TEchNOLOGy TRaNSFER MODEL - Javna agencija

6
KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER
tions of journals or magazines, the articles are available on the internet.
Every participant – 26 persons – is using Google tools, probably the search engine, maybe cooperation tools such as Google Docs or
Google Wave as well.
In the discussion about the use of Web2.0 tools for knowledge transfer processes the participants emphasize the potential of these
tools to spread knowledge in an easy way. On the other hand they criticize these tools concerning the velocity if information exchange
and the unclear legal framework.
6.8 Working Sheet Module 6
As we just know, the process management concerning technology transfer projects within CLEANIX is very rough and confused
without a clear focus on „sustainable learning“. Over the past few years there have been many committed students writing a
master thesis but they were not considered for work at the company. Due to that reason the knowledge which has been generated
was not applied in the daily routines within CLEANIX.
In the meantime, the CEOs assigned one employee with the task to coordinate cooperation projects, but not only to coordinate
them but also to build up the knowledge management system within CLEANIX which is lacking an up-date as well.
Until today both the headquarters in Graz and the subsidiary company in Maribor were working with file servers for storing
information but they are suffering from the same problems as can be found in other enterprises. The filing system becomes
confusing, the folders and documents are named differently, and all in all a file server is something like a static knowledge
management tool. CLEANIX is missing an intranet for internal communication so that, therefore, the most important ways of
communication are face-to-face contacts, telephone and mail. In consideration of the fact that CLEANIX is growing, and especially
within the R&D-department in Slovenia external knowledge becomes more and more important, the knowledge management
system should be reviewed.
From the perspective of a TTF one should think about possible support of CLEANIX in designing such processes with answering
the following questions:
How could the employees be motivated in order to share their knowledge and experience with their co-workers? What could
appropriate incentive schemes look like?
Do you see any potential concerning Social Media and knowledge transfer/organizational learning within CLEANIX? Do you see
any advantages for CLEANIX using Social Media Tools? Are there any barriers and obstacles concerning the transfer of knowledge
which could be diminished by increased use of web tools?
Can you support the “sustainable knowledge saving” within the external knowledge transfer projects? Can you assist CLEANIX
with the task “knowledge management”? How could you do that?
6.9 Further Readings
• Bonaccorsi, A.; Piccaluga, A. (1994): A theoretical framework for the evaluation of university-industry relationships, in: R&D-Management,
24(3), pp. 229-247.
• Cabrera, A.; Cabrera, E. (2002): Knowledge-sharing Dilemmas, in: Organization Studies, 23(5), pp. 687-710.
• Davenport, T.; De Long, D.; Beers, M.: Successful Knowledge Management Projects, in: Sloan Management Review, 39(2), pp. 43-57.
• Europäische Kommission; BMWA: Benchmarking Industry – Science Relations, National Report – Austria, Final Report, OEFZS-S-0099,
Wien/Mannheim 2001.
• Hofstetter, S. (1990): Technologietransfer als Instrument zur Förderung von Innovationen in technologieorientierten Klein- und Mittelunternehmungen,
Bamberg 1990.
• Kerres M. (2006): Potentiale von Web2.0 nutzen, in Hohenstein A. und Wilbers K. (Hrsg.), Handbuch E-Learning. München: DWD 2006
• Klafft, M.; Pfennigschmidt, S.; Ahrend, C.; Dziekan, K.; Kliemke, C.; Wenzel, H. (2009): Skalierbare Innovationsprozesse. Wissenstransfer
zwischen KMU und Wissenschaft, 2009, URL: http://publica.fraunhofer.de/eprints/urn:nbn:de:0011-n-1036564.pdf (3.12.2009)
• KPMG (2000): Knowledge Management Research Report 2000, download available http://www.providersedge.com/docs/km_articles/KPMG_KM_Research_Report_2000.pdf
(23.4.2010)
• Philbin, S. (2008): Process model for university-industry research collaboration, in: European Journal of Innovation Management, 11(4),
pp. 488-521.
• Roberts, J. (2000): From know-how to show-how? Questioning the Role of Information and Communication Technologies in Knowledge
Transfer, in: Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 12(4), pp. 429-443.
• Stocker, A.; Tochtermann, K.; Krasser, N. (2009): Wissenstransfer mit Weblogs in KMUs. Eine explorative Einzelfallstudie, in: Proceedings
of the 5th Conference of Professional Knowledge Management, Solothurn, Schweiz, 2009.
• Szulanski, G. (2000): The Process of Knowledge Transfer: A Diachronic Analysis of Stickiness, in: Organizational Behaviour and Human
Decision Processes, 82(1), pp. 9-27.
• Thompson J. (2007): Is Education 1.0 Ready for Web 2.0 Students? in The Innovate Gateway, April/May 2007, Volume 3, Issue 4
• Zhang, M.; Macpherson, A.; Jones, O. (2006): Conceptualizing the Learning Process in SMEs. Improving Innovation through External
Orientation, in: International Small Business Journal, 24(3), pp. 299-323.
6.10 Useful Adresses and Links
http://publica.fraunhofer.de/eprints/urn:nbn:de:0011-n-1036564.pdf
http://www.providersedge.com/docs/km_articles/KPMG_KM_Research_Report_2000.pdf
http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html What Is Web 2.0 - O’Reilly Media
79