You are on page 1of 18

1

Human Resources and Knowledge

Student Name

Course Code+ Name

Professor

University

State

Date Due
2

Human Resources and Knowledge

Abstract

Various discussions have arisen over time regarding human resources and organization

knowledge. However, the voices of those who act in organizations have been highly ignored.

This paper aims to come up with relevant findings of how professionals in the Human Resource

(HR) understand about knowledge in their endeavors of managing large organizations. The

participants in this paper talked about such areas as the importance of knowledge, areas of

knowledge as well as the practice of knowledge. The data collected allows us to evaluate how

knowledge relates to practice with a reflection of both influences in specific organizations and

broader occupations. The findings provide an insight into how the current theoretical ideas

regarding knowledge are applied. Also, this paper examines areas which are not sufficiently

addressed. Such areas are how the various construction of knowledge co-exist, how they serve

more than the traditional acknowledgment of knowledge to enhance the processes in the

operation of a business and evaluating knowledge process for the role of effect.

1. Introduction

According to Borgatti and Foster (2003), there are different versions of literature from

orientations and research fields relating to the understanding of knowledge in organizations.

Much of such is the definition and the nature of knowledge. Other scholars have tried to research

on the knowledge process in small and large organizations. A significant focus is on how to

create knowledge, transfer and how to apply it. The work of Maylor, Blackmon, and Huemann

(2016) on this subject has laid down a foundation for ideas with an objective of capturing and

leveraging knowledge to improve on competitiveness. The current market environment has been

characterized by the increased emphasis on situated and social nature of knowledge. This paper
3

will explore various academic approaches to knowledge especially views on social and situated

knowledge. In the current practice, it is not fully clear how people in organizations understand

and perceive knowledge in their work and how they develop, share and interpret it in their

practice. Therefore, we shall use the basic concept to extend what they think. In this regard, it is

important to establish the talks of individuals regarding knowledge and how they describe the

knowledge in practice. Scholars such as Van de Ven and Johnson (2006) have criticized the

current academic work on knowledge terming it abstract and conceptual. On the other hand

increasing empirical work still lags behind. The studies conducted on knowledge processes have

concentrated on the functions of product development and manufacturing firms while others

relating to the social nature of knowledge focus on the practice by craft workers and the highly

skilled manual (Asheim & Coenen 2005). This study will help evaluate how to apply the existing

ideas in enhancing professionalism in the HR.

2. Issues and Theory

2.1. Defining Knowledge

Most of the writings on this subject are dominated by arguments about the definition

and nature of knowledge. Many scholars focus on differentiating between explicit and tacit while

others categorize these distinctively often asserting that one can manage each differently. As

noted by Bratianu, Jianu, and Vasilache (2010), some authors form a concept that is based on a

continuum between very tacit and very explicit judgment, aspects of skills, spiritual and

emotional knowledge. Some proposed classifications are complex. They tend to follow a four-

way grouping that factors categorizing knowledge on both the explicit/tacit and it is collectively

or individually owned. This leads to defining knowledge as encoded (explicit/collective),

embrained (individual/explicit), embodied (individual/tacit) and embedded (collective/tacit). As


4

established by Garshol (2004), a richer taxonomy better than traditional explicit vs. explicit is

provided. This classification focuses on establishing the know-how, know-why, know-who, and

know-what. The above classifications often lead to complicating knowledge and its

characteristics. This paper will take a better version of trying to understand knowledge through

the sentiments of persons working in organizations. It is through exploring their perceptions,

observations, and feelings regarding knowledge that a deeper insight into the concept will be

achieved.

2.2. Process Views of Knowledge

Scholars have debated about writing on knowledge processes which is conceptualized

with knowledge management. Some individuals are of the view that new knowledge is formed in

a continuous cycle of tacit to explicit and explicit to tacit. This view created a heated discussion

with a concern of how knowledge can change from one form to another. As asserted by Seidler

Alwis, and Hartmann (2008), this argument provides a ground for a concept of knowledge with a

linear knowledge creation as well as utilization and transfer, considering the challenges of

storing knowledge every stage along the way. Also, network analysis has enabled the

examination of such processes and the identification of the use of various interpersonal

relationships as a route for transferring knowledge. However, such literature assumes that the

decisions making processes are rational because they term knowledge an object. Although the

scope and range of research continue to increase, the concentration is to identify remarkable

knowledge processes in certain organizational functions. This approach has been criticized due

to its emphasis on an epistemology of possession. As a result, it has been emphasized that social

nature of knowledge has been considered as discussed in the following section.


5

2.3. The Social Nature of Knowledge and Knowing

In this case, measures have been taken to get richer explanations by factoring the

context and considering knowledge via practice. It involves exploring both the construction of

the social nature of knowledge and the already constructed social nature of knowledge.

Although these ideas are based on communication processes and social interaction, little research

has been employed to evaluate talk in line with knowledge. This study follows this approach to

knowledge as the beginning point in order to add to the current research through evaluating both

how people discuss knowledge and how their explanations of practice portray knowledge in

action. Thinking and research about social nature of knowledge revolve around three core

concepts which are; communities of practice, sense-making and social capital (Marshall &

Rollinson 2004).

As asserted by Smith, and McKeen (2004), commodities of practice can be understood

as groups of people doing real work. The term practice refers to the way the work is done as

well as social interaction process that is undertaken. A group of people working and at the same

time socializing provides a regime negotiated locally where knowing is defined in the context

of particular competence practices and fixed within shared mental schemes or models. In this

case, knowing and knowledge are bound inextricably with local content, practice and group

identity. However, the way the word community is presented and used conveys a simple

practice. Although in the early writings about communities of practice power relation was an

important dynamic, the subsequent work has not developed it. Surprisingly, the role of the

knowing and knowledge has not been highly considered in the recent researches. Instead, more

attention is on identifying with identifying and knowledge being a major component in the

conceptualizing communities of practice. This is crucial for the practitioners in HR as Freidson


6

(2001) suggests that knowledge and identity are closely intertwined for professional groups.

Communities were primarily viewed as informal self-organizing. However, research views at

groups as corresponding to teams or functions in a formal organization whereas sometimes

ignores the concerns between informal structures and formal structures which should be the

focus of attention. Other challenges involve looking at the communities as a closed entity instead

of acknowledging overlapping communities and multiple memberships. Some of them may be

enjoined in some geographical of functional area or wider epistemic community. This is

understood to be the case especially for professional groups where communities of practice cross

the organizational walls and connect with wider professional communities. This area is

characterized by ethnographic studies in describing one communities of practice (Vickers & Fox

2010). Other scholars have focused their attentions on the boundaries of communities and

practice. Some researchers have been focused on product development teams, craftwork or

highly skilled manual with an argument that there is a production of tangible output. However,

studies have not yet used these concepts to evaluate the practice of professionals in HR as an

organizational group forming an element of an identifiable occupational community whose

outputs are more intangible and less well defined.

Whereas communities of practices focus on understanding the social nature of

knowledge, other concepts like sensemaking go more particular about the process. Both concepts

are closely related with sensemaking being related to bringing about the community of practice

concept. As provided by Choi, and Ruona (2011), sensemaking is regarded a continuous process

of associated response and ascription. Knowing and knowledge are not static but constructed

between and by the people in response to specific cues interpreted and constructed in a particular

manner. Narrative and storytelling are viewed as very influential in the process of sensemaking
7

and have been approved as a way of ensuring the sharing of knowledge which is not easy to

make explicit in some forms. As noted by Adler, and Kwon (2002), while the concepts of

sensemaking and communities of practice point out the necessity of relationships, they form the

basis of conceptualizing social capital. In fact, relationships among individuals play a major

focus for investigators of knowledge in many analyses. Network analysis investigates the flow

of knowledge. However, Wasko and Faraj (2005) are of the opinion that such networks are

complex social systems which share norms and language and in which obligations and trust

provide a basis for effective relationships. Social capital is understood as the available goodwill

to groups or individuals Its source is the content and structure of the actors in a social relation.

The effects follow from the information through solidarity and influence it provides to the actor.

The term is controversial considering some scholars are of the view that the term capital is

more of economics than social aspect. They suggest that the term social capacity should be

applied. Trust is an important element in social capital. However, the relative significance of

cognition-based and affect-based trust are not yet fully integrated. Social capital as a concept

provides us with an opportunity to evaluate knowing and knowledge in a social context where

obligations, credential, membership, influence, communication, negotiation and social status all

play a role. The concepts of sensemaking, social capital, and communities of practice are all

closely related. The emphasis on focusing on practice and social processes provides a new

avenue for exploring knowledge at various levels of analysis. These concepts are not static.

Scholars continue to come up with ideas to expand the research on an empirical basis. However,

there is a need to further expand the types of occupational and organizational contexts under

review to allow different individuals bring forth their ideas on the subject. This study will
8

explore how professionals in the HR talk about and practice knowledge in order to expand the

research in this field.

3. Methods

The research process and the concept of knowledge follow a perspective of social

constructionist. This research is focused on the practice and actors in evaluating how knowing

and knowledge are portrayed in daily working of practitioners in the HR using the collection of

qualitative data and analysis methods. A total of 16 semi-structured interviews were done with

practitioners in HR in two different companies. Discussions followed in the two companies

where we were provided with volunteers giving rise to snowball sampling. The last sample

consisted of 9 participants from the bank and seven from the consultancy firm. Those from the

HR background ranged from one to seventeen years of practice. These professionals had

performed different roles in the HR departments. Interviews were conducted in the workplace;

tape recorded and took approximately an hour. The approaches used were two. In the first case,

before the interviews were conducted, every participant had to complete a test consisting 20

statements as a primer. The statements that participants were to answer were structured as

follows: According to me professionals in the HR should.The approach was meant to avoid

the inclusion of our definition of knowledge or practice. The participants forwarded the results to

the first author before the interview. The first part of the interview involved the discussion of the

responses focusing on matters relevant to the research. The 20 statements were not necessarily

analyzed to form source data. The next approach made use of the questions structured in a

critical incident style. The purpose was to explore particular projects or responsibilities with

which the participants were engaged. This is a good technique to elicit stories regarding

knowledge. Every interview was completely transcribed to the template analysis.


9

4. Results

This part provides us with the central themes that emerged from the analysis of the

data collected during the interview. The themes are grouped according to knowledge in practice,

the importance of knowledge and areas of knowledge. The adopted methodology provides that

the intention of this research is not to present these themes as a view of the reality of

practitioners in the HR. Instead, we recognize that they were arrived at through the process that

took place, our roles as researchers, views of the participants and personal interpretation when

reading. Additionally, the themes are not a reflection of an attempt to provide a dominant or

average view.

4.1. Areas of Knowledge

Participants did not respond about knowing and knowledge as academics but regarding what

they needed to know and how it related to their duties as HR practitioners. The following themes

were obtained: Knowing what should work, knowing what, legal knowledge, basic HR

knowledge, best practice and common sense.

Best Practice

Participants showed the interest of understanding and applying best practice. They

sought to apply best practice within their firms in terms of products, tools, and solutions. In this

case, the positioning was tangible and concrete. Although individuals talked about the

significance of best practice, they had no consistency or clear definition. For instance; I guess it

shows a benchmark of practice best applied with what is there being the question. Best practice

was viewed as dynamic and as tied to a means of progress in the HR field. Also, sometimes they
10

positioned best practice as inspirational, an objective that has been upheld by various bodies and

organizations. Therefore, the notion of best practice has complex values and set of ideas.

Basic HR Knowledge

According to Bratton, and Gold (2012), the legal framework is a major area of knowledge as it

interprets various concerns on practice and perceived is valuable in the business and HR

practitioners.

I believe there are various things such as employment that your clients expect to understand.

According to me employees are different and could have some similar scenarios but quite not

the same you cant just follow the guidelines and expect to understand everything. Instead,

there should be the utilization of personal judgment.

Other participants talked about leveraging the law in order to arrive at certain objectives in

business.

Its somehow awful. However, sometimes it is a challenge persuading a manager to follow a

certain way andits important to a have a legal backing reference.

While the nature and the objective of the law are appreciated, legal knowledge is provided as

being more than just having the facts. Instead, the art of applying it in the HR is emphasized.

Knowing what will Work

Participants gave their views on their relationship with the business. They asserted about

delivering solutions in the form of products, projects, and tools. They insisted on the essentials of

understanding the local context and having a sense of what is likely to work. This was seen as

critical for the ability to deliver. Two aspects were evident from the data. The first one is the

awareness of the circumstances locality which involves the concept of being ready for certain

practices.
11

I believe it is about assessing where your business is located.some people in a given

environment can deal with peculiar mattersso I think you should be positioned to come up

with relevant tools..

Much of what you can do is to understand what you can influence, what you cant and what you

will never..instead of wasting time, carry out an assessment and be ready to shift your

attention somewhere else.

The above participants insisted that even though you know what will work, its important to

apply personal experience and judgment. Therefore, while focusing on implementing techniques

and tools knowledge is important to accomplish the set goals.

Common Sense

Common sense was applied in two special ways. The first considered that most of the practices

in the HR are common sense (Gloet & Terziovski 2004). The participants had some shared views

but experienced difficulties when defining common sense and explaining its development.

In most cases, the use common sense in HR works well.You cant apply rocket science in this

case but just use c your brain and consider the necessary frameworks.

The next use of the term was more of action-oriented. It involved applying common sense when

faced with a problem.

A little use of common sense can help you solve

This discussion is likely to be related to articulating difficulties in some instances of knowledge.

Also, it is necessary to compare this HR knowledge with the emerging ones.

4.2. Importance of Knowledge


12

We have covered a lot of information on knowledge. In this case, it is important to evaluate the

presentation of knowledge during the interviews in relation to such themes as credibility and

confidence as well as expertise and experts.

Confidence and Credibility

It was observed that a sense of individuals knowledge was essential for their confidence and

building a good relationship with their clients. It results from constant interaction with clients

and application of relevant knowledge and not inherently possessing knowledge themselves.

The clients must see that you have enough knowledge that you can apply coupled with expertise

in the area of their interest..it will be easier to build a strong business relationship.

I think someone with knowledge is confident.the clients will gauge whether you are familiar

with what you are asserting.

Some of the participants were worried that they were not sufficiently knowledgeable in some

areas. This lowered their confidence in handling such areas.

I feel uncomfortable when dealing in this area

I felt exposed.think there is a need to do more on

Expert and Expertise

It was observed that expertise was significant in the HR and the business as a whole.

You should bring new things on boardclients require new suggestions..

On the other hand, some participants were frustrated due to the limited opportunity they had to

demonstrate and deliver their expertise in the business.

I think I have more to offer, but the resources and the chance are constrained..

Sharing expertise through working as a group was deemed a necessary aspect of their practice.
13

I am not an expert in some areas such as recruitment and succession planning. So I rely on

others in the department

One of the participants asserted about the potential downside associated with being viewed as an

expert.

There is much pressure on you when everybody says..so you take up most of the tasks. The

pressure is too high.

Knowledge in Practice

Individuals narrated about their experiences in setting up projects. They talked about

how they shared knowledge, developed and utilized it in practice. In this case, the explored

themes are exposure to new ideas, personal reflection, use of trusted advisors and brainstorming.

Brainstorming

This was done by bringing people together and discussing various aspects of concern. I involved

sharing experiences and applying them to certain issues.

We gathered together in groups and discussed what options we had in our scenario. Some were

of the thought that we were so arrogant not to involve relevant bodies and authorities..

Individuals who applied brainstorming did not only discuss ideas but also they made clear

progress in moving matters forward. It was observed that brainstorming provided an avenue of

sharing knowledge and presenting solutions to challenges from different participants. At the end

every important answer was available.

Use of Trusted Advisors

This involved a process of checking the sense of the available ideas. It included using another

person as a reference board. Stories were narrated coupled with relevant questions which sought

moral support as well as acted as an input.


14

You discuss in a group and as you know different people have different ideas..solution is .

You only need to give your views and confirmyour opinion was not so misguided......

The participants described various relationships including the ones outside the organizations,

friends, and families as well as the ones in the HR departments. It was observed that trust was

paramount in these relationships. However, some asserted that they didnt find it necessary to

verify the feedback they got.

It is better to do it through relationships because you get a better insight and you get the

views of those you know very well and

Two particular exchanges require further reactions. Firstly, some participants talked about the

need to seek input from people with different point of view actively.

Talking to him he brings a completely different opinion to a traditional aspect, so it is beneficial

engaging him.

Secondly, some individuals were of the opinion that it was important to get views on individuals

who are politically recognized to be difficult to overlook. Although they were considered good

advisors, this looked more of some individuals trying to seek recognition using their knowledge.

Its about evaluating who need to be ahead of and coming with a way of doing it. You are likely

to learn a lot from individuals who know it all .

Personal Reflection

As shared by Paavola, Lipponen, and Hakkarainen (2004), social interaction is considered a

crucial element of knowledge in practice. However, some individuals asserted the need to have a

self-reflection. This involves evaluating what it all meant by taking a back step and considering

the way forward:

I sat down in the room with my notes and worked out my head .
15

Also, it includes relating what other people were doing and what your experiences were. There

were means of reaching personal decisions about various issues. This was accompanied by

frustration when other people talked about their experiences and ideas.

Sometimes there is a lot to do with a task until you get confused whether to take your time or go

forward.factor the project in a different angle.

Being exposed to new ideas

Some participants reacted to the challenges of becoming more cynical, insular and trapped in

their own experience as they progress in their career.

I think as you grow in a career you tend to rely more on your personal experience and disregard

others. As a result, you become unable to make informed decisions.

Some individuals narrated on their experiences attending different seminars. According to them,

the seminars and professional conferences expounded their horizon of thinking thereby being

able to solve old problems using the learned skills. Much of it did not necessarily expose them to

new ideas but to different content. Sometimes when out of the Workplace, individuals talked

about how they had been impacted with reflective moods, motivation, and inspiration by the

individuals, speakers, and the atmosphere thereby providing them with a special lease of life

when returning to work.

Yes, I found the presentation very good..gave me a new perspective of life.

Findings and Conclusion

The findings provided further evaluation of the complex relationship between practice

and knowledge. Knowing and knowledge seems to frame practice in different forms. The HR

community impacts notions and knowledge of best practice further appears to be an influence in
16

their daily work. On the other hand, common sense and the knowledge of what works seems to

affect their approach to service delivery to the clients. The sharing of individual knowledge

serves a strong base of shaping both collective and individual identity thus influencing practice.

Also, the practice appears to frame their knowing and their knowledge especially through

emphasizing on verbal, informal and social processes such as the use of trusted advisors and

brainstorming. Additionally, the nature of relationships influences views on important and valid

knowledge. Sharing experience reinforces ideas about understanding what is likely to work and

the use of common sense.

The data allows us to consider that knowledge is differently defined as dynamic and

static. It is understood ad subjective and objective combining both explicit and tacit elements.

Therefore, it is premature to say that there is a continuous or consistent understanding of

knowledge in practice. It is likely that when knowledge is shared at a generic point, its particular

meanings may be located in a place and time such as a project activity or an individual

conservation. The findings from the participants in the research show that knowledge and

knowing performs different functions within the practice. Various processes and various

constructions of HR knowledge within practice serve different personal, professional and

political purposes apart from the commonly known functions of knowledge. This is because

traditional knowledge is known to enhance operations in business processes. Therefore, it is

important to explore beyond considering knowledge in terms of its application and content and

instead examine its construction within the practice and its functions. What is interesting is not

just knowledge is viewed as explicit or tacit, but when, why, how, and by whom its constructed

in that manner. This study is important for anyone pursuing further studies in HR, practitioners

in the field as well as researchers for an in-depth review.


17

List of References

Adler, P.S. and Kwon, S.W., (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of

management review, 27(1), pp.17-40.

Asheim, B.T. and Coenen, L., (2005). Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems:

Comparing Nordic clusters. Research policy, 34(8), pp.1173-1190.

Borgatti, S.P. and Foster, P.C., (2003). The network paradigm in organizational research: A

review and typology. Journal of management, 29(6), pp.991-1013.

Bratianu, C., Jianu, I. and Vasilache, S., (2010). Integrators for organisational intellectual capital.

International Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital, 8(1), pp.5-17.

Bratton, J. and Gold, J., 92012). Human resource management: theory and practice. Palgrave

Macmillan.

Choi, M. and Ruona, W.E., (2011). Individual readiness for organizational change and its

implications for human resource and organization development. Human Resource Development

Review, 10(1), pp.46-73.

Freidson, E., (2001). Professionalism, the third logic: On the practice of knowledge. University

of Chicago press.

Garshol, L.M., (2004). Metadata? Thesauri? Taxonomies? Topic maps! Making sense of it all.

Journal of information science, 30(4), pp.378-391.

Gloet, M. and Terziovski, M., (2004). Exploring the relationship between knowledge

management practices and innovation performance. Journal of manufacturing technology

management, 15(5), pp.402-409.

Marshall, N. and Rollinson, J.,(2004). Maybe Bacon had a point: The politics of interpretation in

collective sensemaking. British Journal of Management, 15(S1).


18

Maylor, H., Blackmon, K. and Huemann, M., (2016). Researching business and management.

Palgrave.

Paavola, S., Lipponen, L. and Hakkarainen, K., (2004). Models of innovative knowledge

communities and three metaphors of learning. Review of educational research, 74(4), pp.557-

576.

Seidler-de Alwis, R. and Hartmann, E., (2008). The use of tacit knowledge within innovative

companies: knowledge management in innovative enterprises. Journal of knowledge

Management, 12(1), pp.133-147.

Smith, H.A. and McKeen, J.D., (2004). Creating and facilitating communities of practice. In

Handbook on Knowledge Management 1 (pp. 393-407). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Van de Ven, A.H. and Johnson, P.E., (2006). Knowledge for theory and practice. Academy of

management review, 31(4), pp.802-821.

Vickers, D. and Fox, S., (2010). Towards practice-based studies of HRM: an actor-network and

communities of practice informed approach. The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 21(6), pp.899-914.

Wasko, M.M. and Faraj, S., (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital and

knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS quarterly, pp.35-57

You might also like