KM Implementations of Two IT Organisations-Samples for Students

Question: Compare KMImplementationsofTwo ITOrganisations. Answer: Introduction Knowledge Management is nothing but a systematic way or process of management of organization assets for creation of values and meeting of tactical and strategic kinds of requirements (Grover and Froese, 2016). It mainly consists of following points like initiatives, strategies and systems which mainly sustains and also enhances the assessment of storage, refinement and lastly creation of knowledge. Knowledge management is generally applied to a strong kind of bonding to goals and strategy of an organization (Power, Sharda Burstein, 2015). It mainly involves the management of knowledge which is useful for some kind of purpose and it also creates a value for the organization. In the coming pages of the report an idea has been provided regarding the description of two IT organization that is Google and Microsoft. A comparison has been done for the KM (knowledge Management in two organizations (Google and Microsoft). A discussion has been provided regarding the success factor of two organizations. A discussion has been provided regarding the various kinds of lessons learned from implementation of KM (knowledge Management). Discussion Description of two IT organization The present rate of fast placed economy is totally based on economy and becoming excellent in the domain of increasing domain for having competitive advantage over the rivals (Power, Sharda Burstein, 2015). Google has been putting certain number of efforts for improvisation of excellence in the field of core competency. It generally focusses on maintenance and managing of creativity and innovation (Donate de Pablo, 2015). The organization is heavily based on certain number of tools and techniques. As an organization the ultimate mission of google is to organize the information of the world and make it accessible universally and useful to large number of people (Davenport, 2015). The ultimate goal of google is provide the best kind of search results, improvisation of user interface, Removal of low quality of content from SERPs. Google is more focusing on to provided automated services in the field by providing a list of technologies like google document and many other thing. Knowledge Management is known to be integrated, systematic approach for identification, sharing of departments information (Wang, Noe, Wang, 2014). From its founding in 1975, one of the biggest competitive advantage of Microsoft Corporation has been the quality of people. The organization claims to make use of extraordinary people who have strong kinds of intellect and capabilities. IT group has generally focused heavily on the various kinds of issues of identification and proper kinds of maintenance of knowledge competencies. SPUD initiative is being taken by various kinds of learning and resources of communication. The ultimate goal is use of competence model for transferring and building of knowledge (Davenport, 2015). The project is also expected to lead better kind of better kind of match of employees for various kinds of jobs and team works. Implementation was considered to be proceeding across various geography and various kinds of functions. Comparison of KM implementation For managing and maintaining of creativity and innovation Google has heavily make use of KM tools and techniques (Todorovi? et al., 2015). Google has implemented KM process for encouraging and managing new kinds of ideas. Every year the organization is coming up with brain storming sessions with more than 100 engineers. At the end of each kinds of meetings, six new kinds of ideas have been placed for suggestion at provided rate. Google soon realized the fact that the upper management support for essential kinds of effective KM strategy. The organization has proper kinds of office hours for web products in which employees can easily discusses about new products and ideas. Google focus to provide most suitable kinds of examples related to innovations. The company has decided to push forward the kind of commitment to various innovation. The organization has ultimately make use of this new technology because they have provided proper value for large number of customers. Unlike most of th e traditional kinds of IT organization focus on stimulation and welcoming of various kinds of creative and sometimes crazy website. Managers are generally focus on providing invest in extremely high value of risk if and only if it can provide large value of benefits. In the year of 1995 a project name SPUD (Skills planning under development) was started by the Unit of internal group of Microsoft (Todorovi? et al., 2015). The project generally involves building of online system which contains job rating systems and database and various kinds of competency level for large number of employees. The ultimate aim of the project was to create online competency profile for large number of jobs and employees at Microsoft. High quality knowledge is not considered to be enough in todays market (Becerra-Fernandez Sabherwal, 2014). An organization needs high value of IQ which can easily provide share of information and enables various kinds of staff members in terms of idea. Discussion of success factors There are large number of success factors behind the successful implementation of knowledge management (Geisler Wickramasinghe, 2015). The success factor generally consists of following ten points namely Identification of goals and objectives. Proper identification and use of motives Development of strategy related to change management Proper identification and recruiting of internal champions. Focusing of inventory and organization of various kinds of knowledge assets. Having a soft value of lunch. Listening to be proactive to large number of feedback. Link knowledge to large number of employees. It generally focuses on conduction of a contest. It generally focuses on training on a continuous basis. In google there are large number of success factor which can be used for large number of process like multiple channel for transfer of knowledge. It also focuses on linking with certain number of financial initiatives and various kinds of technological standard which provides flexible and easy to use of various kinds of system (Patil Kant, 2014). One of the important duration of the project is the identification of success factors which is mainly present in KM objectives in different organization. Lessons learned from their KM implementation All the employees of this two organization are generally provided the platform for attending conference for more than once in a year (Cohen Olsen, 2015). This kinds of occasion are mainly used for sharing of knowledge and learning of concerns about of whole kinds of organization (Fidel, Schlesinger Cervera, 2015). A knowledge library generally comes up with idea of questions and various kinds of discussion related to products. Employees generally have communication about various kinds of updates and products. Microsoft SharePoint was first launched in the year of 2001, it is mainly associated with intranet content management and various kinds of documents with broader kinds of capabilities (Lai et al., 2014). At present share point is claimed to be used by 78% of fortune 500 companies. In the span of year 2006 and 2011 Microsoft have sold over 36.5 million users. There are large number of challenges being encountered in share point like Duplication of efforts and increased number of costs Leak out of various kinds of information. Irrelevance kinds of information. There are large number of benefits of making use of knowledge management strategy like Details about information and various content of governance Increasing on focus of outcomes Focusing on improvements of workforce behaviors Placing the needs of the business at first Focus the needs of explicit type of knowledge KMS provides Top-Down structure for support. It generally optimizes the investments of large number of technology. Recommendation for improvement KM There are certain number of recommendation for knowledge management like KMS (knowledge Management System) have some kind of architecture which can be easily used for various kinds of organization process which focus on being predictive and comprehensive. KMS (Knowledge Management System) generally focus on providing information which can be used for providing best kinds of service. KMS is considered to be simple to use for large number of people. A KMS is nothing but a browser based thing which mainly offers URLs to be organized in easier and more convenient to use. KMS focus on organization of content in the other kinds of ways instead of top or high level of category. It should focus on implementation of content creation framework The organization focus on mainstream of knowledge management and contribution of incentives. Conclusion From the above discussion it can be easily concluded that this report is all about knowledge management. The report mainly discusses about knowledge management in two organizations in Google and Microsoft. In the discussion portion of report an idea has been provided regarding two IT organization. After that a comparison has been made with respect to KM implementation in two organizations. A proper kind of discussion has been provided with respect to success factor behind its implementation. Various kinds of lesson have been discussed which have learned from the knowledge management implementation in two organizations that is Google and Microsoft. A list of recommendation has been provided with respect to improvement of Knowledge management References Becerra-Fernandez, I., Sabherwal, R. (2014).Knowledge management: Systems and processes. Routledge. Cohen, J. F., Olsen, K. (2015). Knowledge management capabilities and firm performance: A test of universalistic, contingency and complementarity perspectives.Expert Systems with Applications,42(3), 1178-1188. Davenport, T. H. (2015). Process management for knowledge work. InHandbook on Business Process Management 1(pp. 17-35). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. Donate, M. J., de Pablo, J. D. S. (2015). The role of knowledge-oriented leadership in knowledge management practices and innovation.Journal of Business Research,68(2), 360-370. Fidel, P., Schlesinger, W., Cervera, A. (2015). Collaborating to innovate: Effects on customer knowledge management and performance.Journal of business research,68(7), 1426-1428. Geisler, E., Wickramasinghe, N. (2015).Principles of knowledge management: Theory, practice, and cases. Routledge. Grover, R. and Froese, T.M., 2016. Knowledge management in construction using a SocioBIM platform: A case study of AYO smart home project.Procedia Engineering,145, pp.1283-1290. Lai, Y. L., Hsu, M. S., Lin, F. J., Chen, Y. M., Lin, Y. H. (2014). The effects of industry cluster knowledge management on innovation performance.Journal of Business Research,67(5), 734-739. Patil, S. K., Kant, R. (2014). A fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for ranking the solutions of Knowledge Management adoption in Supply Chain to overcome its barriers.Expert systems with applications,41(2), 679-693. Power, D. J., Sharda, R., Burstein, F. (2015).Decision support systems. John Wiley Sons, Ltd. Todorovi?, M. L., Petrovi?, D. ?., Mihi?, M. M., Obradovi?, V. L., Bushuyev, S. D. (2015). Project success analysis framework: A knowledge-based approach in project management.International Journal of Project Management,33(4), 772-783. Wang, S., Noe, R. A., Wang, Z. M. (2014). Motivating knowledge sharing in knowledge management systems: A quasifield experiment.Journal of Management,40(4), 978-1009