Christmas Feast @ Herzl

In a “Christmassy” Thursday evening, and with the temperature indicating that it’s time to get together, the WMF decided to arrange its annual Christmas feast. The evening started by warming up in the atmospheric styrian Christmas market with some Glühwein. However with temperatures close to 0° “Herzl” was awaiting to warm our feet and most importantly our heart. The highlight of the evening? Of course five WMF associated members that joined our “get-together” and supported us in spending an evening full of interesting discussions and too much knowledge sharing. Topics of the evening included an overview of the WMF accomplishments during the last year, like the acquisition of three new members, teaching opportunities, the barcamp, as well as discussions and planning for future initiatives like further teaching opportunities, refocus on the mutual PhD support and  the further development of the “Praxishandbuch”. The atmospheric evening gave the chance to both our new and old members to share experiences and ideas, as well as advices for the future steps. Above all it was an event full of joy and fun. From their full of knowledge hearts, the WMF members wish you merry Christmas and a happy new year. Until 2017!

Guest Lecture @ FH Burgenland

Right in the middle of collaboratively working out a shared understanding of knowledge activities is where students found themselves just after a few introductory minutes at the guest lecture at FH Burgenland. The lecture aimed to build a bridge between knowledge activities and psychological theories in order to facilitate digital communication, design intuitive tools, evaluate knowledge representations and usage of tools. With the vast practical experience of the tremendously engaged students, the lecture became highly interactive, so the surge of newly acquired theoretical knowledge was channeled to fruitful discussions of how to apply theories in the field. Be it standard knowledge management tools such as wikis, highly specialized tools such as bits and pieces, or tools that make use of the wisdom of the crowd, such as social tagging systems – the lectureres of the WMF had everything covered as well as discussed. Students also provided their thoughts and valuable insights on how to conceptualize knowledge activities in the future. This way, the lecturers learned at least as much as the students while having a whole lot of fun.



Wissensmanagement Impulse

Knowledge activities revisited

by Sebastian Dennerlein, Robert Gutounig & Stefan Schweiger

The model of knowledge activities has been an essential part of Wissensmanagement Forum`s knowledge management handbook from 2007 (Wissensmanagement Forum 2007). Since then it has been applied and validated in numerous occasions where knowledge management has been implemented or taught. As part of the handbook’s renewal, the model of knowledge activities is re-examined in order to address necessary redefinitions, extensions and  clarifications. To make it accessible to an international audience we also make present the first English version here in this article.

The model of knowledge activities was originally based on Probst’s building blocks of knowledge management (Probst 2002). It is  a model to identify and analyse the organizational and individual processes with respect to knowledge management (Wissensmanagement-Forum 2007). They are divided into strategic and operational activities. Especially the five operational knowledge activities allow for an analysis of knowledge management related benefits. In Figure 1, the knowledge activities are illustrated, in Figure 2 you see a short description taken from the organizational context.

Knowledge activities 

Figure 1: Knowledge activities (based on Probst et al. 2002)

Knowledge activities - Contents and supporting methods & instruments

Figure 2: Knowledge activities – Contents and supporting methods & instruments

Here we state what we find needs updating and the current status of discussion:

  • Knowledge generation: Knowledge generation has been seen so far predominantly as an internal process, without external stimulation. Here we want to differentiate into internal and external knowledge generation: i.e. knowledge is created within the organization by employees or knowledge is created together with partners or customers, thus “externally”. Besides this, we are thinking about renaming knowledge generation to knowledge “creation”, since this stresses the fact of the creation of new knowledge in comparison to the construction of existing knowledge. This renaming would enable to highlight the collaborative processes of knowledge building as well: “(co-)creation” of knowledge.
  • Knowledge transfer: We understand knowledge transfer in terms of knowledge sharing processes, which are practiced widely in Web 2.0 contexts (for example mash up ways of sharing, memes etc.). In particular we suggest that there is an influence of sharing processes on knowledge transfer and this interplay has to be taken into consideration and analyzed.
  • Knowledge organization: The organization of knowledge can – as is the case with knowledge generation – happen in a joint team effort. This is why we will investigate the effects of collaborative knowledge organization on knowledge management: for example, collaborative knowledge organization is reflected by building taxonomies collectively with a wiki software.
  • With respect to overall model, we want to respect the sequential influence of the knowledge activities and propose an order for effective knowledge circulation: knowledge acquisition → (co-)organization → (co-)creation → saving → sharing → knowledge acquisition. This loope, spiral-like model will be repeated iteratively, whereby the involved knowledge is maturing, and at the same time, the existing knowledge base is extending. Besides the clear depiction of the mechanisms of interaction, the new model will relate the knowledge activities to the model of interdisciplinary teamwork (Kraker & Dennerlein, 2013). For example, collaborative as well as cooperative phases with respect to the knowledge activities, as well as organization and generation model of knowledge circulation will be included.

The revision of this model should help to apply it to measure the effectiveness of KM tools (offline & online). A variant of the model could help to analyze of the impact of Web 2.0 models, methods and tools on knowledge management. A lot of instances of these tools are already implemented in many organisations and help teams to communicate more efficiently. Among these tools are for example Yammer, more recently also Slack,Skype, Hangouts Chat grape), Whatsapp, Snapchat, Facebook messenger and many more.

Finally, we will discuss the upcoming model of knowledge circulation in relation to one of the most influential models in KM, Nonaka´s SECI model of knowledge dimensions (Nonaka / Takeuchi 1995), to also respect implicit and explicit processes of knowledge management. In this way we aim at mutual inspiration and obtaining a sound basis for different kinds of KM applications.


  • Kraker, P., & Dennerlein, S. (2013). Towards a Model of Interdisciplinary Teamwork for Web Science: What can Social Theory Contribute?. In Web Science 2013 Workshop: Harnessing the Power of Social Theory for Web Science.
  • Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxfors, New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Probst, G., Raub, S. & Raub, K (2002). Managing knowledge: building blocks for success. Chichester: Wiley.
  • Wissensmanagement Forum (Hrsg.). (2007). Das Praxishandbuch Wissensmanagement.Integratives Wissensmanagement. Graz: Verl. der Techn. Univ.

BarCamps als Methode des Wissenstransfers – III: Ideen & Vorschläge zur Umsetzung

Das BarCampGraz 2010 war aus Sicht der Beteiligten ein großer Erfolg. Auch von 7.-8. Mai 2011 wird das BarCamp Graz mit vier Themenschwerpunkten (Wissen, Politik, mobile Anwendungen und Design) einen Beitrag zur Öffnung, Vernetzung und Demokratisierung des Wissensaustausches liefern. Wir wollen hier nochmals den Blick auf ein paar grundlegende Aspekte werfen, die es uns ermöglichen das Funktionieren oder Nicht-Funktionieren offenen Wissenstransfers zu verstehen.

Weiterlesen »