Managing the Knowledge Culture: A Guide for Human Resource Professionals and Managers on the 21st Century Workplace

Citation

Sears, W.H. (2005), "Managing the Knowledge Culture: A Guide for Human Resource Professionals and Managers on the 21st Century Workplace", European Business Review, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 367-369. https://doi.org/10.1108/09555340510607406

A lesson from a long‐ago speed‐reading course: After the first three books in any academic discipline, one has seen 80 percent of all the material that will ever be new. The value of this text is that even for the serious student of management and associated issues, there will be a full measure of new material. For those new to the field, it will prove to be an invaluable primer. Further, the bibliographical references include many titles from 2004, so the content is current. Even the familiar concepts – the 80 percent – are positioned as necessary background for understanding the evolution of knowledge as the “raw material” of twenty‐first century organizations.

One might assume that management of knowledge workers, and the cultures in which they operate, must derive from practices deep in the permissive end of the authoritarian‐participative continuum. The assumption holds, not because the workers are smart, but because of the subtleties involved in orchestrating the collection and collation of information in ways that honor individual contributions while fostering a maximum of inclusion of all the players. As the ultimate intangible, information and knowledge are easy to overlook or to withhold. Consequently, effective management of knowledge workers requires team‐building and teamwork skills, along with the capacity to “tune in” to individuals at close to an intuitive level.

That means even the lessons of that neglected learning methodology, sensitivity training, might again be employed; i.e. despite the implications of the terms, managing knowledge workers cannot be an entirely cerebral process!

Dr Harris' long fascination with culture (see Managing Cultural Differences, 6th Edition, 2004) is obvious in this text. Are knowledge workers to be considered “white collar workers” as in the context of 1950 s sociology, or the yuppies of the 1980 s, or the computer geeks of the 1990s? Actually, none of the above. One result of the explosion of knowledge and the evolution of robotics has been the elimination – in developed economies, at least – of many blue‐collar jobs and the forced retirement of workers who are still capable and competent. What is evolving is a new breed, a multi‐ethnic workforce in which age, sexual orientation, and other irrelevant discriminators have yielded to the need to employ people who can think! In this contest, thinking means converting education, experience, observation, and research into new or improved commercial processes and products.

Peter Drucker observed that this signals the evolution of “…a planetary culture of brain power and its products”. His proven prescience has predicted most of the changes in enterprise management for more than four decades, particularly the decline of authoritarian management as a viable means for achieving highest levels of corporate performance. Now, with a twenty‐first century work environment based on technology, talent, and tolerance, and no longer dependent on youth, physical prowess, and industrial era skills, Drucker's projections seem to have been fully realized. But when knowledge is the key resource, and knowledge workers, in effect, “own” the means of production, there has never been a time when teamwork and management have been more important!

Meanwhile, of course, globalization continues and China has been declared the #1 consumer of raw materials and producer of toxic wastes while establishing commercial outposts in Africa and in the high plains of the former Soviet Union. There are not yet echoes of the old Cold War rhetoric, but the geopolitical stakes have never been higher for the US and the UK, with the pragmatic Europeans ready to serve the highest bidder.

The essence of the contest is “intellectual logistics”, in which the issue is getting the right information to the right people at the right time. Chapter five outlines a variety of strategies and techniques for developing the potential of workers in an incredibly complex post‐industrial workplace. The focus on knowledge, competence, and technological capacity creates a continuing and central role for human resource professionals. The author recalls the seminal work done by Leonard Nadler, now an emeritus professor at The George Washington University, who coined the term “human resource development” (HRD). Nadler was an early advocate of corporations assuming responsibility for building on the entry‐level skills of employees and encouraging them to grow in their ability to learn and earn in support of corporate performance. Unfortunately, the harsh employment environment created by mergers and acquisitions, and the slash‐and‐burn downsizing that followed, has destroyed any sense of employee loyalty toward their employers. HRD was effectively dead! Several years ago, Drucker observed that all senior managers and executives keep a current resume close at hand; and a recent communiqué from a California consultant revealed that in her experience, teamwork is as often directed at withholding contributions rather than in performing better, faster, and cheaper.

Managers will have to provide direction, but it is the HRD professionals who will shape the cultural dimensions of the twenty‐first century organization. Their efforts will be focused on providing the means for enhancing human performance, and participating in decisions about using automation and robotics to reshape tasks and responsibilities. In a way, these latter challenges will be an extension of decisions about core functions and outsourcing work that can be done more effectively outside the corporate structure. Operationally, this means that the corporation will become increasingly more focused and specialized to survive in an intensely competitive global marketplace.

The author labels the kind of HRD activist that is required as a “transformational leader”. He sees this person as a role model of integrity, openness, and competence; who can provide constructive feedback and counsel; and who stimulates trust, enthusiasm, pride, and loyalty to the employer. Working with like‐minded staff, these unique individuals will translate corporate direction into knowledge requirements for workers. They will see to the logistics of getting the right information to the right employees at the right time, and to ensure that the information‐processing skills are adequate for the task. They will indeed be the facilitators of human potential realized, and the success and survival of twenty‐first century corporations.