Towards an understanding of leading knowledge workers – a lit review.

Towards an understanding of leading knowledge workers – a lit review. ANY FURTHER INFORMATION

Who are/What are knowledge workers? • KW first coined 50 years ago by Drucker • IT v Humanistic definitions • Drucker(2003)– “Information with relevance and purpose” • Davenport (2005)- “Information combined with experience, context, interpretation and reflection”. • Pepper(2002) “anyone who knows more about their job than their boss…or any professional”

….defined • Gray (2006) 5 Dimensions of KW • Finding existing knowledge (e.g. competitive intelligence analyst) • Creating new knowledge (e.g. pharmaceutical and other researchers) • Packaging knowledge (e.g. book or paper publisher) • Distributing knowledge (knowledge management professionals and lecturers) • Applying knowledge (e.g. accountants) • Drucker…Knowledge does not reside in a book, a database, or a software programme; these may contain information. Knowledge is always embodied in a person; applied by a person; taught and passed on by a person or used or misused by a person; (pg 287).

So why does it matter? – organisational level • Cobert (2005) “knowledge and knowledge workers will become the greatest strategic resource for an organisation…and learning how to lead them the greatest strategic skill” • ….KW the key to organisations competitive advantage and future survival (Asllani & Luthans 2003). • Drucker 70-80% of value added comes from KW..

..why does it matter? – societal level • OECD (2003) management of ‘knowledge’ will impact on the economic and social development of nations… • Cullen (2006)…future economies based on KW…role of tertiary education in developing a knowledge ‘economy’…. • Labour market trends: aging workforce coupled with knowledge loss and the ‘rise and rise’ of knowledge work (Ware & Grantham 2003); knowledge based tight labour market (brain drain international competition) and global convergence (Horwitz, Teng Heng, Quazi (2003) • All increase the pressure and urgency for understanding..

What goes wrong - why is KM like Herding Cats? • KW….. resent traditional management styles demand greater autonomy, dislike bureaucratic styles and systems, have loyalty to career not organisations, own their own knowledge and therefore organisations ca, are motivated by own learning, work meaning and career… • Economist 2004 “…managing knowledge workers is complex, difficult, requiring new skills, leadership understanding, structures and abilities ….and is notoriously like ‘herding cats’…”

A new paradigm – moving away from blood letting…..How does the future look? • The problem is however….”though we live in a Knowledge age many of our organisational practices are ebbed in historical principles of management” Lewis 2006, Oltra 2005. • Pepper (2003)..what we teach our leaders of the future is the ‘mindset’ of the past. • Industrial era paradigms still prominent today in text books. • Mind set of … Industrial era and control is what gets passed on from one generation of management to another .. this thinking is built into the very structures and systems and management processes of our organisations and our teaching in management. Lewis (2006). • Covey…these old world management techniques similar to blood letting paradigms of the past..

Leading KWs the role of team based designs • Models that ‘tap into the highest forms of human motivation, genius of people and their talents is where the future of that organisation will lie……(Lewis 2006) Pearce (2004)..KW is increasingly becoming a team based design…and argues for increased models of shared leadership. • Sears (2005) ‘“Effective knowledge management requires team building and team work skills” pg 2.

Team based designs work because… • Pearce (2004)- it has never been more difficult for any one person to have all the knowledge and skills required for the wide variety and contexts of knowledge work; a highly educated workforce has greater knowledge to offer the organisation, and today’s employees desire more from work than just a pay check – they want to make a meaningful difference – which according to Pearce (2004) is increasingly being made though team based knowledge work. • Example: research publications – • In one study of Scientific Publications, the 195 articles published only 3% were by Individuals, 77% shared by three or more co authors and a number published by 100 co authors, suggesting that team based design and the concept of ‘shared leadership’ in the team is an important component in cutting edge scientific discovery.

Self Managed Teams. • Muthusamy (2005) “Increasingly organisations are moving towards SMTS” …. they fit the framework required to better manage KWs - workers who know more about their work than managers, are self motivated, highly educated and require autonomy and are self controlled. • SMTs allow for freer communication of ideas, dissent to test ideas, and synergy to grow innovation. • SMTs reduce the need for close supervision of individuals while advancing and not sacrificing organisational effectiveness and goals. • The advanced form of SMTs results in diminishing of distinctions between the role definitions of higher level managers and teams in a leadership sense – hence they are conducive to intuitive learning, encourage dialogue, support cognitive freedom and knowledge sharing and as such enhances organisational effectiveness.

….team based design • (Muthusamy et acl 2005) argue that SMTs help to build competencies on Knowledge…and argue that SMTs is one of the major contributions to KW landscape. • Lawler (2001)…SMTs one bigger developments to hit business “since the industrial revolution …” • …but many researchers calling for further research into the effectiveness of SMTs and KW..

…the changed role of Leadership • MCGregor (2004) rise of “social capital” and KW….argued for a move away from current management practices and existing education in management….towards individual psychology and ‘soft’ management skills. • Australian Report - Industry Task Force on Leadership and Management Skills ) which found that nearly half of all Australian managers had difficulty in dealing with people (pg 161). ..

…leaders of the future • Sears (2005) argued that ‘sensitivity training’ may be crucial for managing knowledge workers –along with the ability to ‘tune in’ to individuals at a close and intuitive level. • Further openness, facilitative leadership, trust, transparency and consensus building (Maccoby 2006, Maccoby 1996) are all required for leaders of knowledge workers . • Further Pepper (2003) and Drucker (1998), argue that organisations need a special form of leadership that recognizes the intellectual capital as an invaluable asset. They argue the age of managerial and leadership respect for people and their creative potential in organisations is paramount. • Chennai (2006) supports this view by stating that since knowledge workers are concept orientated and tend to be self reliant the leader has no need to lead in the traditional way and that the relationship between leaders and knowledge workers is best based on trust and integrity (Chennai 2006).

..one example – Servant Based Leadership • Copy of handout – servant based leadership. • Pepper (2003) leaders achieve and sustain their position by having followers and relying on followers support ….. based on the notion that power and authority cannot create trust and respect…in fact power and authority weaken mana and create resistance…McGregor this model of leadership consistent with KW.. • …number of researchers calling for further studies in this area…

…does this mean the end of workplace control? • work meaning, and intellectual commitment are the primary drivers of attitude and behaviour Pratt &Ashforth (2005). • Landcare (2004) “….motivated to perform by developing their career …… through knowledge processes” • hence focus falls to ‘self control’. • Covey (2004) managers role is to shift from controller to enabler .

….control issues and organisation issues • These need to be in place within an organisational context that supports them….organic and participative… • Role of HR ‘service provider” to ‘business partner’ in order to build knowledge capabilities. • Build structures that move to performance support from performance management.

What are our current practices? • What are we currently teaching in business courses….? My own research on most used texts suggest….. • As a Knowledge Worker yourself what is your response…..?

Towards an understanding of leading knowledge workers – a lit review.