure and content of the ISO KM standard requirements (Corney, 2018; Maximo et al., 2020; Milton & Lambe, 2016). Other studies investigated some specific issues of the standard, such as its implications for risk management (Herdmann, 2020) or enterprise archi- tecture modelling (Kudryavtsev & Sadykova, 2019). However, to the best of our knowledge, potential risks, challenges, and benefits of implementing ISO KM standard, are still under-investigated. Focusing on potential risks concerning the imple- mentation of ISO 30401, Boyes (2018) identified sev- eral risks such as the risk of low uptake, the risk of low- quality certification, the risk that organisations imple- ment the KM standard symbolically rather than support and participation of the widest range of peo- ple in the global KM community” (Boyes, 2018). Arguing about the challenges of implementing ISO 30401, Maximo et al. (2020) state that there are several challenges making it difficult to adopt standardised methods for KM, such as “the culture of knowledge, the continuous involvement of top management, the awareness of people that knowledge sharing is an activity that is part of their work routine,... the difficulty to define a standard criterion for establishing adherence based on isolated items of the standard” (p. 37,158). The same authors highlight that organisa- tions that keep information up to date are more likely to succeed with standards. For these organisations, KM is a key factor of growth and the systematisation of KM according to internationally established stan- dards adds internal benefits and represents a competitive differential recognised by the market. Pawlowsky et al. (2021), point out some benefits of implementing ISO KM standard requirements for organisations. According to the authors “the new ISO 30401 KMS might prove to be helpful in KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH & PRACTICE 9 risks, challenges and benefits. robustness and effectiveness, regardless or whether or not you pursue ISO 30401 accreditation” (p. 53). The authors describe some success stories of KM with the framework of KM standard. The analysis of literature on the ISO 30401 standard for KMS, shows that the standard produces benefits if it is well embedded in the rich and complex setting in which organisational knowledge is generated and managed. This can require some changes in organisa- tion’s culture and processes that have to be gradually done. Figure 3 summarises the main findings of the literature review about risks, challenges and benefits regarding the implementation of ISO 30401 KMS requirements. The list is by no means exhaustive, as a further empirical investigation is required to describe comprehensively the phenomenon. 4. Conclusions KM exists as a discipline from several decades. Sometimes it has been considered a further man- agement fad, maybe because it has never had approaches, models, tools and methods universally agreed upon. The recent inclusion of KM-related requirements into ISO standards, i.e., ISO 9001:2015 Quality Management Systems – Requirements and ISO 30401:2018 Knowledge Management Systems – Requirements, has pro- vided a sort of new emphasis and professional credibility to the discipline (Collison et al., 2019). The need of defining some standards for KM has grown hand in hand with the increasing strategic relevance of KM for organisations and the need of features that can affect the adoption of ISO certifica- tion for KM, to further explore. From a practical view- point, the identified list of potential difficulties and/or benefits can help managers make decisions on the adoption of ISO 30401. Certainly, difficulties and/or benefits have to be contextualised. Each organisation has its distinctive characteristics, e.g., strategy, struc- ture, culture just to name a few that affect benefits, risks and challenges related to ISO standards applica- tion. Additionally, difficulties and/or benefits for orga- nisation may vary depending on the purpose of implementing ISO standards, i.e., certifying KMS or merely revising organisational KMS. Undoubtedly, further rigorous empirical studies are necessary in order to analyse the real benefits, risks and challenges regarding the implementation of ISO 30401:2018. The topics addressed in the paper are just a small piece of the numerous issues to investigate about ISO standards for KMS. To date, there are still several key knowledge gaps on which research should focus in the future, using both quantitative and qualitative research methods and numerous research questions should be deeply explored, such as: What are organi- sational factors enabling and hampering the successful development of ISO 30401 standards for KM? What are the organisational characteristics (e.g., size, industry, operating environment and ecosystem) enabling and hampering the development of ISO 30401 standards for KM? How can an organisation successfully structure its KMS and KM programme according to ISO KM requirements and principles? What are the external factors to an organisation that affect the successful challenges implementation of KMS according to ISO KM require- ments and principles? How can an organisation drive espe- progressive organisational changes to make its KMS consistent with ISO standards, in the light of its strategic ISO stan- objectives? How can an organisation ignite a KM stan- integrates dards culture among its internal and external stake- holders? How can an organisation successfully engage its internal and external stakeholders in the implemen- tation of KMS driven by ISO standards principles? How can an organisation integrate ISO standard for KM with existing management systems and adopted inter- national standards (e.g., ISO 140001, ISO 9001, etc.) in order to facilitate its implementation? What are the main challenges, risks and benefits related to the imple- mentation of KM requirements of ISO standard 30,401, experienced by organisations? These are a few open research questions regarding the understanding of how an organisation can effec- tively set up, implement, and manage ISO 30401 stan- dard. They open the way for further research and empirical investigation about the rich and complex environment in which KM and KMS work in organi- sations, also “in a standardised form”. KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT RESEARCH & PRACTICE 11 Herdmann, F. (2020). Handling Knowledge Risk Management Supported by ISO Standards. In S. Durst & T. Henschel (Eds.), Knowledge Risk Management. Management for Professionals (pp. 229–251). Springer. International Organization for Standardization. (2018). ISO 30401:2018 Knowledge management systems – Requirements. International Organization for Standardization – ISO`. International Organization for Standardization. (2018). Proposals for management system standards (ISO/IEC Directives Part 1 and Consolidated ISO Supplement, Annex SL). International Organization for Standardization – ISO. International Organization for Standardization – ISO. (2015). ISO 9001: 2015Quality management systems – Requirements. International Organization for Standardization – ISO. Ioannis, R., & Belias, D. (2020). Combining strategic man- agement with knowledge management: Trends and inter- national perspectives. International Review of Management and Marketing, 10(3), 39–45. https://doi. org/10.32479/irmm.9621 Kudryavtsev, D., & Sadykova, D. (2019). Towards architect- ing a knowledge management system: Requirements for an ISO compliant framework. In IFIP Working Conference on The Practice of Enterprise Modeling (pp. 36–50). Springer. Lam, L., Nguyen, P., Le, N., & Tran, K. (2021). The relation among organizational culture, knowledge management, and innovation capability: Its implication for open innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 7(1), 66. https://doi.org/10. 3390/joitmc7010066 Larkin, J. H. (1989). Display based problem solving. In Fernandes, C. (2021). D. Klahr & K. Kotovsky (Eds.), Complex information processing: The impact of Herbert A. Simon (pp. 319–341). MIT Press. Lin, C., & Tseng, S. (2005). The implementation gaps for the knowledge management system. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 105(2), 208–222. https://doi.org/10. 1108/02635570510583334 Maximo, E. Z., Pereira, R., Malvestiti, R., & de Souza, J. A. (2020). ISO 30401: The standardization of knowledge. International Journal of Development Research, 10(6), 37155–37159. Milton, N., & Lambe, P. (2016). The Knowledge Manager’s Handbook: A Step-by-Step Guide to Embedding Effective Knowledge Management in Your Organization. Kogan Page Ltd. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (2007). The knowledge-creating company. Harvard Business Review, 85(7/8), 162. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (2019). The wise company: How companies create continuous innovation. Oxford University Press. (2020). Strategic knowl- Pawlowsky, P., Pflugfelder, N. S., & Wagner, M. H. (2021). The ISO 30401 knowledge management systems stan- dard–a new framework for value creation and research? Journal of Intellectual Capital, 22(3), 506–527. https://doi. org/10.1108/JIC-07-2020-0256 Scaife, M., & Rogers, Y. (1996). External cognition: How do graphical representations work? International Journal of Knowledge Management, 20(3), 417–422. https://doi.org/ 10.1108/JKM-02-2016-0057 Takeuchi, H., & Shibata, T. (2006). Japan, Moving Toward a More Advanced Knowledge Economy: Volume 2. Advanced Knowledge-Creating Companies. World Bank. Vekiri, I. (2002). What is the value of graphical dis- plays in learning? Educational Psychology Review, 14 (3), 261–312. https://doi.org/10.1023/ A:1016064429161 Wagner, M. (2020). ISO 30401: Wissen systematisch nutzen. Wissensmanagement, 22(4), 32–34. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s43443-020-0163-x

The ISO 30401 Knowledge Management Systems PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue