What can management theories offer evidence-based practice? A comparative analysis of measurement tools for organisational context

Background: Given the current emphasis on networks as vehicles for innovation and change in health service delivery, the ability to conceptualise and measure organisational enablers for the social construction of knowledge merits attention. This study aimed to develop a composite tool to measure the organisational context for evidence-based practice (EBP) in healthcare. Methods: A structured search of the major healthcare and management databases for measurement tools from four domains: research utilisation (RU), research activity (RA), knowledge management (KM), and organisational learning (OL). Included studies were reports of the development or use of measurement tools that included organisational factors. Tools were appraised for face and content validity, plus development and testing methods. Measurement tool items were extracted, merged across the four domains, and categorised within a constructed framework describing the absorptive and receptive capacities of organisations. Results: Thirty measurement tools were identified and appraised. Eighteen tools from the four domains were selected for item extraction and analysis. The constructed framework consists of seven categories relating to three core organisational attributes of vision, leadership, and a learning culture, and four stages of knowledge need, acquisition of new knowledge, knowledge sharing, and knowledge use. Measurement tools from RA or RU domains had more items relating to the categories of leadership, and acquisition of new knowledge; while tools from KM or learning organisation domains had more items relating to vision, learning culture, knowledge need, and knowledge sharing. There was equal emphasis on knowledge use in the different domains. Conclusion: If the translation of evidence into knowledge is viewed as socially mediated, tools to measure the organisational context of EBP in healthcare could be enhanced by consideration of related concepts from the organisational and management sciences. Comparison of measurement tools across domains suggests that there is scope within EBP for supplementing the current emphasis on human and technical resources to support information uptake and use by individuals. Consideration of measurement tools from the fields of KM and OL shows more content related to social mechanisms to facilitate knowledge recognition, translation, and transfer between individuals and groups

Harnessing Intellectual Resources in a Collaborative Context to Create Value

The value of electronic collaboration has arisen as successful organisations recognize that they need to convert their intellectual resources into customized services. The shift from personal computing to interpersonal or collaborative computing has given rise to ways of working that may bring about better and more effective use of intellectual resources. Current efforts in managing knowledge have concentrated on producing; sharing and storing knowledge while business problems require the combined use of these intellectual resources to enable organisations to provide innovative and customized services. In this chapter the collaborative context is developed using a model for electronic collaboration through the use of which organisations may mobilse collaborative technologies and intellectual resources towards achieving joint effect.electronic collaboration;value creation;collaborative computing;knowledge management and intellectual resources

Knowledge Collaboration: Working with Data and Web Specialists

When resources are finite, people strive to manage resources jointly (if they do not rudely take possession of them). Organizing helps achieve—and even amplify—common purpose but often succumbs in time to organizational silos, teaming for the sake of teaming, and the obstacle course of organizational learning. The result is that organizations, be they in the form of hierarchies, markets, or networks (or, gradually more, hybrids of these), fail to create the right value for the right people at the right time. In the 21st century, most organizations are in any event lopsided and should be redesigned to serve a harmonious mix of economic, human, and social functions. In libraries as elsewhere, the three Ss of Strategy—Structure—Systems must give way to the three Ps of Purpose—Processes—People. Thence, with entrepreneurship and knowledge behaviors, data and web specialists can synergize in mutually supportive relationships of shared destiny

Knowledge management practices and the enhancement of customer capital: the importance of time

Actualmente, los responsables de las pequeñas y medianas empresas (PYMES) debido al hecho de tener que vigilar continuamente sus empresas a la búsqueda de mejoras en las relaciones con sus clientes y trabajadores, están otorgando un papel cada vez más estratégico a las prácticas de gestión del conocimiento. No obstante, hay situaciones donde las organizaciones y sus miembros se enfrentan a entornos cada vez más inciertos, por lo que es necesario reconsiderar las prácticas de gestión del conocimiento que se han venido desarrollando en la empresa desde sus inicios. Estas prácticas, en forma de procesos y rutinas, pueden basarse tanto en conocimiento tácito como explícito y también necesitan ser continuamente reconsideradas de cara a la captación de nuevo conocimiento. En tales circunstancias, sería necesario modificar e incluso eliminar parte del conocimiento existente al objeto de asegurarnos de que los empleados tienen acceso a conocimientos lo suficientemente actualizados como para que mantengan o garanticen las relaciones que las PYMEs tienen con sus clientes. Nuestro trabajo examina el impacto que un contexto de “mentalidad abierta” (openminded) en la organización existente en un momento dado (T) tiene sobre las actuaciones que intentan reconsiderar los conocimientos organizativos en un momento posterior (T+1). Analizamos además la relaciones entre los procesos de aprendizaje/conocimiento explorativo y aplicado sobre el capital relacional. Se utiliza para ello evidencias empíricas procedentes de 107 PYMES del sector de las telecomunicaciones en España, utilizando la técnica PLS.Actualmente, los responsables de las pequeñas y medianas empresas (PYMES) debido al hecho de tener que vigilar continuamente sus empresas a la búsqueda de mejoras en las relaciones con sus clientes y trabajadores, están otorgando un papel cada vez más estratégico a las prácticas de gestión del conocimiento. No obstante, hay situaciones donde las organizaciones y sus miembros se enfrentan a entornos cada vez más inciertos, por lo que es necesario reconsiderar las prácticas de gestión del conocimiento que se han venido desarrollando en la empresa desde sus inicios. Estas prácticas, en forma de procesos y rutinas, pueden basarse tanto en conocimiento tácito como explícito y también necesitan ser continuamente reconsideradas de cara a la captación de nuevo conocimiento. En tales circunstancias, sería necesario modificar e incluso eliminar parte del conocimiento existente al objeto de asegurarnos de que los empleados tienen acceso a conocimientos lo suficientemente actualizados como para que mantengan o garanticen las relaciones que las PYMEs tienen con sus clientes. Nuestro trabajo examina el impacto que un contexto de “mentalidad abierta” (openminded) en la organización existente en un momento dado (T) tiene sobre las actuaciones que intentan reconsiderar los conocimientos organizativos en un momento posterior (T+1). Analizamos además la relaciones entre los procesos de aprendizaje/conocimiento explorativo y aplicado sobre el capital relacional. Se utiliza para ello evidencias empíricas procedentes de 107 PYMES del sector de las telecomunicaciones en España, utilizando la técnica PLS

Transformational Leadership and Knowledge Management: Analysing the Knowledge Management Models

The purpose of the present study is to investigate the mutual relationship between transformational leadership and knowledge management as well the potential effects of a transformational leader on his or her followers. In this paper, we review the role of transformational leadership in effective knowledge management and establish the emerging role of transformational leadership, as an ideal leadership style in building knowledge-based companies to achieve a higher degree of competitive advantage. The findings in this article are based upon previous empirical studies that illustrate the formulation of several propositions that contribute to the knowledge management processes. Our findings are based upon possible scenarios that impact transformational leadership and knowledge management using grounded theoretical research. Research limitations are twofold. One limitation is found in the prior literature indicating that past studies have posited that companies might lack the required capabilities or decide to decline from interacting with other companies (Caldwell & Ancona 1988), or even distrust sharing their knowledge (Kraut & Streeter 1995). And, second, our contribution to the literature lies in presenting a link between knowledge management and transformational leadership that incorporates the knowledge management processes that may impact the effectiveness of transformational leaders to enhance their capabilities to effectively play their roles within companies. In addition, managerial applications that may support knowledge management processes are proposed further research is necessary to finalise conclusions. The original value of this research provides an impetus of mutual interaction of knowledge management and transformational leadership

Early Learning Innovation Fund Evaluation Final Report

This is a formative evaluation of the Hewlett Foundation's Early Learning Innovation Fund that began in 2011 as part of the Quality Education in Developing Countries (QEDC) initiative.  The Fund has four overarching objectives, which are to: promote promising approaches to improve children's learning; strengthen the capacity of organizations implementing those approaches; strengthen those organizations' networks and ownership; and grow 20 percent of implementing organizations into significant players in the education sector. The Fund's original design was to create a "pipeline" of innovative approaches to improve learning outcomes, with the assumption that donors and partners would adopt the most successful ones. A defining feature of the Fund was that it delivered assistance through two intermediary support organizations (ISOs), rather than providing funds directly to implementing organizations. Through an open solicitation process, the Hewlett Foundation selected Firelight Foundation and TrustAfrica to manage the Fund. Firelight Foundation, based in California, was founded in 1999 with a mission to channel resources to community-based organizations (CBOs) working to improve the lives of vulnerable children and families in Africa. It supports 12 implementing organizations in Tanzania for the Fund. TrustAfrica, based in Dakar, Senegal, is a convener that seeks to strengthen African-led initiatives addressing some of the continent's most difficult challenges. The Fund was its first experience working specifically with early learning and childhood development organizations. Under the Fund, it supported 16 such organizations: one in Mali and five each in Senegal, Uganda and Kenya. At the end of 2014, the Hewlett Foundation commissioned Management Systems International (MSI) to conduct a mid-term evaluation assessing the implementation of the Fund exploring the extent to which it achieved intended outcomes and any factors that had limited or enabled its achievements. It analyzed the support that the ISOs provided to their implementing organizations, with specific focus on monitoring and evaluation (M&E). The evaluation included an audit of the implementing organizations' M&E systems and a review of the feasibility of compiling data collected to support an impact evaluation. Finally, the Foundation and the ISOs hoped that this evaluation would reveal the most promising innovations and inform planning for Phase II of the Fund. The evaluation findings sought to inform the Hewlett Foundation and other donors interested in supporting intermediary grant-makers, early learning innovations and the expansion of innovations. TrustAfrica and Firelight Foundation provided input to the evaluation's scope of work. Mid-term evaluation reports for each ISO provided findings about their management of the Fund's Phase I and recommendations for Phase II. This final evaluation report will inform donors, ISOs and other implementing organizations about the best approaches to support promising early learning innovations and their expansion. The full report outlines findings common across both ISOs' experience and includes recommendations in four key areas: adequate time; appropriate capacity building; advocacy and scaling up; and evaluating and documenting innovations. Overall, both Firelight Foundation and TrustAfrica supported a number of effective innovations working through committed and largely competent implementing organizations. The program's open-ended nature avoided being prescriptive in its approach, but based on the lessons learned in this evaluation and the broader literature, the Hewlett Foundation and other donors could have offered more guidance to ISOs to avoid the need to continually relearn some lessons. For example, over the evaluation period, it became increasingly evident that the current context demands more focused advance planning to measure impact on beneficiaries and other stakeholders and a more concrete approach to promoting and resourcing potential scale-up. The main findings from the evaluation and recommendations are summarized here

Police Knowledge Exchange: Full Report 2018

[Executive Summary] This report was commissioned to explore the enablers and barriers to sharing within and between police forces and between police forces and partners, including the public. This was completed from an interdisciplinary review of international literature covering sharing, knowledge exchange, learning and organisational learning. The literature broke down into four main factors; who, why, what and how. An introduction to the literature is presented with ‘Who’ is sharing which considers both personal identity and different institutional issues. The ‘Why’ literature covers issues of cultural and community motivators and barriers. The ‘What’ segment reviews concepts of data, information and knowledge and related legislative issues. Finally, the ‘how’ section spans face to face sharing approaches to technologies that produce both enablers and barriers. A series of 42 in-depth interviews and focus groups were completed and combined with 47 survey responses . The aim of the interviews, focus groups and survey was to show perceptions and beliefs around knowledge sharing from a small sample across policing in order to complement the findings from the literature review. The survey was adapted from a standardised questionnaire (Biggs, 1987). The Biggs questionnaire focused on what motivated students to learn and how they approached their learning. Our adapted survey looked at what motivated police to share, and how they approached sharing. The responses showed a trend, across the police, towards a motivation for sharing to develop a deeper understanding of issues. However, the approaches and the strategies they used to share with others, which were primarily driven by achieving and surface approaches (to get promoted and get the job done). According to Biggs (1987) this could leave them discontented as they never progress to a deeper understanding of issues. Scaffolding sharing within the police through processes that are clearly defined, effective and valued could help to overcome these issues. Within the interviews and focus group findings a similar structured approach to sharing was adopted. Within the ‘who’ section some key aspects around personal relationships, reciprocity and reputation were identified. The ‘why’ the police share was one of the largest discussion points. Not only was there a deep motivation to solve key policing issues there was an approach of reciprocity. Police sharing was deeply motivated to support ‘good practice’ in the prevention and detection of crime. However, a sharing barrier was identified in the parity of value given to different types of knowledge for example between professional judgement and research evidence knowledge. Sharing was achieved when there were reciprocal benefits, in particular with personal networks or face to face sharing which was noted as ‘safe’. Again, this was inhibited by misunderstandings around the ‘risks’ of sharing, frequently attributed to data protection legislation; producing cautious reactions and as an avoidance tactic to save time and effort sharing. However, a divide was noted between technical users and those who avoided any online systems for sharing; often due to poorly designed systems and a lack of confidence in how to use systems. The police culture was identified as being risk-adverse, and competitive due to multiple factors, a lack of supported time to share, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) reviews and promotion criteria. The result was perceived to be a poor cultural ability to learn from mistakes and a likelihood to repeat errors. A set of strategic recommendations are given and include the use of a sharing authorised professional practice for HMIC reviews, sharing networks and training. A further set of operational recommendations are given such as; sharing impact cases for evidence based practice, data sharing officers and evaluating mechanisms for sharing. This full report is supported by the Police Knowledge Exchange Summary Report 2018 which gives an overview of the findings and recommendations