1. bookVolume 10 (2017): Edition 1 (June 2017)
Détails du magazine
License
Format
Magazine
eISSN
1338-4309
ISSN
1337-9038
Première parution
03 Aug 2009
Périodicité
2 fois par an
Langues
Anglais
access type Accès libre

Knowledge Management and Czech Self-Governments: Empirical Investigations into the Application of Knowledge Management to Public Administration in the Czech Republic

Publié en ligne: 08 Jul 2017
Volume & Edition: Volume 10 (2017) - Edition 1 (June 2017)
Pages: 201 - 220
Détails du magazine
License
Format
Magazine
eISSN
1338-4309
ISSN
1337-9038
Première parution
03 Aug 2009
Périodicité
2 fois par an
Langues
Anglais
Abstract

Although knowledge management has become the subject of an enormous quantity of articles and books in recent times, certain more problematic aspects of it remain neglected. Firstly, literature addressing knowledge management concentrates almost exclusively on business organizations and fails to provide details or recommendations adequate to effective application within the sphere of public administration. This holds especially true for Czech academic literature. Secondly, despite a reasonable number of articles on knowledge management in scientific journals, information about perceptions of knowledge-management activities, procedures and tools within organizations lacks detail. The purpose of this article is to investigate and summarize the activities, procedures and tools in use for dealing with knowledge within Czech self-governments and to discuss the main empirical findings. Although the quantitative survey herein does not provide fully representative data, it is still in a position to indicate that knowledge management in Czech public administration tends to be underdeveloped as well as undervalued.

Keywords

Alavi, M. and D. E. Leidner. 2001. “Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues.” MIS Quarterly 25(1), 107–136.Search in Google Scholar

Allee, V. 2003. The Future of Knowledge: Increasing Prosperity Through Value Networks. Amsterdam et al.: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Ammons, D. N. and D. J. Roenigk. 2015. “Performance Management in Local Government: Is Practice Influenced by Doctrine?” Public Performance & Management Review 38(3), 514–541.Search in Google Scholar

Andriessen, D. G. 2008. “Stuffor Love? How Metaphors Direct our Efforts to Manage Knowledge in Organizations.” Knowledge Management Research & Practice 6(1), 5–12.Search in Google Scholar

Bolisani, E. and M. Handzic (eds). 2015. Advances in Knowledge Management: Celebrating Twenty Years of Research and Practice. Heidelberg: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-09501-1Search in Google Scholar

Burford, S. and S. Ferguson. 2009. “Managing Knowledge by Intention: The Role of Standards, Frameworks and Models.” Actkm Online Journal of Knowledge Management 5(1), 3–14.Search in Google Scholar

Cong, X. and K. V. Pandya. 2003. “Issues of Knowledge Management in the Public Sector.” Academic Conferences Limited, http://www.ejkm.com/issue/download.html?idArticle=17 (accessed June 1, 2017).Search in Google Scholar

Deming, W. E. 1986. Out of the Crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Center for Advanced Engineering Study.Search in Google Scholar

Deming, W. E. 1993. The New Economics for Industry, Government, Education. Cambridge, MA: MIT Center for Advanced Engineering Study.Search in Google Scholar

Edwards, J. S. 2015. “Knowledge Management Concepts and Models.” In Bolisani, E. and Handzic, M. (eds.). Advances in Knowledge Management: Celebrating Twenty Years of Research and Practice. Heidelberg: Springer, 25–44.Search in Google Scholar

Farzin, M. R. et al. 2014. “A Survey of Critical Success Factors for Strategic Knowledge Management Implementation: Applications for Service Sector.” Procedia: Social and Behavioural Sciences 109, 595–599.Search in Google Scholar

Ferguson, S. 2006. “AS 5037–2005: Knowledge Management Blueprint for Australian Organisations?” The Australian Library Journal 55(3), 196–209.Search in Google Scholar

Firestone, J. M. and M. W. McElroy. 2003. Key Issues in the New Knowledge Management. Amsterdam et al.: Routledge.10.1016/B978-0-7506-7655-7.50008-0Search in Google Scholar

Frischmann, B. M, M. J. Madison and K. J. Strandburg (eds). 2014. Governing Knowledge Commons. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199972036.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Gatarik, E. 2014. “The Many Faces of ‘Innovation Ecosystems’: Investigating and Reflecting the Ecology of Decision-Making as Core of the Topic.” IFKAD 2014, 1887–1906.Search in Google Scholar

Gatarik, E. and R. Born. 2012. “The Practice of Network Economics as a Competitive Advantage of Regions and Societies.” IFKAD – KCWS 2012, 2143–2166.Search in Google Scholar

Gatarik, E. and R. Born. 2015. “Managing Network Economies: The Competitive Advantage of Commons as Ecosystems of Innovation.” Journal of Organisational Transformation and Social Change 12(3), 287–307.Search in Google Scholar

Gatarik, E. and R. Born. (forthcoming). “Innovating for Organisational Resilience: An Epistemological Investigation into Business Continuity Practice in an Austrian SME.” Journal of Organisational Transformation and Social Change VOL.Search in Google Scholar

Gödel, K. 1931. “Über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme I.” Monatsheft e für Mathematik und Physik 38(1), 173–198.Search in Google Scholar

Hamel, G. 2012. What Matters Now: How to Win in a World of Relentless Change, Ferocious Competition and Unstoppable Innovation. Hoboken: Wiley.Search in Google Scholar

Hammer, M. and J. Champy. 1993. Reengineering the Corporation: Manifesto for Business Revolution. New York: Harper Collins.10.1016/S0007-6813(05)80064-3Search in Google Scholar

Hammerschmid, G., S. Van de Walle and V. Stimac. 2013. “Internal and External Use of Performance Information in Public Organizations: Results from an International Survey.” Public Money & Management 33(4), 261–268.Search in Google Scholar

Handzic, M. A. 2015. “Descriptive Analysis of Knowledge Management Research: Period from 1997 to 2012.” In Bolisani, E. and Handzic, M. (eds.). Advances in Knowledge Management: Celebrating Twenty Years of Research and Practice. Heidelberg: Springer, 45–66.Search in Google Scholar

Hasan, H. M. 2004. Bottling Fog: Conjuring up the Australian KM Standard. Research Online. University of Wollongong. Available online at: http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1360&context=commpapers (accessed June 1, 2017).Search in Google Scholar

Hess, C. and E. Ostrom (eds). 2007. Understanding Knowledge as a Commons: From Theory to Practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 41–81.Search in Google Scholar

Klimovský, D. et al. 2014. “Inter-Municipal Cooperation in Lithuania and Slovakia: Does Size Structure Matter?” Lex Localis: Journal of Local Self-Government 12(3), 643–658.Search in Google Scholar

Martin, J. and A. Spano. 2015. “From Performance Management to Strategic Local Government Leadership: Lessons from Different Cultural Settings.” Public Money & Management 35(4), 303–309.Search in Google Scholar

Matejova, L. et al. 2015. “Political Business Cycle in Local Government: Case Study of Czech Municipalities.” In Matejova, L. and Spalkova, D. (eds.). Proceedings of the 19thInternational Conference: Current Trends in Public Sector Research. Brno: Masarykova Univerzita, 142–148.Search in Google Scholar

Nam, T. and T. A. Pardo. 2011. “Conceptualizing Smart City with Dimensions of Technology, People, and Institutions.” In Proceedings of the 12thAnnual International Conference on Digital Government Research. Also available at: https://inta-aivn.org/images/cc/Urbanism/background%20documents/dgo_2011_smartcity.pdf (accessed June 1, 2017).10.1145/2037556.2037602Search in Google Scholar

Němec, J., B. Mikušová Meričková and M. Svidroňová. 2015a. “Co-Creation in Local Public Services Delivery Innovation: Slovak Experience.” Lex Localis: Journal of Local Self-Government 13(3), 521–535.Search in Google Scholar

Němec, J., B. Mikušová Meričková and M. Svidroňová. 2015b. “Social Innovations in Public Services: Co-Creation in Slovakia.” In Schoburgh, E. and Ryan, R. (eds.). Sborník z mezinárodního vědeckého semináře: Current Trends in Public Sector Research Xix. Brno: Ekonomicko, Správní Fakulta, 273–281.Search in Google Scholar

Nielsen, P. A. 2014. “Learning from Performance Feedback: Performance Information, Aspiration Levels, and Managerial Priorities.” Public Administration 92(1), 142–160.Search in Google Scholar

Nonaka, I. and H. Takeuchi. 1995. The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.10.1016/0024-6301(96)81509-3Search in Google Scholar

Nowak, M. and R. Highfield. 2011. Supercooperators: Altruism, Evolution, and Why We Need Each Other to Succeed. New York: Simon and Schuster.Search in Google Scholar

Osono, E., N. Shimizu and H. Takeuchi. 2008. Extreme Toyota: Radical Contradictions that Drive Success at the World’s Best Manufacturer. Hoboken: Wiley.Search in Google Scholar

Ostrom, E. 2009. “Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems” Nobel Prize lecture. Stockholm, Sweden: Nobel Media, 8 December 2009.Search in Google Scholar

Plaček, M., F. Ochrana and M. Půček. 2015. “Benchmarking in Czech Higher Education: The Case of Schools of Economics.” Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 37(4), 374–384.Search in Google Scholar

Plaček, M., M. Půček and F. Ochrana. 2016. “Political Business Cycle in the Czech Republic: Case of Municipalities.” Prague Economic Papers 25(3), 304–320.Search in Google Scholar

Plaček, M., M. Schmidt, F. Ochrana et al. 2016. “Impact of Selected Factors regarding the Efficiency of Public Procurement (The Case of the Czech Republic) with an Emphasis on Decentralization.” Ekonomický Časopis 64(1), 22–36.Search in Google Scholar

Polanyi, M. 1966. The Tacit Dimension. Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith.Search in Google Scholar

Prusak, L. 2001. “Where did Knowledge Management Come from?” IBM Systems Journal 40(4), 1002–1007.Search in Google Scholar

Rifk in, J. 2014. The Zero Marginal Cost Society: The Internet of Things, the Collaborative Commons, and the Eclipse of Capitalism. New York: Macmillan.Search in Google Scholar

Simon, H. A. 1947. Administrative Behavior: A Study of the Decision-making Processes in Administrative Organization. New York: Macmillan.Search in Google Scholar

Špaček, D. 2015. “Quality Management in the Czech Public Administration.” In Vries, M. and Nemec, J. (eds.). Implementation of New Public Management Tools: Experiences from Transition and Emerging Countries. Bruxelles: Bruylant, 285–304.Search in Google Scholar

Špaček, D. 2016. “Knowledge Management in Public Administration and Research in the Czech Republic: Preliminary Findings.” In Matějová, L. and Špalková, D. (eds.). Proceedings of the 20thInternational Conference Current Trends in Public Sector Research. Brno: Ekonomicko-správní fakulta, 94–101.Search in Google Scholar

Spender, J. C. 2015. “Knowledge Management: Origins, History, and Development.” In Bolisani, E. and Handzic, M. (eds.). Advances in Knowledge Management: Celebrating Twenty Years of Research and Practice. Heidelberg: Springer, 3–24.Search in Google Scholar

Taylor, F. W. 1919. The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper & Brothers.Search in Google Scholar

Weick, K. E. and K. M. Sutcliffe. 2015. Managing the Unexpected: Sustained Performance in a Complex World. Hoboken: Wiley.10.1002/9781119175834Search in Google Scholar

Wittgenstein, L. 1953. Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Articles recommandés par Trend MD

Planifiez votre conférence à distance avec Sciendo