5. KM caveats
Our knowledge-enhanced ERP implementation model was based on certain assumptions about organizations,stakeholders, and knowledge.First, we assumed that different stakeholders involved in ERP projects share the same basic goals and objectives about KM. For example,ERP owners should purposefully manage the knowledge created during project implementation and other stakeholders (such as ERP vendors, consultants, and support team members) should have a positive attitude toward KM and be willing to share their values, works, insights, and knowledge. Second, we assumed that there was a positive relationship between knowledge and truth, i.e., the knowledge gleaned from the process was the true status of project implementation and had not been manipulated, distorted, or suppressed for any reasons. Third, we assumed that ERP knowledge was either tacit and explicit, and the conversions between these two was possible if managed properly [11,21] and that it was fundamental to KM for ERP implementation.
8层住宅建筑给水排水课程设计+CAD图纸+计算表 It is also important to distinguish between tacit knowledge and implicit knowledge [22] because knowledge variations exist and can bring noise into KM processes. According to Polanyi [13], tacit knowledge is hidden knowledge which involves the process of comprehension that is little understood. It is difficult to formalize, not capable of expression or articulation, and hence cannot be translated into explicit knowledge. Implicit knowledge refers to unexpressed but expressible knowledge and can be shared by others through common experience or culture. Tacit knowl- edge cannot be converted to explicit knowledge but implicit knowledge can. So, in the KM process for ERP implementation, implicit knowledge instead of tacit knowledge, should be managed.
KM still focuses on people management. The ‘people’ dimension of KM is more important than the technical one [18,22]. A learner might assimilate, understand, comprehend, and incorporate information into internal knowledge and then generate new knowl- edge. In our model, we stress the importance of the central support group as a community for knowledge exchange. ERP knowledge holders are thus encouraged and helped to share their knowledge.
6. Relative returns
The ultimate success of ERP implementation depends on how well an organization manages the knowledge created during the implementation process. It is important to measure returns from using this knowledge approach in managing ERP implementation. Though knowledge cannot easily be measured, the degree of knowledge gain can be estimated and predicted. Fig. 6 shows how each of the four steps provides relative value in terms of the knowledge gain due to the project and thus to the organization. The magnitude of this gain depends on the extent to which an organization commits itself to KM in ERP implementation. However, each step does not provide the same benefit.
Few empirical studies have measured the effective- ness of KM. Therefore, the discussion of relative knowledge returns of ERP implementation was based on our experience and observations; it is thus tentative and conceptual in its nature.
7. Methodology illustration
For illustration purposes, a high-level review was made of our methodology against a practical metho- dology. Several commercial ERP implementation
上一页 [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] 下一页
erp英文参考文献及翻译 第4页下载如图片无法显示或论文不完整，请联系qq752018766
