A Typology of Knowledge Management System Use by Teams

This essay sketches out a typology of knowledge management system use by teams. It is proposed that how a knowledge management system is framed and enacted by a team depends on (a) psychological safety (the shared beliefs held by members of a team that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking — Edmondson, 1999) and (b) the rate of episodic change experienced by the team. Four distinct patterns of use are identified: candid, ambivalent, conservative, and reluctant. Each of these usage patterns has implications for the learning opportunities teams may face and the perceived usefulness of a knowledge management system.

[1]  Mark Weiser,et al.  A research framework for empirical studies in organizational memory , 1996, Proceedings of HICSS-29: 29th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[2]  Veda C. Storey,et al.  Confronting the assumptions underlying the management of knowledge: an agenda for understanding and investigating knowledge management , 2000, DATB.

[3]  E. Goffman.  The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life , 1959 .

[4]  B. R. Schlenker,et al.  The triangle model of responsibility. , 1994, Psychological review.

[5]  P. Tetlock,et al.  Accounting for the effects of accountability. , 1999, Psychological bulletin.

[6]  Stephanie Watts Sussman,et al.  Understanding Strategic Learning: Linking Organizational Learning, Knowledge Management, and Sensemaking , 2001 .

[7]  Ilze Zigurs,et al.  A Theory of Task/Technology Fit and Group Support Systems Effectiveness , 1998, MIS Q..

[8]  W. Scott,et al.  Institutions and Organizations. , 1995 .

[9]  B. Gallupe,et al.  Knowledge management systems: surveying the landscape , 2001 .

[10]  George P. Huber,et al.  Transfer of knowledge in knowledge management systems: unexplored issues and suggested studies , 2001, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[11]  Linda Argote,et al.  Managing Knowledge in Organizations: An Integrative Framework and Review of Emerging Themes , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[12]  Dale Goodhue,et al.  Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance , 1995, MIS Q..

[13]  M. S. Ackerman,et al.  Definitional and contextual issues in organizational and group memories , 1996, 1994 Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[14]  Michael J. Ginzberg,et al.  Lotus Notes and Collaboration: Plus ça change , 1996, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[15]  Ronald E. Rice,et al.  Technology Adaptation: The Case of a Computer-Supported Inter-Organizational Virtual Team , 2000, MIS Q..

[16]  Michael W. Morris,et al.  The Lessons We (Don't) Learn: Counterfactual Thinking and Organizational Accountability after a Close Call , 2000 .

[17]  Gabriel Szulanski,et al.  When and How Trustworthiness Matters: Knowledge Transfer and the Moderating Effect of Causal Ambiguity , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[18]  Atreyi Kankanhalli,et al.  The role of IT in successful knowledge management initiatives , 2003, CACM.

[19]  Ronald E. Rice,et al.  Technology adaption: the case of a computer-supported inter-organizational virtual team 1 , 2000 .

[20]  Gregory M. Rose,et al.  Information technology and organizational learning: a review and assessment of research , 2000 .

[21]  W StraubDetmar,et al.  Reconceptualizing System Usage , 2006 .

[22]  Karl E. Keick.  Cosmos vs. chaos: Sense and nonsense in electronic contexts , 1985 .

[23]  Atreyi Kankanhalli,et al.  Seeking Knowledge in Electronic Knowledge Repositories: An Exploratory Study , 2001, ICIS.

[24]  Jonathan Grudin,et al.  Groupware and social dynamics: eight challenges for developers , 1994, CACM.

[25]  Daniel Z. Levin,et al.  The Strength of Weak Ties You Can Trust: The Mediating Role of Trust in Effective Knowledge Transfer , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[26]  Amy C. Edmondson,et al.  The Local and Variegated Nature of Learning in Organizations: A Group-Level Perspective , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[27]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models , 1989 .

[28]  M. Lynne Markus,et al.  Toward A Theory of Knowledge Reuse : Types of Knowledge Reuse Situations and Factors in Reuse Success , 2022 .

[29]  Dorothy E. Leidner,et al.  Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues , 2001, MIS Q..

[30]  Rob Kling,et al.  Reconceptualizing Users as Social Actors in Information Systems Research , 2003, MIS Q..

[31]  Gerald R. Salancik,et al.  Commitment is too easy , 1977 .

[32]  Craig W. Thomas,et al.  What Do We Know and Need to Know about the Environmental Outcomes of Collaborative Management , 2006 .

[33]  G. Pisano,et al.  Disrupted Routines: Team Learning and New Technology Implementation in Hospitals , 2001 .

[34]  T. Davenport,et al.  Just-in-time delivery comes to knowledge management. , 2002, Harvard business review.

[35]  Rajiv Sabherwal,et al.  Organizational Knowledge Management: A Contingency Perspective , 2001, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[36]  S. G. Cohen,et al.  What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite , 1997 .

[37]  W. Orlikowski.  Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations , 2000 .

[38]  A. Edmondson.  Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams , 1999 .

[39]  B. R. Schlenker.  Impression Management: The Self-Concept, Social Identity, and Interpersonal Relations , 1980 .

[40]  D. Sandy Staples,et al.  The use of collaborative electronic media for information sharing: an exploratory study of determinants , 2000, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[41]  Richard A. Guzzo,et al.  Teams in organizations: recent research on performance and effectiveness. , 1996, Annual review of psychology.

[42]  Dorothy E. Leidner,et al.  Knowledge Management Systems: Issues, Challenges, and Benefits , 1999, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[43]  J. H. Davis,et al.  An Integrative Model Of Organizational Trust , 1995 .

[44]  John E. Mathieu,et al.  A Temporally Based Framework and Taxonomy of Team Processes , 2001 .

[45]  C. Gersick.  Time and Transition in Work Teams: Toward a New Model of Group Development , 1988 .

[46]  Michael J. Ginzberg,et al.  Lotus Notes and collaboration: le plus c/spl cedil/a change , 1996, Proceedings of HICSS-29: 29th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[47]  Ulrike Schultze,et al.  A Confessional Account of an Ethnography About Knowledge Work , 2000, MIS Q..

[48]  Mark Snyder.  Impression management: The self in social interaction , 1981 .

[49]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  A framework for collaboration and knowledge management , 2001, Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[50]  E. Sundstrom,et al.  Work teams: Applications and effectiveness. , 1990 .

[51]  E. Schein.  Organizational Culture and Leadership , 1991 .

[52]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory , 1994 .