Global Environment and Management Trends Knowledge Culture

Question: Discuss about theGlobal Environment and Management Trends for Knowledge Culture. Answer: Introduction The article creating a knowledge culture authored by Susanne Hauchild, Thomas Licht and Wolfram Stein is a very informative piece of information to the business fraternity. According to these authors, the executive bodies from different companies regard knowledge as very significant for the success of the firm. According to the three authors, the management should have the ability to indulge their workers by creating ample working environment for them. By doing so, they encourage innovations from different employees and thus capacity to make knowledge and technological know-how of the company to work according to the objectives put in place come into realization. Hauschild, Licht Stein, (2001) highlighted that the achievements brought forth by any group rely on their ability to create, distribute and apply the most practical acquaintance in their endeavors. Therefore, in this piece of work, one will delve on the methodology used; the results and the conclusion as outlined by the wri ters of this article in order create room for a better understanding of the theme under scrutiny. Methodology Used According to the survey carried by McKinsey which sample 40 companies in the United States, Europe, and Japan, showed that the managers heading the sampled institutions outlined that an outstanding knowledge begins and ends by employing of the sophisticated form of information technology system. The reason behind it is the fact that the progress of the companies is directly proportional to the way in which different new and advanced types of information systems in place work (Bergren, et al. 2017). The analysis further shows that the profitability margin of the corporation accrues based on the models built and the way in which they are linked together with the information system of the company. A relationship which exists between the two co-principles of business success results in the production of up to date processes, products and customer relation in the firm. A clear framework of how knowledge is being created, distributed and applied in the company is incumbent in ensuring that proper leadership achievement is possible so as provide the framework for which the management exercise practice is done. Those leaders who are performers make the prosperity of the company a core objective unlike those whom their creativity is low (Garca-Snchez, et al. 2017). Moreover, a sound knowledge applied in the business should be culture-incorporated. The firm should involve all the systems in place so as to interrelate in a manner in which it paves the way for a smooth running of the company. For instance, the managerial body should make the employees aware of the links which go beyond the infrastructure. The reason being the fact that in the 21st century, land, labor and capital is no longer of great importance since their percentage to the growth of a firm is almost useless (de Vasconcelos, et al. 2017). However, knowledge has been outlined as the key factor. Nevertheless, architecture should be on the upper front of all businesses. The modern design if applied will make use of subtle position beneath in physical or imaginary drawing in a piece of paper. Therefore, the executive wing in any business organ should be aware in trends in the field of engineering and architecture so as to be aware of the cheap, economical and modern forms of architec ture in place. According to Gloet Samson, (2017) knowledge is an essential component for value credit and innovations in a firm. It encompasses product development and the generation of satisfactory elements to the consumers. The companies should have a high taste output since most of the consumers who are the direct revenue generators to the corporations are enticed by the quality production which can only be made possible by applying the current information technology in the world (Berkenkotter Huckin, 2016). This conclusion is drawn from the analysis of financial indicators and the process performance of different companies. According to the statistics carried out, 15% of the businesses that applied knowledge management accordingly were successful in the trading. Conversely, 15% of the enterprises that used a modern information technology failed. The explanation to this arises as a result of lack of proper coordination between the different structures put in place by the companies. More so, th e authors delineate that the achievement made by the sampled out businesses in the United States, Japan, and Europe was about 11% dated between 1995 and 1998. However, the fruitless were at 1.6% the same period. Despite the disparities between the well-performing companies and the poorly performing businesses, the manner at which the mode at which the development margin from the successful businesses was dropping was alarming. It was estimated at 4.6 % as per the 1995-1998 periods. On the other hand, the less successful firms were having it better since they depreciated at 0.7% (Lee, Shiue, Chen, 2016). The authors of this article relate this to the ability of the companies to hold on to the success. It is viewed that those organizations whose structures are in place are not productive due to the laxity which comes with having super profits and large market obtained at the same time having the ability to control the consumers due to the trust existing. Conversely, unproductive corp orations tend to work hard by employing different mechanism such has applying new information technology, finding the best way of coordinating themselves and creating room for more innovations so as to improve their companies (Al-Busaidi Olfman, 2017). Therefore, their chances of failing are very slim, unlike those association with an advanced managerial and information technology that tend to relax without considering the trend in technology which is changing at a very fast rate currently. As a result, these top companies drop drastically in all aspects ranging from leadership, architecture and business processes. Results Creating a knowledge culture outlines necessary instructions for the achievement to be felt and maintained by the enterprise. Susanne, Thomas, and Wolfram state that a company must create, distribute and apply knowledge so as to run accordingly at the same time make returns. The management should ensure that the way in which it is using knowledge in different production sites in the company is fast and direct since it forms the stronghold in the base of the institution (Bratianu, 2016). This mechanism will help in reducing of the milestones resulting from poor relationships and the harmonization which are in place in the firm. Such problems could be poor employee affiliation, competition from other companies and the fast growing technology. The company can reduce the challenges by bringing people holding different positions together within the vicinity and form an alliance agreed upon by the entire team. Apart from knowledge application, Watkins, (2017) highlights that the company should have smart distribution experience. It can make use of this by ensuring that this type of knowledge is moved correctly to where it is entailed. This kind of expertise relies primarily on the infrastructure regarding databases since it eases dissemination of information within and outside the company relating to work. The information from the employees and the management should have a good distribution framework since it establishes a continuous attachment in the trading counterparts. Additionally, the authors of this article also alluded that knowledge creation is also very crucial to the success of the business. This sort of experience is very slippery since creativity is seen as cultured not ordained. Citing from Hong Lee, Suh, (2016), companies are entitled to be innovative now and then on ways of producing goods and services since different scholars view creativity as the principal source of coming up with distinct products in the market. According to the statistics, 80% of the successful enterprises in the world make jobs of their employees impressive with and aim of making them creative in the business. On the contrary, 40% of the unsuccessful companies also have a mechanism in place of encouraging their employees. However, theirs is not centralized and effective as compared to that belonging to the achieving companies. Conclusion The thriving company understands very well that information technology is not synonymous with knowledge management and vice versa. The difference emerges as a result that knowledge management is a long-term business project which requires diverse aspects of business with other measures in place such has a sufficient labor force, health competition, and favorable climatic conditions (Noh, Kim Jang, 2016). According to the techniques which distinguish between the productive and non-productive companies, the well performing tend to make use of the cheaper, faster and the more rapid methods of production which are prompted by the changing technology. On the other hand, the unsuccessful are much into the outdated methods of manufacturing and thus forming the basis for their failure in the business world. Therefore, they ought to do intensive research concerning the best and trending information technology system used in production. They can also learn the three key ways of succeeding in business, that is, creation, application, and distribution technology to guide them in dealing with issues relating to business. Bibliography Al-Busaidi, K.A. and Olfman, L., 2017. Knowledge Sharing Through Inter-organizational Knowledge Sharing Systems. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 47(1). Bergren, M.D., Maughan, E.D., Johnson, K.H., Wolfe, L.C., Watts, H.E.S. and Cole, M., 2017. Creating a Culture of Accurate and Precise Data. NASN School Nurse, 32(1), pp.39-41. Berkenkotter, C. and Huckin, T.N., 2016. Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication: Cognition/culture/power. Routledge. Bratianu, C., 2016. Knowledge dynamics. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 4(3), p.323. de Vasconcelos, J.B., Kimble, C., Carreteiro, P. and Rocha, ., 2017. The application of knowledge management to software evolution. International Journal of Information Management, 37(1), pp.1499-1506. Garca-Snchez, E., Garca-Morales, V.J. and Bolvar-Ramos, M.T., 2017. The influence of top management support for ICTs on organisational performance through knowledge acquisition, transfer, and utilisation. Review of Managerial Science, 11(1), pp.19-51. Gloet, M. and Samson, D., 2017, January. Linking Knowledge Management, Business Excellence and Innovation Performance. In Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Hauschild, S., Licht, T. and Stein, W., 2001. Creating a knowledge culture. The McKinsey Quarterly, pp.74-74. Hong, J., Lee, O.K.D. and Suh, W., 2016. Creating knowledge within a team: a socio-technical interaction perspective. Knowledge Management Research Practice. Lee, J.C., Shiue, Y.C. and Chen, C.Y., 2016. Examining the impacts of organizational culture and top management support of knowledge sharing on the success of software process improvement. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, pp.462-474. Noh, M., Kim, H. and Jang, H., 2016. Learning performance and business performance of knowledge management organizations: The moderating effect of technological capability. Information Development, 32(3), pp.637-654. Watkins, K.E., 2017. Defining and Creating Organizational Knowledge Performance. Educar, 53(1), pp.211-226.