Evaluation of knowledge synergy components

DSpace Repository

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Skačkauskienė, Ilona
dc.contributor.author Hrušecká, Denisa
dc.contributor.author Katinienė, Aušra
dc.contributor.author Čepel, Martin
dc.contributor.other Ekonomická fakulta cs
dc.date.accessioned 2018-03-29
dc.date.available 2018-03-29
dc.date.issued 2018-03-29
dc.identifier.issn 1212-3609
dc.identifier.uri https://dspace.tul.cz/handle/15240/22792
dc.description.abstract There is no doubt that knowledge is a key asset of any organisation, enabling it to get a competitive advantage, implement innovation, deal with difficulties and improve its management processes. Requirements on employees´ knowledge have been rising in recent years, especially with regard to the new trends and currently the widely discussed fourth industrial revolution. In the emerging network economy and knowledge society, organisations must be ready for complex knowledge dissemination and management processes. Knowledge is collected, stored, assessed, and created by an organisation and shared by its members. In the course of knowledge dissemination, members of the organisation create synergy which generates unique knowledge. Managing organisational knowledge necessary for the creation of added value and the acquisition of a competitive advantage requires evaluating the knowledge synergy and its components. The paper aims at identifying knowledge synergy components and providing an evaluation method of employees’ knowledge synergy and its components to have a rational and objective evaluation of employees’ knowledge, relations among employees, and organisational knowledge synergy. To achieve this aim, knowledge synergy components are identified, evaluation issues are revealed, types of knowledge synergy relations are presented together with an evaluation formula for each of these relations, components of employees’ knowledge and factors reflecting knowledge content are specified, an evaluation formula for each component is provided, and an organisational knowledge synergy evaluation method is described. Due to its versatility, presented results are applicable in any industry or business area for measuring and improving intellectual capital as well as for benchmarking purposes. The research applies methods of analysis, synthesis, graph theory and combinatorics as well as a systematic approach. en
dc.format text
dc.format.extent 15 stran cs
dc.language.iso en
dc.publisher Technická Univerzita v Liberci cs
dc.publisher Technical university of Liberec, Czech Republic en
dc.relation.ispartof Ekonomie a Management cs
dc.relation.ispartof Economics and Management en
dc.relation.isbasedon Belohlavek, D. (2007). The Unicist Ontology of Intellectual Capital Building. Buenos Aires: Blue Eagle Group.
dc.relation.isbasedon Bianchi, M. (2010). Perspectives for the extension of Graiciunas’ span of control to the process of enterprise creation. Journal TILTAI Social Sciences, 53(4), 15-33.
dc.relation.isbasedon Bivainis, J., & Morkvėnas, R. (2008). Darbuotojų žinių potencialo vertinimas. Business: Theory and Practice, 9(2), 105-115. https://dx.doi.org/10.3846/1648-0627.2008.9.105-115.
dc.relation.isbasedon Boyatzis, R. E. (1982). The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance. New York: Wiley.
dc.relation.isbasedon Brčić, Ž. J., & Mihelič, K. K. (2015). Knowledge sharing between different generations of employees: an example from Slovenia. Economic Research, 28(1), 853-867. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2015.1092308.
dc.relation.isbasedon Cho, W., Shaw, M. J., & Kwon, H. D. (2013). The effect of synergy enhancement on information technology portfolio selection. Information Technology and Management, 14(2), 125-142. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10799-012-0150-9.
dc.relation.isbasedon Desauza, K. C. (2003). Knowledge Management Barriers – Why the Technology Imperative Seldom Works. Business Horizons, 46(1), 25-29. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0007-6813(02)00276-8.
dc.relation.isbasedon Dias, M. S. (2014). Gestão do conhecimento no setor público: identificando práticas e desafios no centro de desenvolvimento da tecnologia nuclear. Accounting and Management, 7(7), 193-208.
dc.relation.isbasedon Drucker, P. (1980). Managing in Turbulent Times. New York: Harper & Row.
dc.relation.isbasedon Drucker, P., & Peter, F. (1969). The Age of Discontinuity. Guidelines to Our Changing Society. New York: Harper & Row.
dc.relation.isbasedon Eikenberry, K. (2007). Remarkable Leadership: Unleashing Your Leadership Potential One Skill at a Time. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
dc.relation.isbasedon EUROSTAT. (2017a). Annual data on employment in knowledge-intensive activities at the national level, by sex (from 2008 onwards, NACE Rev. 2). Retrieved July 3, 2017, from http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=htec_kia_emp2&lang=en.
dc.relation.isbasedon EUROSTAT. (2017b). Employment in technology and knowledge-intensive sectors at the national level, by level of education (from 2008 onwards, NACE Rev. 2). Retrieved July 3, 2017, from http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=htec_emp_nisced2&lang=en.
dc.relation.isbasedon Fink, K. (2005, June 29 – July 1). Knowledge Measurement and Interviewer Bias. Paper presented at I-KNOW ’05, Graz, Austria. New York: ACM.
dc.relation.isbasedon Fombelle, P. W., Jarvis, C. B., Ward, J., & Ostrom, L. (2011). Leveraging customers’ multiple identities: identity synergy as a driver of organizational identification. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 40(4), 587-604. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0254-5.
dc.relation.isbasedon Ginevičius, R., & Podvezko, V. (2007). Some problems of evaluating multicriteria decision methods. International Journal of Management and Decision Making, 8(5), 527-539. https://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJMDM.2007.013415.
dc.relation.isbasedon Graičiūnas, V. A. (1937). Relationship in Organization. In L. H. Gulick & L. F. Urwic (Eds.), Papers on the Science of Administration (182-187). N.Y.: I.P.A.
dc.relation.isbasedon Haynes, K. S., & Mickelson, J. S. (2009). Affecting Change: Social Workers in the Political Arena. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
dc.relation.isbasedon Helms, M., & Cengage, G. (2006). Experience and Learning Curves. Encyclopedia of Management. Retrieved March 3, 2009, from http://www.enotes.com/management-encyclopedia.
dc.relation.isbasedon Huang, Y., Ye, J., & Gao, Z. (2012). Study on Team Stability Based on the Perspective of Knowledge Potential. iBusiness, 4(3), 256-259. https://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ib.2012.43032.
dc.relation.isbasedon Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple Attribute Decision-Making Methods and Applications. A State of the Art Survey. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
dc.relation.isbasedon Jankauskienė, V., Kanapeckienė, V., Narkauskaitė, L., & Valintėlienė, R. (2012). Visuomenės sveikatos priežiūros funkcijas vykdančių specialistų žinios ir įgūdžiai. Visuomenės sveikata, 2(57), 45-56.
dc.relation.isbasedon Juřičková, E. (2014, February 6 – February 7). Innovation's Dependence on Human Capital in the World's Most Innovative Countries. Paper presented at 2nd International Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship (ICIE), Bangkok, Thailand. England, Sonning Common: ACPI.
dc.relation.isbasedon Kaminskienė, L. (2011). Lietuvos kvalifikacijų sistemos ir europos kvalifikacijų sąrangos sąsajos. Kvalifikacijų ir profesinio mokymo plétros centras. Retrieved November 24, 2016, from .
dc.relation.isbasedon Ketchen, D. J., & Hult, G. T. M. (2011). Marketing and organization theory: opportunities for synergy. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(4), 481-483. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0259-0.
dc.relation.isbasedon Khan, I. A. (2010). Knowledge Groups: A Model for Creating Synergy across the Public Sector. Public Organization Review, 10(2), 139-152. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11115-009-0101-z.
dc.relation.isbasedon Klafke, R. V., Lievore, C., Picinin, C. T., de Francisco, A. C., & Pilatti, L. A. (2016). Primary knowledge management practices applied in Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC) industries from 2001-2010. Journal of Knowledge Management, 20(4), 812-828. https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JKM-12-2015-0522.
dc.relation.isbasedon Kloudová, J., & Chwaszcz, O. (2011). New Way of Analysis of Creative Centers within Europe. Economics & Management, 16, 197-206.
dc.relation.isbasedon Lobanova, L., & Chlivickas, E. (2009). Žmogiškųjų išteklių kompetencijų vertinimas viešajame sektoriuje. Viešasis administravimas, 21(1), 63-72.
dc.relation.isbasedon Matošková, J. (2016). Measuring Knowledge. Journal of Competitiveness, 8(4), 5-29. https://dx.doi.org/10.7441/joc.2016.04.01.
dc.relation.isbasedon Meenu, D., Mikku, D., & Shishodia, Y. S. (2012). Knowledge Management and Organizational Competencies: A Harmonic Collaboration. International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering, 2(12), 45-50.
dc.relation.isbasedon Moradmand, N., Datta, A., & Oakley, G. (2014, June 23 – June 27). An Interactive Multimedia Development Life Cycle Model Based on a Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning. Paper presented at World Conference on Educational Media and Technology 2014, Tamplere, Finland. USA, Waynesville: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
dc.relation.isbasedon Morkvėnas, R. (2010). Organizacijos žinių potencialo vertinimas. Daktaro disertacija. Vilnius: Technika.
dc.relation.isbasedon Neef, D., Siesfeld, T., & Cofela, J. (1998). The Economic Impact of Knowledge. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.
dc.relation.isbasedon Newman, M., Barabási, A., & Duncan, J. W. (2006). The Structure and Dynamics of Networks. New York: Princeton.
dc.relation.isbasedon Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-creating Company. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
dc.relation.isbasedon Opricovic, S., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2004). Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European Journal of Operational Research, 156(2), 445-455. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00020-1.
dc.relation.isbasedon Park, M., Lee, H.-S., & Kwon, S. (2010). Construction knowledge evaluation using expert index. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 16(3), 401-411. https://dx.doi.org/10.3846/jcem.2010.46.
dc.relation.isbasedon Podvezko, V. (2008). Sudėtingų dydžių kompleksinis vertinimas. Verslas: Teorija ir praktika. Business: Theory and Practice, 9(3), 160-168. https://dx.doi.org/10.3846/1648-0627.2008.9.160-168.
dc.relation.isbasedon Sala-i-Martin, X., Bilbao-Osorio, B., Blanke, J., Drzeniek Hanouz, M., & Geiger, T. (2011, January 28). The Global Competitiveness Index 2011–2012: Setting the Foundations for Strong Productivity. Paper presented at World Economic Forum 2011, Davos, Switzerland. Geneva: WEF.
dc.relation.isbasedon Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday / Currency.
dc.relation.isbasedon Simon, H. A. (1947). Administrative Behavior: a Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations. New York: Simon & Schuster.
dc.relation.isbasedon Skačkauskienė, I., & Katinienė, A. (2015). Žinių potencialo sampratos formavimasis tinklaveikos visuomenėje. Mokslas – Lietuvos ateitis, 7(2), 163-171. https://dx.doi.org/10.3846/mla.2015.740.
dc.relation.isbasedon Skačkauskienė, I., Kazlauskienė, E., & Katinienė, A. (2017). Modelling Knowledge Synergy Evaluation. Montenegrian Journal of Economic, 13(1), 35-49. https://dx.doi.org/10.14254/1800-5845/2017.13-1.2.
dc.relation.isbasedon Smith, I. W. (2004). Continuing Professional Development and Workplace Learning 7: Human Resource Development – a Tool for Achieving Organizational Change. Library Management, 25(3), 148-151. https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01435120410522370.
dc.relation.isbasedon Smith, R. (2001). Knowledge Management – The Road Ahead. Presented at the 2nd Conference & Expo of the Staff Exchange Program of The World Bank Group, Washington, D.C., USA. Available from .
dc.relation.isbasedon Smith, R., & Farquhar, A. (2000). The Road Ahead for Knowledge Management: An AI Perspective. AI Magazine, 21(4), 17-40.
dc.relation.isbasedon Steiner, I. (1972). Group Process and Productivity. New York: Academic Press.
dc.relation.isbasedon Strassmann, P. (1998). The Value of Knowledge Capital. American Programmer, 11(3), 3-10.
dc.relation.isbasedon Šegota, A., Tomljanovic, M., & Hudek, I. (2017). Contemporary approaches to measuring competitiveness – the case of EU member states. Proceedings of Rijeka Faculty of Economics: Journal of Economics and Business, 35(1), 123-150. https://dx.doi.org/10.18045/zbefri.2017.1.123.
dc.relation.isbasedon Torres, A. A. L., Ziviani, F., & Silva, S. M. (2012). Mapeamento de competências: ferramenta para a comunicação e a divulgação científica. Transinformação, 24(3), 191-205.
dc.relation.isbasedon Urban, B., & Joubert, G. C. D. S. (2017). Multidimensional and comparative study on intellectual capital and organisational performance. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 18(1), 84-99. https://dx.doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2016.1255990.
dc.relation.isbasedon Urwick, L. (1943). Personnel Management in Relation to Factory Organization. London: Urwick Institute of Labour Management.
dc.relation.isbasedon Ustinovichius, L., & Zavadskas, E. K. (2004). Statybos investicijų efektyvumo sistemotechninis įvertinimas. Vilnius: Technika.
dc.relation.isbasedon Vanagas, R., & Tumėnas, A. (2008). Savivaldybės darbuotojų tarnybinės veiklos vertinimas veiklos valdymo kontekste. Viešoji politika ir administravimas, 25, 57-67.
dc.relation.isbasedon Wu, W.-P., & Choi, W. L. (2004). Transaction Cost, Social Capital and Firms’ Synergy Creation in Chinese Business Networks: An Integrative Approach. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 21(3), 325-343. https://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:APJM.0000036466.90433.92.
dc.relation.isbasedon Žaptorius, J. (2007). Darbuotojų motyvavimo sistemos kūrimas ir jos teorinė analizė. Socialogija, 18(4), 105-117.
dc.rights CC BY-NC
dc.subject knowledge management en
dc.subject knowledge synergy en
dc.subject knowledge sharing en
dc.subject intellectual capital en
dc.subject evaluation en
dc.subject communication en
dc.subject.classification M1
dc.title Evaluation of knowledge synergy components en
dc.type Article en
dc.publisher.abbreviation TUL
dc.relation.isrefereed true
dc.identifier.doi 10.15240/tul/001/2018-1-010
dc.identifier.eissn 2336-5604
local.relation.volume 21
local.relation.issue 1
local.relation.abbreviation E+M cs
local.relation.abbreviation E&M en
local.faculty Faculty of Economics
local.citation.spage 144
local.citation.epage 158
local.access open
local.fulltext yes
local.filename EM_1_2018_10


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace

Advanced Search

Browse

My Account