domains which are inherently resistant to incursions by the carriers of bureaucratic
rational control.’ He describes the application of the knowledge held by knowledge
workers as esoteric, non-substitutable, global, and analytical.
Rather than applying deep technical knowledge to familiar situations, the crux of
knowledge work is the ambiguous, the unfamiliar, or the esoteric. This does, of
course, provide a useful power base for the knowledge worker to develop a market
niche where his or her skills cannot be categorized and labelled. The output of the
knowledge work process is often intangible (for example, consulting advice) and its
quality is diYcult to determine. Whether a solution is ‘good’ or ‘no good’ is often
determined by factors external to the solution itself, such as changing market
forces, the interpretation of the clients buying the solution, and the degree of
trust that the sellers of the solution inspire.
- 3 Knowledge Production in an Environment that
Provides Collective Knowledge and Social Networks
The conversion of human capital into intellectual capital is highly reliant upon the
context for knowledge production. Knowledge workers interact with other know-
ledge workers to produce knowledge-intensive outcomes. Knowledge workers
work with knowledge; their own, certainly, but also the knowledge of others as
communicated through information systems and artifacts, as well as the organiza-
tional and technical knowledge encoded in programs, routines, and managerial
discourse (Scarbrough 1999 ). Here the ‘encultured’ knowledge (the process of
achieving shared understandings through social relationships) and embedded
knowledge (systemic organizational routines) inXuence the production of know-
ledge (Blackler 1995 ).
This process draws on ‘what others know’ as well as ‘how easily that knowledge is
shared,’ which, in turn, are inXuenced by the nature of the knowledge and the
quality of the relationships. Smith et al. ( 2005 ), in their review of the knowledge
management literature, identify three categories of organizational resources that
impact on knowledge creation capability: stocks of individual knowledge, ‘ego
networks,’ and organizational routines. These routines comprise aWrm’s climate.
Informally, and perhaps tacitly, they establish how theWrm develops and uses
knowledge (p. 347 ). The categories of resources that make the act of knowledge
work possible are sometimes seen as diVerent forms of capital. Ego networks refer
to ‘social capital’ (Nahapiet and Ghoshal 1998 ; Leana and van Buren 1999 ) and
organizational routines are attributes of ‘organizational capital.’ Both social
and organizational capital impact on the knowledge creation capability of an
organization and the ability to conduct knowledge work.
If we look at the managerial implications of the knowledge production process,
it is clear that we cannot manage knowledge workers without managing the
hrm and knowledge workers 453