The Final Blog: My Perceptions On Blogging

I’m a final year student studying here in MMU and this is my final trimester. During my 5 years of studying here, this is actually the first time that the subject requires me to do blogging as a form of assignment (a big applause to the lecturer). There are 3 blogs to write on and each with different topics, given by the lecturer and this, is finally the last one.

First of all, according to Wikipedia, a blog (a contraction of the term "Web log") is a Web site, usually maintained by an individual, with regular entries of commentary, descriptions of events, or other material such as graphics or videos.

I had a blog of my own that tells the ups and downs of my life. I like to express my feelings there and share it with certain people I know. I do it regularly and I felt quite relief after that. I even like to read other peoples blog when I have the free time. I found that very interesting as I might learn something new from them, for example, the best foods and hang outs place in Malaysia, and etc.

So, having to do blog as my assignment is something I really looked into. I found it interesting the moment Mr. Goh, the lecturer announced to us that we have to create a blog as our assignment. Doing blog as an assignment, for me, really helps the student to pinpoint their own point of view on things, especially in the relation part. It makes sure that the students really understand the subject that they learned, at the same time practice what they have learned, apply it in their daily life. But, somehow, to certain students, for example, me, I found it quite hard to relate the theories that I have learned in my daily life. It took me some time to do the relation part. That is why from the 3 topics given for this blog, I find this one, the last blog is the toughest among all! It is because from the first sentence until the last one, it was all about what I have learned and what I have understood through this whole assignments and the subject itself.

I was at first enthusiastic to start the blog, as I am fond of writing blog. But sadly, the topics of the blog are quite hard and require me to do some research on my own to complete them.

In terms of challenges, for me, I don’t think there is much hassle to do the blog. It just takes a couple of minutes if you already have the idea on what to write and babble about. Compared to the usual assignments (report, research method, etc), blogging seems much easier and interesting. It is more relax without having to do a certain format of assignment. However, the challenge comes when I start writing the blog. I don’t have the enthusiasm to write it at first because of the hard topic. And then, it requires me to put videos and links in there. Although I had been blogging for quite some time, I still don’t quite sure on how to put the videos on the blog as I rarely put videos in my blog. Another challenge is to complete the blog in time. The time given in writing the blog is short and at the same time I had too many assignments to go through (as this is my final trimester!). I’m the one who can’t survive without hanging out with friends in a day and that made me can’t catch up with the assignments. I did manage to submit them in time, but the quality is obviously low. This is where I motivate myself with positive reinforcement, where I usually tell to myself that I CAN go out IF one of my assignments was done. For example, this one day, I really want to shop for shoes. I had one assignment to be submitted the next day though, so, I promised to myself that I can buy not only one, but two shoes once I had finished the assignment. Seriously, it did help me in finishing my assignments on time.

There are pros and cons on doing blogging. Through blogging, one of the advantage that I can get is knowledge sharing. Sharing knowledge is the easiest and the most obvious advantage that I can have by blogging. Bloggers tend to share knowledge with each other without them knowing it. For example, from the topics given by Mr. Goh, the seven of us tend to write our own ideas and thoughts on it. We all learned by the differences in our thoughts unconsciously. We were able to share our information in a nick of time and as easy as it can be (we just read each other’s blogs). And, from these kinds of activities; I can say that our relationship was improved, as we got to know each other well by reading the blogs and sharing information. The other advantage that I can say is that it saves a lot of time. It requires you to just sit there, find information on the internet, and start writing. Also, this blogging activity is an IT- wise, which is good for us to maintain technology wise, as this is one of the trend in nowadays globalization world – you can chare information through the whole wide world. I also think that blogging creates this sense of social awareness, where people can understand and be sensitive to the other people’s feelings, thoughts, and situations.

For me, there are only two cons of blogging, which one of them is in terms of lack of privacy. Yes, we want to share our thoughts and feelings with others through blogging, but at some times, the involvement of someone you did not know in your life makes it a little bit awkward. The other cons is it is too dependable on technology, so, if let’s say one day the system was down, it is hard for us to do the blog and submit it to the lecturer.

Through doing this blog, I can relate to one of the theory in the subject called the Johari Window theory, where we get to know and understand ourselves better so that other people see us better. First, we tend to share with others a bit about ourselves in the blog, and get feedback form others, as the blog requires us to give feedbacks and comments to others. At the same time, we interact with others through knowledge and information sharing. This is obviously good for the learning environment, and once again, the relationship among us is improved.

For me, this whole blogging as a form of assignment is really good for both the students and the lecturers. It really saves time, and makes knowledge sharing easier. I think this kind of activities should be more practiced in the university by the lecturers. This came to my last word; I enjoyed doing this blog, I enjoyed the subject very much (as I like to learned on how to understand people better and at the same time develop myself to be more discipline and positive) although there are a lot to read, and I enjoyed having Mr. Goh as the lecturer as he always have many stories and things to tell (even there is no enough time). I also enjoyed the companies from all of you and I really hope to see you in the future. Good luck and thank you! :)

Implementing Knowledge Management in Organizations: Ways to Encourage Team Members to Share Knowledge

Knowledge is a philosophical concept defined by a Greek philosopher, Plato, as a belief supported by an explanation (Blair, 2002). Under the context of knowledge-view of an organization, the definition suggests that knowledge comes from a firm's increased ability to make use and sense of available information to create value for the shareholders (Leiponen, 2006). There has been a significant growth in the knowledge-based era, which suggests that generating and retention of knowledge can have positive effects on the firm's performance (Di Mattia & Scott, 1999). To manage this intangible asset to leverage firms for benefits is considered to be its core capability.

Knowledge management (KM) has been aimed at capturing, integrating and using existing organizational knowledge and consequently creating a knowledge asset that can be a source of sustained competitive advantage in the long run (Brooking, 1999; Havens & Knapp, 1999). The literature has divided knowledge into two major categories depending upon its nature to be codified for the use in a KM system. The structured and systematic knowledge that can be described in formal language and easily communicated and shared through formal means qualify for the explicit knowledge type (Elizabeth, 2001). It has been established that such knowledge is easy to codify in the form of databases and is seen as a base resource because of its inherent nature of easy imitation by other organizations. The other form of knowledge which has gained tremendous importance is the automatic collective behavior and is called tacit knowledge (Richard et al, 2001). Tacit knowledge, according to Sajjad et al (2005), comprises of mental models, values, beliefs, assumptions and perceptions which are deeply entranced into the intellectual capital of an organization. And it has been suggested that tacit knowledge is faced with an apparent challenges such as the feature of inimitability that make it a source of sustained competitive advantage also makes it hard to capture and share within the organization to gain the potential benefits. Any organization should not only look at the 'best practices' in the field but should customize each approach to its own unique culture and requirements to be able to successfully use KM.

In my own view, for an organization to share knowledge more effectively, it needs to leverage the Communities of Practice (CoPs) within its organization. Brooke Manville, Director of Knowledge Management at McKinsey & Co., defines communities of practice as groups of people who are informally bound to one another by exposure to a common class of problems. These groups share their learning and knowledge resources continuously and informally amongst each other for mutual benefit. They will brainstorm for new ideas, or to solve any problems arise in the organizations. Every organization has to have groups like these, which are typically loosely structured, decentralized, fluid, and built on personal relationships. These CoPs are perfectly positioned to support knowledge management efforts. They are continuously capturing and sharing relevant knowledge with each other. Often, though, the knowledge captured is not directed towards a business objective and isn’t codified or validated in any formal capacity. Nor is the knowledge stored in a format that enables easy retrieval. An organization can leverage these CoPs to further its KM objectives by stepping back and creating a list of priorities for what types of knowledge to capture and share. These priorities should directly map to the organization’s business goals and should represent what the organization needs to know to be more successful in the marketplace both at the organization and at the individual level.

Once the business priorities have been identified, existing CoPs should be approached to more formally capture and roll out these organizational learning in a piecemeal fashion using the intranet. If there aren’t any communities of practice naturally aligned to the business priorities, then new ones should be organized. Some large organizations with a history of knowledge management successes have already structured their communities of practice to do this for them on a regular, focused basis. All these while of studying in MMU, I found this as an important aspect to be applied when studying for exams or doing assignments in groups. The results of doing the assignments in groups by having discussion and such tend to be more effective rather than doing the assignments alone. Same goes while I studied for exams, I will have a better understanding on the subject when we had study groups rather than I studied alone.

Other than applying the CoPs, there are a few other theories that can motivate workers in organizations to share knowledge among each other. One of the theories is the reward incentives. There are many sorts of rewards such as financial bonuses, recognition, or fully sponsored vacations by the manager. Financial reward somehow is seen as the most fundamental applied performance practice in any organizations and the most powerful source of knowledge and information sharing. People would tend to share what they know if they are given rewards such as that. People also tend to seek some sense of recognition in their organizations. They want to be known for what they have given. I have seen many cases like these in many companies. For example, my mother worked in the Ministry of Health for years. She told me that usually when there is a new freshly graduated students work there, they tend to not share their ideas or knowledge with colleagues afraid that once they have given out their knowledge, they would have nothing advantage on them. They are afraid of the risk of other people gets the name from their knowledge. But, when offered bonuses or financial rewards for new ideas or any tasks given, they would used and applied all the knowledge they have to have the best outcome and to get the rewards offered.

There are also a theory from Maslow called Maslow’s Needs Theory. There are five stages in the hierarchy of needs according to Maslow’s and they start from physiological needs, to safety needs, to needs of belongingness, to needs of self-esteem, and the needs for self-actualization. At the stage of belongingness, people would tend to share their knowledge and experiences to be part of the group, to share common interest between them, and to feel part of them. Sharing of knowledge at that stage can be in terms of formal (meetings, discussion at workplace) or informal (chatting, going out together). However, through informal, people will tend to share more rather than formal. This is because they feel comfortable towards each other at that time and would share more. When I am doing my assignments in groups, I would prefer to get to know the people in the group better and to do the discussion outside campus or anywhere else that we are comfortable with so that the sharing process would be easier and at the same time, new ideas will be easier to be created. Other than the theories, trust is also one very important aspect to be looked into in the process of sharing knowledge in the organizations. Based on trust, people will absolutely share their knowledge without hesitation. I have a group of friends who will share any information they know depending on whether they are close with the other person or not. For example, if she is with her best friends, she will talk a lot about everything that she knows, but not with her regular friends in campus. This is because of trust. People would tend to share more when they trust each other.

References:

1. http://www.wikipedia.com/

2. chapter 4 in lecture notes

3. Veneeva, V. (2006). How Important Is Knowledge Management For Businesses. Retrieved June 28, 2006, from online database.

4. McShane, S. L., & Glinow, V. (4th Ed.). (2007). Organizational Behavior. McGraw Hill International Edition.

The reflections of individualism-collectism, power distance, and achievement-nurturing in organizations and people.

Let me briefly discuss of what is individualism-collectism, power distance, and achievement nurturing one by one. And first of all, you had to put in mind that they are among several types of key values that are important to any organizations. And why did I say that? Let me explain.

Individualism-collectism, as according to Gerard Hendrik Hofstede, are two contrasted word which is either the extent to which people are expected to stand up for themselves and to choose their own affiliations, or alternatively act predominantly as a member of a life-long group or organization. This type of culture defines how people think of themselves and their relationship with others. Individualism to me is more to the rights or freedom for workers to choose their own work style or any organizations that they want to work in. They work for how long they want to and usually prefer to work alone rather than in groups. People in this culture focus more on their individual goals rather than the group goals. Refers to Hofstede (2001, Exhibit 5.1, p. 215), USA is one of the most countries that practice individualistic culture. For examples, when they are meeting people for the first time, they want to know what that person does; they tend to look at their accomplishment, the way they dressed up, where they live, and so on. Individualist cultures are more remote and distant from others (Hofstede, 2001). On the other hand, collectism in my own word, are those who are willing and prefer to work and stay on one organization for a long time. They are more loyal and usually prefer to work in groups. Their goals to achieve are based on the group rather than individual. The cultures under collectism emphasize more on relationships among people. They stress interdependent activities and suppressing individual aims for the group’s welfare. Recent studies show that Latin Americans practice this kind of culture the most. They focus more on groups and rather than doing things alone. One example, there are this one Columbian who studied in US to get a PhD, teaches at a distinguished university there, and succeeds in publishing books. When he returns to visit Columbia, people to whom he is introduced will want to know to whom he is related to. Columbians want to know who his family is because that places him in society much more than what he had achieved in US.

According to other sources (Goncalo & Staw, 2006), individualism is a set of cultural values that emphasizes individual autonomy, the prioritization of personal goals over group goals, and the definition of one’s self in terms of one’s individuality and uniqueness from the group. Meanwhile, collectism is a set of cultural values that emphasize group harmony, the prioritization of collective goals over personal goals, and the definition of one’s self in terms of the groups one belongs to. Goncalo & Staw (2006) stated in their research that both individualism and collectism have pros and cons that affect organizations. They (Goncalo & Staw, 2006) both agreed individualism is better compared to collectism to the extent that individualism offers a more conducive climate for creativity than collectism. But for my own opinions, both of the culture has its pros and cons, and to be more specific, I would choose collectism over individualism. Yes, there might be a certain degree of problems working in groups as each people have their own different views on things. But the fact that there might be many different ideas and creativities, this culture can achieve goals efficiently in a nick of time and increase productivity in organization. Meanwhile, individualism might have low pressures on work, but they cannot create a high level of creativity towards organizations.

Power distance, as define by Hofstede (1997), is the extent to which less powerful members of institutions and organizations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally. It is the way the culture deals with inequalities. Hofstede believes that power distance is learned early in families. In my own word, it is based on what people learned since they were kid, what they are being thought by their parents, and how they are raised. In high power distance cultures, children are expected to be obedient toward parents in spite being treated more or less as equals. In high power distance cultures, people are expected to display respect for those of higher status. For example, in countries such as Burma (Myanmar), Cambodia, Laos, and Thailand, people are expected to display respect for monks by greeting and taking leave of monks with ritualistic greetings, removing hats in the presence of a monk, dressing modestly, seating monks at a higher level, and using a vocabulary that shows respect. Also, in countries with high power distance employees are too afraid to express their doubts and disagreements with their autocratic and paternalistic bosses. The index for power distance describes the dependence of relationships in a country.

Power distance also refers to the extent to which power, prestige, and wealth are distributed within a culture. It somehow represents the gap in power between a superior and a subordinate. In high power distance cultures subordinates and their bosses have a greater expectation that subordinates should unquestioningly follow directives. Cultures with high power distance have power and influence concentrated in the hands of a few rather than distributed throughout the population. These countries tend to be more authoritarian and may communicate in a way to limit interaction and reinforce the differences between people. In the high power distance workplace, superiors and subordinates consider each other existentially unequal. Power is centralized, and there is a wide salary gap between the top and bottom of the organization. In cultures high in power distance, for example, corporate presidents’ offices are more likely to be luxurious, with controlled access. Company bosses are “kings” and employees “loyal subjects” who don’t speak out. In the low power distance workplace, subordinates expect to be consulted, and ideal bosses are democratic. In more democratic organizations, leaders are physically more accessible.

Recent research by Hofstede (2001, Exhibit 3.1, p. 87) shows that Malaysia ranks the highest place for power distance culture. For me that was very true. Here in Malaysia, people are ruled by the government. Everything has to be and based on their way. And the people just follow the rules and regulations without hesitation. They are used to the culture. This somehow shows that there are gaps between the top level and the lower level management. Top people tend to ignore the lower level minorities and tend to ignore any ideas from them. In my own point of view, organizations should practice low power distance to make sure the workplace environment is good and comfortable for all level of workers and this can maintain employee loyalty towards the organization. Other than that, regards to the knowledge-based economy nowadays, it is good to maintain low power distance so that knowledge can be easily shared and disseminated among the employers and employees. Thus, this can raise the productivity within the organization.

The last key value that I will discuss here is the achievement-nurturing culture, in other words, masculinity-feminism. This culture captures the preference of both sexes for achievement over nurturing and cultures scoring high on masculinity are usually more achievement oriented. Hofstede (1980) defines the masculine cultures as those that strive for maximal distinction between what women and men are expected to do, while feminine cultures as those that permit more overlapping social roles for the sexes. He (Hostfede, 1980) stated that cultures which place high values on masculine traits stress assertiveness, competition, and material success while cultures that place high value on feminine traits stress quality of life, interpersonal relationships, and concern for the weak. Based on Hofstede (2001, Exhibit 6.3, p. 286), Japan rank the highest with masculinity culture and Sweden is the lowest, which is more to the feminism culture.

In my point of view, there are pros and cons for both masculinity and feminity cultures. Masculinity culture gives positive impact to the extent that people work hard to achieve their goals and they are most loyal in the organization. This can increase productivity in organizations. Feminity on the other hand, focus more on their feelings, their emotional behaviour, and can tend to be out focused depends on certain situations or problems i.e marriage problems, etc. This kind of culture however can also increase the loyalty of the worker by putting the workers needs as a priority, but at the same time, it can somehow reduce productivity of an organization if they are too focused on unimportant emotional feelings as this will cause them to less focused on their job or task.

Each values plays a pivotal role in organizations and people. It is proven in the discussion above. Since my high schools until now, I have experienced certain culture values as discussed earlier when I am having tasks or homeworks to be done. I learned a lot and it somehow reflects the way I do my tasks nowadays. As mentioned earlier, I would prefer collectism over individualism, low power distance rather than high power distance, and nurturing over achievement. It represents the way I like my work to be done. Well, people are different. Each person has their own culture which they are comfotable with.

References:

1. Goncalo, J.A. & Staw, B.M. (2005). “Individualism-Collectivism and Group Creativity.” Paper presented at the Academy of Management Meetings, Honolulu, HI.

2. Hofstede, G. H., Cultures and Organizations, McGraw-Hill Book Company Europe, England, 1991.
3. http://wikipedia.com