Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0711103-112607 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0711103-112607
論文名稱
Title
組織知識需求、學習策略,與知識管理系統之相關研究
Relationships Between Organization’s Need for Knowledge, Organizational Learning Strategy, and Knowledge Management System
系所名稱
Department
畢業學年期
Year, semester
語文別
Language
學位類別
Degree
頁數
Number of pages
89
研究生
Author
指導教授
Advisor
召集委員
Convenor
口試委員
Advisory Committee
口試日期
Date of Exam
2003-07-10
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2003-07-11
關鍵字
Keywords
知識管理、知識策略、工作知識、組織學習
knowledge strategy, knowledge management, organizaitonal learning, working knowledge
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 5701 次,被下載 6430
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5701 times, has been downloaded 6430 times.
中文摘要
在第三波的技術革命浪潮中,Davenport and Prusak(1998: 19)在其著作「知識管理」(Working Knowledge)中宣稱,公司全體員工的知識、公司運用知識的效率、及其獲取與運用新知的敏捷程度,已成為企業持續維持優勢的唯一命脈。組織藉由「已被證明的信仰」(Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995) 使得雇員快速達到某一程度的「認識」,進而達成組織所需的績效表現,使組織在市場中得以創造價值,進而求得生存。因此,如何使得雇員更有效率地獲得必要的知識,成為組織管理的重點之一。

本研究藉由歸納整理各學者對工作知識、組織學習、知識管理等相關領域的看法,建構分析組織知識管理系統之架構。本研究嘗試從組織中知識運作的型態,歸納出組織日常運作可能倚重的不同知識型態。同時藉由整理各層級學習行為的特徵,以及該學習行為與組織知識基礎的互動關係,進而瞭解組織內各種知識型態與學習行為對組織內知識管理的可能關連性。

本研究透過文獻歸納與實證資料的收集分析,得到以下之研究發現
一、側重的知識類型與學習假設對知識管理系統的影響
在側重的知識類型偏向內隱的組織中,對學習的假定較偏向建構學派。而當側重的知識偏向於可程式化、外顯的知識類型時,組織對學習的假定會偏向於認知學派。內隱為重的知識類型,由於重點在於與其他成員共同建構新的知識與意義系統。而當組織側重的知識偏向於外顯,則組織重點在於收集正確的資訊與知識,建構明確易懂的資料庫,以供使用者隨時查詢。

二、組織知識策略與學習傾向對知識管理系統的影響
當組織的策略偏向於針對現有的知識領域進行發展,則學習的標的通常在內部人員,因此專業性的共同語言的溝通功能成為關鍵,而學習風格上,偏向於漸進式地就原有知識作效率的提昇,當學習傾向於個人,則知識管理系統重點在於建立專業性的共同語言,資訊系統的需求在於完整的參考資料庫與便捷的專家網絡。當學習傾向於團體,則知識管理系統的重點除了建立專業性的共同語言,還有共享意義的建構。資訊系統的需求則在於社群溝通與互動的便利性。

當組織知識策略在向新的知識領域發展時,學習標的通常為外來資源。但是當外部的知識發展屬於激進式,則學習的困難度增高。此時組織往往派遣關鍵成員組成專案小組,以其專業能力先代理組織進行學習,此時對於組織的知識管理系統來說,主要的需求在於將設計完成的標準流程交由基層工作人員執行,因此,通常使用的是從上而下的組織結構,共同語言的能力著重於專業性共同語言。至於資訊系統,傾向於整合型資料庫的建置。

三、共同語言的建立比資訊系統的建置更為關鍵
專業性的共同語言在不同的知識需求或知識策略之下,都受到普遍的重視。而共享意義的建立,以及對其他人專業領域的掌握,對於不同專業間需要密切合作的組織來說,更是能否發揮人力資本最大功效的關鍵。至於資訊系統的建置,只有在員工深切瞭解其共同目標時,資訊科技才能夠成為一個有效的工具。

Abstract
For the revolution of “the Third Wave”, theorists have made arguments of the new tasks of organizations. Davenport and Prusak(1998: 19) have argued that the knowledge of the work force, the efficiency of organization’s utilization of knowledge, and the speed of acquisition and utilization of new knowledge have become the only lifeblood of competitive advantage of organizations.

Organizations make employees achieve some degree of “knowing” by the usage of “justified beliefs”. So that they would be capable of the performance ,which is necessary for the organization to create value in the market and survive. Thus helping employees to obtain the knowledge necessary for performance more efficiently has become one of the major issues of management.

Trying to conclude arguments of working knowledge, organizational learning, and knowledge management in literatures, we build up a framework to analyze the structure of knowledge management system in organizations. First, We draw different types of important working knowledge to organizations out of the operation styles of knowledge in organizations. Also, we sum up different characteristics of learning behaviors in different levels in organizations and the relationships between the learning behaviors and the knowledge base of organizations. Therefore, we could find out the relationship between the working knowledge needed by organizations, the learning behaviors, and the knowledge management system in organizations.
Based on the literature review and qualitative data analysis and, we have the findings as follow:
1. Organizations that need tacit working knowledge to help employees to finish tasks would make learning assumptions of Constructionism; therefore they would focus on the construction of shared meaning. Information system that makes the communication easier would be needed most. Those who need explicit knowledge would make learning assumptions of Congnitivism and need integrated data base which give updated and correct information.
2. Organizations that develop knowledge strategy in existing knowledge domains intend to learn from the internal resources. Therefore they would need a system that helps to find the experts who know the answers and provide solutions. Organization that explore in new knowledge domains more likely to learn from the outside resource. Usually they send a group as learning agent for the organization. This agent would learn then integrate the new knowledge and the needs and operations of the organization. For this reason, the kind of knowledge system needed is to convey the new integrated knowledge from the agent to the rest of the organization.
3. The societal sub-system like language in common play more important role in knowledge management system than information system along.

目次 Table of Contents
第一章 緒論
第一節 研究背景 1
第二節 研究動機 2
第三節 研究目的 3
第四節 觀念性架構 3
第二章 文獻探討
第一節 知識的基礎意義 5
第二節 知識的組織意義 12
第三節 知識管理的定義 21
第四節 關於知識存在的不同觀點 27
第五節 知識管理系統 34
第六節 組織知識需求 38
第七節 組織學習策略 50
第三章 研究方法
第一節 研究方法 57
第二節 研究架構 58
第三節 研究對象與資料蒐集 61
第四章 研究發現
第一節 L營造個案分析 64
第二節 P保全個案分析 69
第五章 結論與建議
第一節 研究結論 77
第二節 建議 79
第三節 研究限制 80
參考文獻
中文部分 81
英文部分 83
附錄一 88
附錄二 89
參考文獻 References
一、 中文部分
Bohn, R. E.,「衡量與管理技術知識」,邸東輝、范建軍譯,2001,Neef, D., Siesfield, G. A., & Cefola, J.主編,知識對經濟的影響力:461-494,台北:知書房。
Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P.著,2000,顧淑馨譯,2001,資訊革命了什麼,台北:先覺。
Davenport, T. H. & Prusak, L.著,1998,胡瑋珊譯,1999,知識管理,台北:中國生產力。
Drucker, P. F.等著,1998,張玉文譯,2000,知識管理�哈佛商業評論,台北:天下遠見。
Neef, D., Siesfield, G. A., & Cefola, J.主編,邸東輝、范建軍譯,2001,知識對經濟的影響力,台北:知書房。
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H.著,1995,楊子江,王美音譯,1997,創新求勝:智價企業論,台北:遠流。
Steward, T.著,1997,宋偉航譯,1998,智慧資本:資訊時代的企業利基,台北:智庫。
尤克強,2001,知識管理與創新,台北:天下遠見。
王至誠,1999,台灣地區保全業經營管理的特性與問題之研究,國立中山大學高階經營碩士班未出版碩士論文。
王秉鈞,1995,「個案研究法個案研究法在企業管理上之應用與評議」,定性研究研討會論文集。
史孟蓉、劉瑞瓏,1999,「一個建構學習型組織之知識管理整合模型」,1999中華民國科技管理研討會論文集:361-374,科技管理學會。
吳思華,1988,產業政策與企業策略—台灣地區產業發展歷程,台北:中國經濟企業研究所。
吳信宏,1995,私人警衛之研究--以保全業為例,中央警察大學未出版碩士論文。
吳淑鈴,2001,企業特性、人力資源管理措施與知識導向文化關係之研究,國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
呂益彰,2000,網路學習社群於大學實施之實證研究,淡江大學教育科技學系未出版碩士論文。
李沛盈,2001,知識管理與組織角色之研究,國立中山大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
李誠主編,2001,高希均等著,知識經濟的迷思與省思,台北:天下遠見。
李慶芳,1995,藉由慣例活動提昇組織能力之歷程-以L營造及M建設為例,中山大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
林淳一,1998,建立知識管理資料庫以提昇企業競爭力之研究,大葉大學事業經營研究所未出版碩士論文。
林雯雯,2001,組織內部知識管理促動因素分析之研究,國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
林慧菁,2002,台商跨國知識管理與人力資源組織角色之相關性研究,國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
施懿玲,2000,組織間學習行為與制度同形現象之研究,國立政治大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
洪儒瑤,2000,台灣企業知識管理應用現況及其模式之研究,台北大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
胡偉良,2000,「從營建管理的觀點探討營造產業的過去、現在和未來(下)」,營造天下,59卷:22-28。
郭志裕,1989,保全業維護治安功能之實證研究,中央警官學校未出版碩士論文。
郭志裕,1994,「保全人員教育與訓練之研究」,警學叢刊,25卷1期:23-36。
陳桂輝,1999,「從『新光保全公司竊盜案』論我國保全公司管理制度」,警光,514期:17-19
勤業管理顧問公司著,1999,劉京偉譯,2000,知識管理的第一本書,台北:商周。
楊景行,2001,營造業知識移轉系統與組織學習關係之研究,國立中山大學高階經營碩士班未出版碩士論文。
楊榮貴,1996,企業模型化與業務領域分析之個案研究,大葉大學資訊管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
楊憶萱,1999,「保全業-中保與新保之比較」,豐銀投資季刊,4月號:74-79。
蔡敦浩,1985,策略決策過程之研究,國立政治大學企業管理研究所未出版博士論文。
藍紫堂,2000,知識管理系統建構之個案研究,國立中山大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。
顧文翔,2000,營造廠建立經驗學習資料庫之研究-以捷運車站工程介面管理為例,國立台灣大學企業管理研究所未出版碩士論文。



二、 英文部分
Bierly, P., & Chakrabarti, A. 1996. Generic knowledge strategies in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management Journal, 17, special issue: knowledge and the firm: 123-135.

Blackler, F. 1995 Knowledge, knowledge work and organizations: an overview and interpretation. Organization Studies, 16(6): 1021-1046.

Bonora, E. A., & Revang, O. 1993. A framework for analyzing the storage and protection of knowledge in organizations. In Implementing Strategic Processes: Change, Learning and Co-operation, edited by Peter Lorang et al. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. (kap. 8; pp. 190-216)

Bontis, N., Crossan, M, & Hulland, J. 2002. Managing an organizational learning system by aligning stocks and flows of knowledge. Journal of Management Studies, 39(4): 437-470

Brown, J. S., & Duguid P. 1998. Organizing knowledge. California Management Review, 40(3): 90-112.

Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. 1991. Organizational learning and communities of practice: toward a unified view of working. Organizational Science, 2:40-57.

Burton-Jones, A. 1999 Knowledge Capitalism : Business, Work, and Learning in the New Economy. New York: Oxford University Press.

Cavaleri, S., & Fearon, D. 1996. Managing in Organizations That Learn. Cambridge, MA : Blackwell.

Cohen D. 1998. Toward a knowledge context: report on the first annual U.C. Berkeley forum on knowledge and the firm. California Management Review, 40(3): 22-40.

Collins, H. M. 1993. The structure of knowledge. Social Research, 60(1): 95-116

Crossan, M., Lane, H. W. & White, R. E. 1999. An organizational learning framework: from intuition to institution. Academy of Management Review, 24: 522-537

Davenport, T. H., De Long, D. W., & Beers, M. C. 1998. Successful knowledge management projects. Sloan Management Review, 39: 43-57

De Long, D. W., & Fahey, L. 2000. Diagnosing cultural barriers to knowledge management. The Academy of Management Executive, 14(4): 113-128.

Dixon, N. 1994. The Organizational Learning Cycle: How We Can Learn Collectively. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Dodgson, M. 1993. Organizational learning: a review of some literatures. Organization Studies, 4(3): 375-394.

Earl, M. 1994. Knowledge as strategy: reflections on Skandia International and Shorko Films. Strategic Information Systems: A European Perspective, edited by Ciborra, C. & Jelassi, T. In Knowledge in Organizations, edited by Prusak, L. 1997. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.( kap. 1; pp.1-15.)

Grant, R. M. 1996. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, special issue: knowledge and the firm: 109-122

Hansen, M. T., Nohria, N., & Tierney, T. 1999. What's your strategy for managing knowledge. Harvard Business Review, 77(2): 106-116.

Hedlund, G., & Nonaka, I. 1993. Models of knowledge management in the West and Japan. In Implementing Strategic Processes: Change, Learning and Co-operation. edited by Peter Lorang et al. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. (kap. 5; pp. 117-144)

Holtshouse, D. 1998. Knowledge research issues. California Management Review, 40(3): 277-281.

Kaser, P. A.W., & Miles, R. E. 2002. Understanding knowledge activists’ successes and failures. Long Range Planning, 35(1): 9-28

Kim, D. H. 1993. The link between individual and organizational learning. Sloan Management Review, Fall: 37-50.

Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 1992. Knowledge of the firm. Combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organizational Science, 3(3): 383-397. In Knowledge in Organizations, edited by Prusak, L. 1997. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.( kap. 2; pp.17-35.)

Lyles, M. A., & Schwenk, C. R. 1992. Top management, strategy and organizational knowledge structure. The Journal of Management Studies, 29:155-174. In 1997. Knowledge in Organizations, edited by Prusak, L. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.( kap. 4; pp.51-71.)

Liebowitz, J., & Beckman, T. 1998. Knowledge Organizations : What Every Manager Should Know. Boca Raton, Fla.: St. Lucie Press.

March, J.G. 1991. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1): 71-87.

McGill, M. E. 1992. Management practices in learning organizations. Organizational Dynamics, 21(1): 5-19

Miles, G., Miles, R. E., Perrone, V., & Edvinsson L. 1998. Some conceptual and research barriers to the utilization of knowledge. California Management Review, 40(3):281-289

Miner, A. S., & Mezias, S. J. 1996. Ugly-ducking no more-pasts and futures of organizational learning research. Organization Science, 7(1): 88-99.

Morten, T., Nohria, N., & Tierney, T. 1999 What's your strategy for knowledge management? Harvard Business Review, Mar.-Apr.: 106-116

Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. 1998. The concept of "ba": Building a foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3): 40-55.

Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Konno, N. 2000. SECI, ba and leadership: a unified model of dynamic knowledge creation .Long Range Planning, 33(1): 5-34.

Nevis, E. C., DiBella, A. J., & Gould, J. M. 1995. Understanding organizations as learning systems. Sloan Management Review, 36(2): 73-85.

Popper, M., & Lipshitz, R. 2000. Organizational Learning: mechanisms, culture, and feasibility. Management Learning, 31(2): 181-196.

Quinn, J. B., Anderson, P., & Finkelstein, S. 1996. Managing professional intellect: making the most of the best. Harvard Business Review, 74: 71-80.

Schein, E. H. 1996. Three cultures of management: the key to organizational learning. Sloan Management Review, Fall: 9-20.

Spender, J.-C. 1996. Organizational knowledge, learning and memory: three concepts in search of a theory. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 9(1): 63-78.

Spender, J. C. 1996. Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, special issue: knowledge and the firm: 45-62

Spender, J. C. and Grant, R. M. 1996. Knowledge and the firm: overview. Strategic Management Journal, 17, special issue: knowledge and the firm: 5-9

Staples, D. S., Greenaway, K., & McKeen, J. D. 2000. Research opportunities relevant for managing knowledge-based enterprise. In Queen's Management Research Center for Knowledge-Based Enterprise: http://www.business.queensu.ca/kbe

Szulanski, G. 1996. Exploring internal stickiness: impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17, special issue: knowledge and the firm: 27-43.

Teece, D. J. 1998. Research directions for knowledge management. California Management Review, 40(3): 289-293

Tsang,E., 1997. Organizational learning and the learning organization: a dichotomy between descriptive and prescriptive research. Human Relations, 50(1): 73-89.

Tsoukas, H. 1996. The firm as a distributed knowledge system: a constructionist approach. Strategic Management Journal, 17, special issue: knowledge and the firm: 11-25

von Krogh G.1998. Care in knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3): 133-154.

von Krogh, G., Nonaka, I., & Aben, M. 2001. Making the most of your company's knowledge: a strategic framework. Long Range Planning, 34(4): 421-439

Zack, M. H. 1999 Managing codified knowledge. Sloan Management Review, 40(4): 45-58.

Zack, M. H. 1999 Developing a knowledge strategy. California Management Review, 41(3): 125-146.
電子全文 Fulltext
本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
論文使用權限 Thesis access permission:校內立即公開,校外一年後公開 off campus withheld
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus: 已公開 available
校外 Off-campus: 已公開 available


紙本論文 Printed copies
紙本論文的公開資訊在102學年度以後相對較為完整。如果需要查詢101學年度以前的紙本論文公開資訊,請聯繫圖資處紙本論文服務櫃台。如有不便之處敬請見諒。
開放時間 available 已公開 available

QR Code