Another worthwhile addition to these models comes from the Knowledge Management (KM) sphere. In a wide ranging review of literature on Organisational Learning (OL) and KM, Pun & Nathai-Balkissoon (2011) concluded that the two fields are very closely related, that there was a need to empirically test theories that integrate the two fields for both large companies and SMEs. Dufour (2010) recognised that while KM and CI both treat information and intelligence, the precise nature of their complementarity is largely unknown. Drew (1999) considered that CI enriched KM by providing external information.
Nonaka & Takeuchi (1995) identifies two modes of knowledge, tacit (sometimes referred to as implicit) and explicit. The way that knowledge is created, understood and shared is referred to as the knowledge spiral. ‘Socialisation’ refers to shared experiences that allow people to create tacit knowledge, for example on-the-job training. ‘Externalisation’ is when tacit knowledge is formulated explicitly through language, (written or oral) or any other means such as art or mathematical formulae. ‘Combination’ is when explicit knowledge is manipulated, sorted or combined for example in formal education; and ‘Internalisation’ is actually absorbing the knowledge individually, and being able to put this knowledge into action e.g. learning how to use new software. The model is illustrated in Figure 3.4. As an
Figure 3.4 Four Modes of Knowledge Conversion (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995)
Tacit Knowledge
Tacit Knowledge Tacit Knowledge
Explicit Knowledge Explicit Knowledge
Tacit Knowledge
Explicit Knowledge
Explicit Knowledge Socialisation Externalisation
Internalisation Combination
49 organisational knowledge creation theory it has benefited from wide spread theoretical and empirical support (Nonaka & Krogh, 2009). Parts of this model may be useful in the step of CI between the “gathering” and “use” of information, as players in the intelligence gathering stage are not always aware of what they know (tacit), what might be
of use to the company in the knowledge they have gleaned during their normal activities and how this information might be shared with others in the company (externalisation). In SMEs almost all mobilised knowledge is tacit (Sadok & Lesca, 2009).
Wright (2011) recently proposed Organisational Learning (OL) as one outcome of CI processes. While OL definitions are numerous (Oubrich, 2007; Pun & Nathai-Balkissoon, 2011; Wright, 2011) there is a broad agreement that OL consists of either accumulated change in cognition or behaviour within an organisation (Wright, 2011). The opportunity for CI processes to contribute to OL had been identified earlier however (Gilad, 1995;
Bonthous, 1996). In fact, the term OL is explicit in the French national CI training programme, named as an objective under the KM section of a French government report (Référentiel IE, 2004). Pun & Nathai-Balkissoon (2011) recognised the large and growing number of scholarly publications focusing on KM in tandem with OL.
The value of information is defined in the context of action, by its usage, and not by its nature (Moinet, 2011). How individuals interpret information has been a recurring theme in the CI literature. Weick (1995) referred to ‘sense making’ as the central motor of CI; Säid (2004) emphasized ‘interpretation’ which combines means and results to develop
capacities in enterprises; Wright (2011) proposed ‘CI and Insight Management’, noting that it is the transformation of information through the filtering, analysing, checking and processing that creates knowledge. Extending this thinking Levet (2001, pp 40-41)
proposed knowledge creation as learning: ‘Knowledge is above all a cognitive capacity to learn whereas information is formatted and structured data. The essential property of knowledge is the power to engender new knowledge whereas information reproduces itself by simple duplication. Knowledge cannot be easily transferred as it is incorporated in individuals and organisations which cannot be isolated from their environments. The creation of knowledge therefore appears to be a process of learning. To impart sustainable competitive advantage, a CI programme must therefore change practices, attitudes and competencies that are conducive to knowledge creation.
50 Attempts have been made to integrate OL into the CI processes. There is a consensus today that the learning can manifest itself through both behaviours and cognition (Garvin, 2000;
Argote & Miron-Spektor, 2009). Early work by Bonthous (1996) emphasised that CI conducted without an effective OL environment will only produce information, and not intelligence. One dilemma with this approach is that there are nearly as many definitions of OL as there are studies on the subject (Oubrich, 2007). Despite the conceptual fuzziness surrounding OL there have been some tentative empirical investigations. (Dishman &
Pearson, 2003) adapted a model by Bonthous (1996) proposing a continuum for
intelligence as learning. It was applied to a company with 1200 employees. The findings of Dishman & Pearson (2003) in applying this continuum revealed that variance existed between management and non-management as to how to integrate intelligence into the organisation and on the methods used to create an OL environment. The literature
discussing OL in an SME context suggests that despite the fact that size and resources may be handicaps, SMEs have a great deal to gain from becoming learning organisations. That CI processes can instil procedures, exchanges, and a culture for sharing which are often lacking in SMEs (Marchesnay, 2004; Guilhon, 2004). The continuum of OL as presented by Dishman & Pearson (2003) provides a framework for investigating the literature on learning concepts for SMEs. This synthesis on OL concepts for SMEs is presented in Table 3.6 overleaf.
51 Table 3.6 Continua for Intelligence as Learning (Dishman & Pearson, 2003)
Feature Continuum Relevance in an SME Context
1. Overall approach to
In SMEs nearly all information is tacit. Analysis and interpretation take human competences and knowledge which may be lacking (Sadok & Lesca, 2009)
2. Breadth of change effort in which intelligence is involved knowledge but also to clarify roles and tasks for information circulation (Guilhon, 2004)
3. Scope of intelligence effort impacts localised (intelligence efforts are within departments or functions)
An SME is not a big company in a small form (Salles, 2006).
CI practices are fragmentary and spontaneous in SMEs (Sadok & Lesca, 2009).
5. Type of contribution to individual and organisational
The importance of double loop learning for SMEs from experience or critical incidents. (Sullivan, 2000) 6. Type of intelligence flows
between company and
The offensive efforts of SMEs are often restricted to gathering and processing information whereas creativity is needed (Bertacchini & Strasser, 2011)
7. Type of relationship between intelligence and environment
Most SMEs are reactive (Rouach & Santi, 2001;
Bulinge, 2002; Smith et al, 2010). SMEs need to focus on proactively managing their CI to survive (Sadok &
Lesca, 2009).
8. Approach to growing people Training traditional, passive education scheme
Learning (business environment is the education environment)
Action learning may be a successful way to develop SMEs (Clarke et al, 2006)
9. Type of competencies
Analysis and dissemination are driven by the character of the decision maker in SMEs (McCarthy, 2003;
Burke & Jarratt, 2004; Tarraf & Molz, 2006).
51
52 Another and more recent empirical study on the integration of CI processes and OL
concepts was conducted by Oubrich (2007). Using a deductive qualitative approach, a model of the classic CI intelligence process integrated the single and double loop theory of Argyris & Schön (1978). This was also an element of the continuum developed by
Bonthous (1996). Single loop learning refers to modifying actions due to differences between expected and observed outcomes, whereas double loop learning questions the antecedents to those expected and observed outcomes. In other words double loop learning encourages new assumptions and theory development (Argyris & Schön, 1978). This model is presented in Figure 3.5.
Figure 3.5 Integration of OL and CI Processes (Oubrich, 2007)
Information
This study used semi-structured interviews and discourse analysis to conclude that only double loop learning generates knowledge. The sources of learning in the double loop were identified as changes in strategic intention and changes in the ‘representations’ of the CI processes. In using the intelligence cycle as the central model however, the focus here is on internal activities with only limited analysis on the external inputs, summarised as environment, stimulus and scanning. The weaknesses discussed earlier concerning the intelligence cycle would seem to be a handicap in this approach. Moreover, research has
53 highlighted the need for so called ‘triple-loop’ learning (Wang & Ahmed, 2003) whereby organisations learn to learn before they are forced to. Pun & Nathai-Balkissoon (2011) in a similar vein, called for a focus on how innovation and higher order learning are embedded in organisations and how this can be transposed to national competitiveness. This would seem to be consistent with the goals of CI as public policy. In dynamic change
environments, OL may be the only sustainable source of competitive advantage (Kandemir
& Hult, 2005; Sánchez et al, 2009). The CI programmes running in France are quite advanced in this thinking and in application. Novincie, the CI programme at CCI Rennes, has the objective of ‘accelerating learning’ for the businesses, which are mostly SMEs (Dufour, 2010).
The models and research presented here so far have shown two parallel emerging visions of what constitutes CI from both French and English speaking world perspectives. We have seen the comprehensive nature of CI in a French context which encompasses CI thinking but extends it into a public policy and Territorial Intelligence. This is true in French speaking Canada too (Bergeron, 2000b) and in Belgium (Larivet & Brouard, 2012).
In France, CI concepts have been integrated not only into company practices but also into governmental structures at every level. In the English speaking world the CI research has been mostly about analysing company behaviour in regard to CI practices and reporting these findings. One goal of this thesis is to compare and contrast these approaches and the literature that underpins them.