Chapter 21
A Decision to Change
Theodore E. Zorn, Jr.
Bill Inglis has been asked to chair the Knowledge Link Task Force, a group set up to begin implementing a “knowledge management” (KM) programme in their organization, Black Cap Engineering and Construction. However, they face limited support from top management along with an organizational culture that seems antithetical to the principles of KM. This case illustrates the dynamics and challenges of organizational change and the key roles that communication plays in the change process. KM, like many management “fashions,” is sometimes adopted for ambiguous reasons and with ambiguous support, creating significant challenges for those charged with implementing it.
This case illustrates the dynamics and challenges of planned organizational change—specifically, an attempt to implement a fashionable management programme called “knowledge management”—and the key roles that communication plays in the change process.
Intellectual capital—the knowledge and expertise held by an organization (e.g., in its established procedures, in members’ heads, or in databases) that an organization may consider an asset, in the same way that cash on hand may be considered financial capital.
Knowledge audit—an attempt to assess comprehensively the: (a) knowledge needed to perform by members of the organization, (b) knowledge possessed by members of the organization, and (c) existing practices for managing knowledge within the organization (Liebowitz and others, 2000, Liebowitz, 2000, Tiwana, 2000).
Knowledge management—a set of practices focused on identifying, developing, capturing, storing, and making accessible the information and knowledge that is critical to an organization’s effectiveness, by means of information and human systems interventions.
Change-oriented communication—planned and emergent communication activity directed toward, and in response to, organizational changes
Management fashion—a management technique or set of practices characterized by: (a) a collective belief that it is leading edge of management progress; (b) its own distinctive jargon; (c) a bell-shaped popularity life-cycle; and (d) active promotion by management fashion setters. (Rigby, 2001)
Management fashion setters—individuals and institutions that promote the rise and fall of particular management fashions; the major fashion setters are usually considered to be management “gurus” (authors of best-selling popular management books), business schools, consulting firms, and the business media.
Programmed vs. adaptive change implementation—two general approaches to change. Programmed implementation involves developing a coherent plan for change implementation and following the plan throughout, whereas adaptive implementation involves the monitoring of a change effort as it develops and modifying practices based on the ongoing monitoring.
Figure 1: Phases of Organizational Change From a Communication Perspective (Cheney et al., 2003)
Discussion Questions
1. What is the evidence that KM is a management fashion? What are the implications of framing the change as part of a management fashion?
2. Given that the ideas encompassed in KM seemed appropriate for this company, why did the change initiative fail?
3. Would you characterize the implementation approach as primarily programmatic, or primarily adaptive? Why?
4. Using the model in Figure 1, what were the primary communication processes involved in the change initiative?
5. If you were Bill Inglis, what would you have done differently once you were appointed to chair the task force?
6. If you were on the Knowledge Link Task Force, what actions would you recommend at this point (that is, at the conclusion of the case)?
Resources and References
Jackson, B. (2001). Management fashions and management gurus. London: Routledge.
Lewis, L. K. & Seibold, D. R. (1998). Reconceptualizing organizational change implementation as a communication problem: A review of literature and research agenda. Communication Yearbook, 21, 93–151.
Lewis, L. K., Hamel, S. A., & Richardson, B. K. (2001). Communicating change to nonprofit stakeholders: Models and predictors of implementers’ approaches. Management Communication Quarterly, 15, 5–41.
Liebowitz, J. (2000). Knowledge management receptivity at a major pharmaceutical company. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4, 252–257.
Walsham, G. (2002). What can knowledge management systems deliver? Management Communication Quarterly, 16, 267–273.
Zorn, T. E., & May, S. K. (Eds.). (2002). Forum introduction: Knowledge management and/as organizational communication. Management Communication Quarterly, 16, 237–241.
Zorn, T. E., & Taylor, J. R. (In press) Knowledge management and/as organizational communication. In D. Tourish & O. Hargie (eds.), Key issues in organisational communication. London: Routledge.
Abrahamson E. (1996). Management fashion. Academy of Management Review, 21, 254–285.
Cheney, G., Christensen, L. T., Zorn, Ganesh, S. (2003). Organizational communication in an age of globalization: Issues, reflections, practices. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.
Ford, J. D. and Ford, L. W. (1995). The role of conversations in producing intentional change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20, 541–570.
Timmerman, E. (2003). Media selection during the implementation of planned organizational change: A predictive framework based upon implementation approach and phase. Management Communication Quarterly, 16, 301–340.
Tiwana, A. (2000) The knowledge management toolkit: Practical techniques for building a knowledge management system. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall,.
KM World: <www.kmworld.com>
KM Tool: A global community for knowledge management professionals: <www.kmtool.net>