Assessment of Knowledge Management Models.

Number of knowledge management models which represents a wide spectrum of views exists in the literature of Knowledge Management. These models are developed as different theoretical constructs or simplified representations for better understanding, analysis and improvement of the process of knowledge management. In reality there is no hard wired knowledge management model to be used in any kind of organisation. An organisation can have its own model for knowledge management depending on the field or the area which the organisation is operating such as Technology or social fields.
Broadly, the literature identifies three categories of Knowledge Management models (McAdam and McCreedy, 1999).

• Knowledge category models
• Intellectual capital models
• Social constructed models

This article will be mainly discussing about the knowledge category models and will be briefly focus on the intellectual capital models and social constructed models.

Knowledge category models

Knowledge category models consider knowledge as discrete entities (McAdam and McCreedy, 1999).

The differentiating characteristic of knowledge from the epistemological models (Gebert, 2003) perspective is the difficulties of articulation of knowledge (Moteleb and Woodman, 2007). The knowledge is categorized as Tacit knowledge and Explicit knowledge. The knowledge which is difficult to express or in other words non-verbalized in most cases to others is define as Tacit knowledge by Polanyi (1966). On the other hand the knowledge that can be communicated or articulated to others is define as Explicit knowledge. Explicit knowledge is often specified as being in computer programs, writing or drawings.
The SECI model of Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) represents the knowledge management process as a continuous spiral process. The following figure best describes SECI model.

SECI model figure is from the website 12Manage

This model presents the process of transferring tacit knowledge to others as tacit knowledge and transferring tacit knowledge to others as explicit knowledge and vise-versa. SECI model provides a framework for an organisation to manage knowledge by categorizing their knowledge assets. Knowledge assets are not static it can be always dynamic (Geytere, 2007). New knowledge assets can be created from the existing knowledge assets.
The drawbacks or weakness in SECI model is that it was created from a study of Japanese organizations. In most cases the people are bound to their work or organization for a long time and are heavily depend on tacit knowledge. But modern organizational knowledge transferring process can be more complicated and the storage of knowledge is also an important factor.
In a more intricate model by Hedlund and Nonaka (1993) describes that there are four knowledge sources for an organisation. They are the individual, the small group, the organisation and the inter-organisational groups such as suppliers or customers. The issue in this model is that it assumes these knowledge sources as knowledge and can be segregated (McAdam and McCreedy, 1999). The following figure describes Hedlund and Nonaka (1993) model.

Hedlund and Nonaka (1993) model figure adopted from McAdam and McCreedy (1999)

Intellectual capital models

There are different models that represent knowledge as intellectual capital. A famous model is Skandia’s intellectual model. Almost all the intellectual models are mechanistic in nature. In these models knowledge is also treated as an asset same as any other asset in an organisation (McAdam and McCreedy, 1999).

Social constructed models

These models in most cases take a balanced approach between scientific and socially constructed knowledge. These models assumes a wide definition of knowledge and views knowledge as being intrinsically linked within the social and learning processes within the organization (McAdam and McCreedy, 1999).