The Status quo of Knowledge Management and Sustainability Knowledge

Q3 Business, Management and Accounting Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management Pub Date : 2020-04-01 DOI:10.34190/EJKM.18.02.004
B. Klingenberg, Helen N. Rothberg
{"title":"The Status quo of Knowledge Management and Sustainability\n Knowledge","authors":"B. Klingenberg, Helen N. Rothberg","doi":"10.34190/EJKM.18.02.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The United Nations (UN) 2030 agenda for sustainable development issues an urgent call to transition to sustainable business models and life styles. Outlining seventeen concrete sustainable development goals (SDGs), organizations and individuals are encouraged to actively participate (United Nations, 2015). However, as of the 2019 report on the SDGs, progress is slow. Organizations that aspire to be economically viable as well as socially and environmentally responsible global citizens, need to understand what sustainability means and how to institutionalize its principles. This paper posits that some of the underlying reasons for slow progress are lack of full understanding of the required knowledge and its systemic nature, as well as potentially insufficient knowledge management processes. It proposes that sustainability knowledge learning should include three “DCA” steps: 1) What to know: identify which knowledge is needed (DEFINE); 2) How to learn : develop strategies to identify sources and learning strategies for the requisite sustainability knowledge (COLLECT); 3) How to use sustainability knowledge: develop knowledge management practices that enable absorption and institutionalization (ACT). Comparing the DCA model to other sustainability knowledge management models reveals that internal processes are emphasized (ACT). Fewer models consider the second step, COLLECT. The necessity to identify knowledge needs, DEFINE is almost entirely absent. Given the complex nature of sustainability knowledge, it appears that currently, knowledge management practices may be inadequately designed to support organizations in their transformational change towards sustainability and in the development of required stakeholder partnerships. Said systemic nature is also ill reflected in knowledge management research for sustainability. Further limiting is a lack of a clear definition of sustainability knowledge. This paper is a call for research to establish a clear view of what sustainability knowledge is, and based on that, a more detailed development of effective knowledge management strategies.","PeriodicalId":37211,"journal":{"name":"Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34190/EJKM.18.02.004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

The United Nations (UN) 2030 agenda for sustainable development issues an urgent call to transition to sustainable business models and life styles. Outlining seventeen concrete sustainable development goals (SDGs), organizations and individuals are encouraged to actively participate (United Nations, 2015). However, as of the 2019 report on the SDGs, progress is slow. Organizations that aspire to be economically viable as well as socially and environmentally responsible global citizens, need to understand what sustainability means and how to institutionalize its principles. This paper posits that some of the underlying reasons for slow progress are lack of full understanding of the required knowledge and its systemic nature, as well as potentially insufficient knowledge management processes. It proposes that sustainability knowledge learning should include three “DCA” steps: 1) What to know: identify which knowledge is needed (DEFINE); 2) How to learn : develop strategies to identify sources and learning strategies for the requisite sustainability knowledge (COLLECT); 3) How to use sustainability knowledge: develop knowledge management practices that enable absorption and institutionalization (ACT). Comparing the DCA model to other sustainability knowledge management models reveals that internal processes are emphasized (ACT). Fewer models consider the second step, COLLECT. The necessity to identify knowledge needs, DEFINE is almost entirely absent. Given the complex nature of sustainability knowledge, it appears that currently, knowledge management practices may be inadequately designed to support organizations in their transformational change towards sustainability and in the development of required stakeholder partnerships. Said systemic nature is also ill reflected in knowledge management research for sustainability. Further limiting is a lack of a clear definition of sustainability knowledge. This paper is a call for research to establish a clear view of what sustainability knowledge is, and based on that, a more detailed development of effective knowledge management strategies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
知识管理现状与可持续性知识
联合国2030年可持续发展议程发出了向可持续商业模式和生活方式过渡的紧急呼吁。概述了17个具体的可持续发展目标,鼓励组织和个人积极参与(联合国,2015年)。然而,截至2019年可持续发展目标报告,进展缓慢。渴望在经济上可行的组织以及对社会和环境负责的全球公民需要了解可持续性意味着什么以及如何将其原则制度化。本文认为,进展缓慢的一些根本原因是缺乏对所需知识及其系统性的充分理解,以及潜在的知识管理流程不足。它提出可持续性知识学习应包括三个“DCA”步骤:1)知道什么:确定需要哪些知识(DEFINE);2) 如何学习:制定战略,确定必要的可持续性知识的来源和学习战略(学院);3) 如何使用可持续性知识:制定能够吸收和制度化的知识管理实践(ACT)。将DCA模型与其他可持续性知识管理模型进行比较表明,强调内部流程(ACT)。较少的模型考虑第二步,收集。确定知识需求的必要性,DEFINE几乎完全不存在。鉴于可持续性知识的复杂性,目前看来,知识管理做法的设计可能不足以支持各组织向可持续性转变,并发展所需的利益攸关方伙伴关系。上述系统性在可持续性的知识管理研究中也没有得到很好的体现。进一步的限制是缺乏对可持续性知识的明确定义。本文呼吁进行研究,以明确什么是可持续性知识,并在此基础上更详细地制定有效的知识管理战略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management
Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management Business, Management and Accounting-Management of Technology and Innovation
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
The KLC Cultures' Synergy Power, Trust, and Tacit Knowledge for Organizational Intelligence Impact of Human Resource Information System Performance for Sustainable Health Sector in South Africa EJKM Editorial: 2024 State of the Journal A Systematic Literature Review on University Collaboration in Open Innovation: Trends, Technologies, and Frameworks Critical Aspects of a Higher Education Reform for Continuous Lifelong Learning Opportunities in a Digital Era
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1