1、(文檔含英文原文和中文翻譯) a AbstractAs the basis of value creation and success of organizations increasinglydepends on the leverage of knowledge available internally, knowledge managementsystems(KMS)are emerging as vital tools for competitive advantage. Among theseKMS, corporate portals present the potential o

2、f providing organizations with a richand complex shared information workspace for the generation, exchange, and use ofknowledge. But developing corporate portals and building the critical mass of usersrequired to make them successful is not an easy task. In this paper, drawing upon theliterature rev

3、iew and an analysis of early adopters of corporate portals, we addressthe strength of this tool which consists mainly in synchronizing and supportingknowledge processes, put the emphasis on factors inhibiting its adoption bycompanies and finally propose some perspectives for a successful implementat

4、ion.1.IntroductionThe widespread adoption of networks and information technology has vastly increased our ability to store, transfer and generate knowledge, enabling and accelerating the emergence of an economic, organizational and technological landscape, that is knowledge-based(Schwartz, Eamonn,&B

5、oyer,1999;Romano,Elia,&Passiante,2001).This perspective builds upon and extends the resource-based view(RBV)of the firm initially promoted by Penrose(1959)and expanded by others(Barney,1986;Chandler,1992;Prahalad&Hamel,1990;Teece,Pisano,&Shuen,1997).The premise of the RBV is that organizations emplo

6、y a mix of acquisition and configuration of resources to change how their business is accomplished. Knowledge is often the basis for the effective utilization of many important resources. In this context, Information and Communication technologies may play an important role in effectuating the knowl

7、edge-based view of the firm by enhancing the firms capability to manage the knowledge it possesses.This awareness is one of the main reasons for the exponential growth of knowledge management systems(KMS).KMS are technologies that support knowledge management in organizations, specifically, knowledg

8、e generation, codification, and transfer(Ruggles,1997).In fact, a 2000 survey conducted by KPMG shows that the use of KMS is common in organizations worldwide and has numerous despite the potential benefits from KMS, the report also finds that companies were experiencing difficulties in effectively

9、using these technologies. To address this issue, this paper focuses on aparticular type of KMS, which is corporate portal, that presents the potentialof providing organizations with a rich and complex shared information workspace for the generation, exchange, and use of knowledge. Building upon a la

10、rge literature review, insights from eight case studies of early adopters and ourown experience in dealing with some aspects of the implementation phase ofSTMicroelectronics portal, we address the strengths of this tool which consistmainly in supporting knowledge development phases and focus on chal

11、lengesand problems that organizations may face during its implementation.The paper is organized as follows: Section 1 presents a review on knowledge,knowledge management processes and systems. The following section focuses on aparticular tool of KMS, that is the corporate portal; we present a compre

12、hensiveview of definitions and characteristics of this tool based on a comparative analysisof eight case studies in order to identify the potential role of corporate portal featuresin the various stages of the knowledge management processes. We then focus on themajor barriers limiting its adoption a

13、nd use by organizations. In the final section,building on the factors identified, we provide some perspectives for a successfulimplementation.2.Knowledge management processes and systemsBefore focusing on portals as KMS, its necessary to define knowledge andknowledge management processes.2.1.Knowled

14、ge definitionsMultiple definitions of knowledge have been proposed in the literature, anddebates about this concept have been expressed from a variety of perspectives andpositions. In fact, ever since the ancient Greek period ,the quest of philosophy hasbeen to find what knowledge is. Early thinkers

15、 such as Plato and Aristotle werefollowed by Hobbes and Locke to name just a few of the more prominent westernphilosophers. It seems we have no choice but to return to the question that has keptphilosophers occupied for thousands of years. However, we should not approach itfrom a philosophical persp

16、ective. As observed by Alavi and Leidner(2001),theknowledge-based theory of the firm was never built on a universal truth of whatknowledge really is but on a pragmatic interest in being able to manageorganisational knowledge. In recent years, we have witnessed a booming interest inknowledge also fro

17、m other disciplines. Mainly two perspectives are dominant, anInformation Technology view and a Strategic management view. While the IT viewmakes the distinction between data, information and knowledge, and considers theambiguity existing between these three concepts, the strategic managementperspect

18、ive views knowledge as a state of mind, a capability or a process. In fact,data is mainly considered as raw numbers that once processed becomes information,and when put in specific context this information becomesknowledge(Vance,1997).Whereas, the perspective of knowledge as a state of mindposits th

19、at individuals expand their personal knowledge through the inputs receivedfrom their environment. Further, the view of knowledge as a capability to actsuggests that it is not the specific actions of knowledge per se, but the ability tointerpret and use information and experience that influences deci

20、sions(Watson,1999).Finally knowledge as a process, focuses on applying expertise, i.e. simultaneouslyknowing and acting(Zack,1999).In this article, we emphasize the view of knowledgeas a capability to act effectively .Knowledge is seen as a justified personal beliefthat increases an individuals capa

21、city to take effective action. Knowledgemanagement in this view is best understood by considering knowledge managementas the systemic and organizationally specified process of acquiring, organizing andcommunicating knowledge of employees so that other employees may make use ofit to be more effective

22、 and productive in their work(Alavi&Leidner,1999).2.2.Knowledge processesWe can describe knowledge management life cycle as an iterative sequence ofactivities (Nissen, 2000).Building upon this notion, we outlined from knowledgemanagement frameworks, key elements of several life cycle models.Several

23、key points emerge from our review of the analyzed knowledgemanagement frameworks:(1)There is no single or commonly accepted definition of what constitutes aknowledge management framework.(2)There are many concepts that are similar in the frameworks analyzed, buttheir ordering or structure varies.For

24、 example, while the majority of the frameworks refer to the first phase asknowledge creation, Davenport and Prusak use the term generate knowledge,whereas Van der Spek and Spijkervet title this analogous phase knowledgedevelopment. In general, the different frameworks proposed share considerablesimi

25、larities. Most of the life cycles are articulated in four phases where the first oneis a create phase. The second phase corresponds to the organization of knowledge.Phase three uses different term across the models, but they all address somemechanism for making knowledge formal. Finally, the fourth

26、phase concerns theability to share and use knowledge in the enterprise. Therefore, in this article, theknowledge development cycle is defined as the process of knowledge generation,knowledge storage, knowledge distribution and knowledge application. A detaileddefinition of these processes will be pr

27、esented when linking them with the differenttools of the corporate portal that support them.3.Portals support for knowledge management processes3.1.Portal definitionsPortals enable e-business by providing a unified application access, informationmanagement and knowledge management both within enterp

28、rises, and betweenenterprises and their trading partners, channel partner and customers(GartnerGroup,1998).From this definition, we can distinguish two types of corporate portals:extranet portals which provide depth content rather than breadth of content, offerspecial advantages for business-to-busi

29、ness, e-commerce because they can providesomething closer to a solution; and enterprise intranet portals that supportknowledge management and internal communications and they are emerging ashome bases for employees. In this article, we will focus on the second type ofportals. A portal can be viewed

30、as away to access disseminated information within acompany since information chunks can be stored in various systems using differentformats. One of the major differences between a traditional web site and a portalresides in the fact that the portal is usually tailored according to the user s need. A

31、portal is consequently, a single point of access to Internet resources, an integrationplatform focusing on unification oriented towards the business processes of thecompany. Therefore, portals synchronize knowledge and applications, creating asingle view into the organizations intellectual capital.

32、Portals have seen anevolutionary approach, the first ones were search engines, that evolved byintegrating a variety of services such as virtual communities, real time chat, i.e. thebest example in this category is Yahoo; Today the term is used widely to describemany different types of products with

33、different purposes. The terms EmployeesPortals, Enterprise Intranet Portals, Corporate Portals, Business-to- EmployeesPortals and Business-to-Employees Systems are sometimes used interchangeably assynonyms to refer to the category of portals, which aim at providing employees within-time relevant inf

34、ormation they need to perform their duties and make efficientbusiness decisions.4.Perspectives for a successful implementationBased upon the earlier analysis, we can offer some perspectives in order todefine, implement and execute effective corporate portals.4.1.Commitment and support of the CEOMany

35、 authors suggest that leadership commitment is a key challenge for thesuccess of any knowledge management initiative(Nonaka&Takeuchi,1995).Ifmanagement spends a significant amount of resources on either purchasing ordeveloping and implementing such technology, employees could interpret this as asign

36、 of managements support for this ideal, and act accordingly. However, asMartinsons(1991)acknowledges, if employees perceive that management is not verycommitted to implementing this new technology, then the initiative to promote astrong knowledge sharing culture is not likely to be successful.4.2.Mo

37、tivation and commitment for adoption of these technologiesUnderstanding what motivates people to apply their expertise is key to avoidingthe trap of building technology marvels that no one uses. Frequently, a critical massof employees end up not using the applications because they are not convinced

38、theapplications will benefit them. Managers should not assume that they know whatemployees want. They must research the needs and latent dissatisfactions of theiremployees, much as they do those of their customers and then create a compellingoffering that encourages employees to use the new online t

39、ools.4.3.Linking knowledge and business processesIt has become largely agreed that knowledge management activities should beintegrated within day-to-day business processes to ensure continual processimprovement and facilitate learning and the gradual development of organizationalmemory. The portal s

40、hould present an ideal environment to integrate the businessprocess aspects with knowledge processes and actively supports the worker in usingand adding to knowledge resources by establishing standards for informationcollection, processing, and presentation.4.4.Information sharing cultureIt is the c

41、ulture of the organization that supports or impedes knowledge creationand transference both internally and to its customers. Therefore, rather than justencouraging or mandating knowledge sharing, fostering the motivation to shareknowledge must precede it.4.5.Learning from failuresCompanies must revi

42、ew their successes and failures, assess them systematically,and record the lessons in form that employees find accessible. Many companies likeMicrosoft, are following this process of identifying and transferring Internal Bestpractices. This process is referred as the “Santayana Review, citing the ph

43、ilosopherGeorge Santayana, who coined the phrase, those who cannot remember the past arecondemned to repeat it(Garvin,1994).4.6.Immaterial incentivesIn line with Malhotra(2002),we consider that, design of incentives mustconsider that institutional controls as well as some monetary rewards and incent

44、ivesare inadequate and do not necessarily ensure desired knowledge sharing behaviors.Instead they can be replaced by immaterial incentives and recognition. Companiesshould champion the new ethics and values that are at the heart of aknowledge-based enterprise. At the core of this new understanding l

45、ies a very simpleethic that Verna Allee calls the principle of fair exchange: Do people feel that theyare being treated fairly for the intelligence, creativity innovation, experience andpassion they bring to their work.5.ConclusionThis article, based on an analysis of eight case studies of early ado

46、pters ofcorporate portal, focused mainly on the benefits and challenges presented by thistool. Corporate portals seem to present the potential of providing organizations witha rich and complex shared information workspace for the generation, exchange, anduse of knowledge. They synchronize knowledge

47、and applications, creating a singleview into the organizations intellectual capital. But developing corporate portalsand building the critical mass of users required to make them successful is not aneasy task. Given the risk that corporate portals fail to deliver the expected benefits,an important t

48、ask for knowledge management research is to contribute knowledgethat will support researchers and practitioners in their efforts to successfully developand implement corporate portals. This article contributes to this stream of researchby studying potential barriers in portals implementation and sug

49、gesting someperspectives for a successful implementation.譯文:企業(yè)門戶網(wǎng)站：知識(shí)管理的同步工具由于價(jià)值創(chuàng)造基礎(chǔ)和組織成功越來越依賴內(nèi)部可用的知識(shí)杠桿作用，知識(shí)KMS）從而稱為競爭優(yōu)勢的重要工具。這些KMS 中，企業(yè)門戶網(wǎng)站為機(jī)構(gòu)提供了豐富、復(fù)雜的共享信息平臺(tái)的可能性，可進(jìn)行知識(shí)的產(chǎn)生、交換和通過文獻(xiàn)回顧以及對早期企業(yè)門戶網(wǎng)站案例的分析，我們確定該工具強(qiáng)度，主要包括同步和知識(shí)系統(tǒng)流程，著重強(qiáng)調(diào)限制企業(yè)利用的因素，并最終提出成功執(zhí)行的一些觀點(diǎn)。1.引言促使和加速基于知識(shí)的經(jīng)濟(jì)、組織和技術(shù)前景的出現(xiàn)（ Schwartz、Eamonn 和Boy

50、er，1999；Romano、Elia 和 Passiante2001RBV （1959Barney1986；Chandler1992Prahalad 和 Hamel1990TeecePisano 和 Shuen1997RBV 的前提是機(jī)構(gòu)進(jìn)行資源收購和配置以改變其業(yè)務(wù)如何完成。知識(shí)通常是有效使用各種重要資源的基礎(chǔ)。這種情況下，信息和通信技術(shù)可能通過提高公司管理其所有的知識(shí)的能力，在完成企業(yè)知識(shí)觀上起重要作用。這是知識(shí)管理系統(tǒng)（KMS）指數(shù)級(jí)增長的主要原因之一。KMS 是支持機(jī)構(gòu)內(nèi)知識(shí)管理的技術(shù)，特別是知識(shí)創(chuàng)造、編碼管理和傳遞（Ruggles1997KPMG 進(jìn)行的 2000年調(diào)查顯示全球范圍

51、內(nèi)各機(jī)構(gòu)普遍適用 KMS，并取得眾多益處（KPMG，2000但是，盡管 KMS 有各種益處，但報(bào)告發(fā)現(xiàn)公司在有效使用這些技術(shù)上存在各種難題。為確定這個(gè)問題，本文專注 KMS 的特定類型，即什么是企業(yè)門戶網(wǎng)站，為機(jī)構(gòu)提供了豐富、復(fù)雜的共享信息平臺(tái)，包括知識(shí)創(chuàng)造、交流和使用。基于大 量 文 獻(xiàn) 回 顧 、 早 期 使 用 者 八 個(gè) 案 例 研 究 觀 點(diǎn) 和 我 們 在 處 理STMicroelectronomics 括支持知識(shí)創(chuàng)建階段，并專注執(zhí)行期間機(jī)構(gòu)可能面臨的挑戰(zhàn)和問題。本文結(jié)構(gòu)如下：第一部分回顧了知識(shí)、知識(shí)管理流程和系統(tǒng)。第二部分重點(diǎn)介紹 KMS 工具，即企業(yè)門戶網(wǎng)站；基于對八個(gè)案例的全

52、面分析，給出該工具的定義和特征，以便確定企業(yè)門戶網(wǎng)站特點(diǎn)在知識(shí)管理流程不同階段所起的作用。然后我們研究限制機(jī)構(gòu)選擇和使用的障礙。在最后一部分，根據(jù)已確定的因素，我們提出了成功執(zhí)行的一些觀點(diǎn)。2.知識(shí)管理流程與系統(tǒng)討論門戶網(wǎng)站作為 KMS 之前，需要界定知識(shí)和知識(shí)管理流程。2.1.知識(shí)定義文獻(xiàn)中關(guān)于知識(shí)定義各種各樣，這個(gè)概念的爭論表現(xiàn)為各種觀念和立場。事實(shí)上，自古希臘時(shí)期起，哲學(xué)的探尋就是發(fā)現(xiàn)什么是知識(shí)?；舨妓购吐蹇说纫慌吭轿鞣秸軐W(xué)家繼承了早期思想家如柏拉圖和亞里斯多德的思想。看來我們沒有選擇余地，只能回到問題本身，而這已困擾哲學(xué)家數(shù)千年之久。但是，我們不應(yīng)從哲學(xué)角度進(jìn)行思考。Alavi 和 Leidner（2001公司從未建立于什么是知識(shí)的普遍事實(shí)之上，而是基于管理機(jī)構(gòu)知識(shí)能力的實(shí)際利益。近些年，我們看到人們從其他學(xué)科關(guān)注知識(shí)。主要有兩種觀念，即信息技術(shù)觀點(diǎn)和策略管理觀點(diǎn)。信息技術(shù)明確區(qū)分?jǐn)?shù)據(jù)、信息和知識(shí)，并認(rèn)為這數(shù)據(jù)多指原始數(shù)據(jù)，經(jīng)過處理成為信息，而特定情況下，該信息變?yōu)橹R(shí)。（Vance，1997環(huán)境的內(nèi)容擴(kuò)充個(gè)人知識(shí)。此外，認(rèn)為知識(shí)是行為能力的觀點(diǎn)表明，并非知識(shí)Watson，1999Zack，1999與交流員工知識(shí)的流程，讓其它員工可以運(yùn)