Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Value Creation in the Digitally Enabled Knowledge Economy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Knowledge Management in Digital Change

Part of the book series: Progress in IS ((PROIS))

Abstract

This chapter discusses the critical question of how to manage knowledge for value creation in digitally enabled economies. We introduce the concept of “Knowledge 4.0” to set the developments of how companies and organisations use digital technologies for knowledge creation and sharing into a historic perspective. We explain the chain of activities that create value in the digitally enabled knowledge economy following the model of the “knowledge ladder 4.0”. The model helps to relate enabling technologies to changes and new forms of managing knowledge and knowledge work. In addition, this introductory chapter summarises the key findings of the contributions presented in the subsequent chapters that we group into the four topic areas: (1) digital enrichment of resources to leverage human performance, (2) collaboration and networking, (3) leading and learning and, finally, (4) new forms of digitally enabled knowledge intensive value creation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    https://digitalcharta.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Digital-Charta-EN.pdf.

  2. 2.

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-major-difference-between-Cognitive-Computing-and-Artificial-Intelligence.

  3. 3.

    Compare: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ethics-and-creativity-in-artificial-intelligence-an_us_593047b4e4b09e93d7964848.

  4. 4.

    (https://salvadorbaille.com/2017/02/07/so-you-think-you-have-a-competitive-advantage-i/).

References

  • Adamczyk, S., Bullinger, A. C., & Möslein, K. M. (2012). Innovation contests: A review, classification and outlook: Innovation contests. Creativity and Innovation Management, 21(4), 335–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adolf, M., & Stehr, N. (2017). Knowledge. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Review: Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annanperä, E., Liukkunen, K., & Markkula, J. (2016). Managing emerging business ecosystems–A knowledge management viewpoint.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bharadwaj, A., El Sawy, O. A., Pavlou, P. A., & Venkatraman, N. V. (2013). Digital business strategy: Toward a next generation of insights.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bittner, E. A. C., & Leimeister, J. M. (2014). Creating shared understanding in heterogeneous work groups: Why it matters and how to achieve it. Journal of Management Information Systems, 31(1), 111–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bmas, G. F. M. O. L. S. A. (2015). Re-imagining work green paper: Work 4.0.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bostrom, N. (2014). Superintelligence: Paths, dangers, strategies. Oxford: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boudreau, K. J., & Lakhani, K. R. (2013). Using the crowd as an innovation partner. Harvard Business Review, 91(4), 60–69, 140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bounfour, A. (2016). Digital futures, digital transformation. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brynjolfsson, E., & Mcafee, A. (2014). The second machine age: An industrial revolution powered by digital technologies. Digital Transformation Review, (5), 12–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, P. (2000). A social history of knowledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H., Chiang, R. H., & Storey, V. C. (2012). Business intelligence and analytics: From big data to big impact. MIS Quarterly, 36(4).

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. W. (2006). The era of open innovation. Managing Innovation and Change, 127(3), 34–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T. H., & Kirby, J. (2016). Only humans need apply: Winners and losers in the age of smart machines. New York: Harper Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, G. B. (2002). Anytime/Anyplace computing and the future of knowledge work. Communications of the ACM, 45(12), 67–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennerlein, S., Seitlinger, P., Lex, E., & Ley, T. (2016). Take up my tags: Exploring benefits of meaning making in a collaborative learning task at the workplace. In European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Domingos, P. (2015). The master algorithm: How the quest for the ultimate learning machine will remake our world. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eberl, U. (2016). Smarte Maschinen. Wie Künstliche Intelligenz unser Leben verändert. München: Hanser.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11), 1105–1121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ettlinger, N. (2016). The governance of crowdsourcing: Rationalities of the new exploitation. Environment and Planning A, 48(11), 2162–2180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghazawneh, A., & Henfridsson, O. (2010). Governing third-party development through platform boundary resources. In The International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), AIS Electronic Library (AISeL).

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. M. (1991). The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulation. California Management Review, 33(3), 114–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. (1994). Competing for the future. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, F. A. (1945). The use of knowledge in society. The American Economic Review, 519–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henfridsson, O., & Lindgren, R. (2010). User involvement in developing mobile and temporarily interconnected systems. Information Systems Journal, 20(2), 119–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, J. (2017). Demokratie im Datenkapitalismus. WZB Mitteilungen Heft, 155, 14–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iansiti, M., & Lakhani, K. R. (2014). Digital ubiquity: How connections, sensors, and data are revolutionizing business. Harvard Business Review, 92(11), 90–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Intel. (2014). The future of knowledge work. White paper workplace transformation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karimi, J., & Walter, Z. (2015). The role of dynamic capabilities in responding to digital disruption: A factor-based study of the newspaper industry. Journal of Management Information Systems, 32(1), 39–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaschig, A., Maier, R., & Sandow, A. (2016). The effects of collecting and connecting activities on knowledge creation in organizations. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 25(4), 243–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly III, J. E. (2015). Computing, cognition and the future of knowing: How humans and machines are forging a new age of understanding. IBM Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, G., Moon, B., & Hoffman, R. R. (2006). Making sense of sensemaking 1: Alternative perspectives. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 21(4), 70–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koch, T., & Windsperger, J. (2017). Seeing through the network: Competitive advantage in the digital economy. Journal of Organization Design, 6(1), 6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3(3), 383–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolko, J. (2010). Sensemaking and framing: A theoretical reflection on perspective in design synthesis. Design Research Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotter, J. P. (2014). Accelerate: Building strategic agility for a faster-moving world. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, C. F., & Snowden, D. J. (2003). The new dynamics of strategy: Sense-making in a complex and complicated world. IBM Systems Journal, 42(3), 462–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Dinh, T., Nomo, T. S., & Ayayi, A. (2015). Towards a cyberinfrastructure for social science research collaboration: The service science approach. In International Conference on Exploring Services Science. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehtiniemi, T., Kuikkaniemi, K., Poikola, A., Nelimarkka, M., Valtonen, T., Floréen, P., & Turpeinen, M. (2015) Trends of knowledge work and needs for knowledge work tools. Re: Know White Paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loebbecke, C., Van Fenema, P. C., & Powell, P. (2016). Managing inter-organizational knowledge sharing. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 25(1), 4–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macmillan, I., Ihrig, M., & Steinhour, J. (2017). Mapping critical knowledge for digital transformation. From http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/management-knowledge-assets/.

  • Madsbjerg, C. (2017). Sensemaking: The power of the humanities in the age of the algorithm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maier, R. (2007). Knowledge management systems: Information and communication technologies for knowledge management. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manhart, M., Thalmann, S., & Maier, R. (2015). The ends of knowledge sharing in networks: Using information technology to start knowledge protection. In ECIS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manyika, J., Chui, M., Bughin, J., Dobbs, R., Bisson, P., & Marrs, A. (2013). Disruptive technologies: Advances that will transform life, business, and the global economy. San Francisco, CA: McKinsey Global Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martens, B., Poeppelbuss, J., & Teuteberg, F. (2011). Understanding the cloud computing ecosystem: Results from a quantitative content analysis. Wirtschaftsinformatik, 2011, 16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matt, C., Hess, T., & Benlian, A. (2015). Digital transformation strategies. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 57(5), 339–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer-Schönberger, V., & Cukier, K. (2013). Big data: A revolution that will transform how we live, work, and think. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazmanian, M., Orlikowski, W. J., & Yates, J. (2013). The autonomy paradox: The implications of mobile email devices for knowledge professionals. Organization Science, 24(5), 1337–1357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mithas, S., Tafti, A., & Mitchell, W. (2013). How a firm’s competitive environment and digital strategic posture influence digital business strategy. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, A., Wheaton, K. (2016). Welcome to curation 2.0. KM World January 2016, 25(1), 1–2. http://www.kmworld.com/Articles/Column/The-Future-of-the-Future/Welcome-to-Curation-2.0-108249.aspx.

  • Newman, G., Wiggins, A., Crall, A., Graham, E., Newman, S., & Crowston, K. (2012). The future of citizen science: Emerging technologies and shifting paradigms. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 10(6), 298–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • North, K. (2005). Wissensorientierte Unternehmensführung (6th edn 2016). Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • North, K., & Gueldenberg, S. (2011). Effective knowledge work: Answers to the management challenges of the 21st century. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, K., & Haas, O. (2014). Zwischen Experiment und Routine: Wie wird Wissensmanagement erwachsen? OrganisationsEntwicklung, 3(2014), 50–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, K., & Kumta, G. (2018). Knowledge management: Value creation through organizational learning. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, K., & Varvakis, G. (2016). Competitive strategies for small and medium enterprises. In Increasing Crisis Resilience, Agility and Innovation in Turbulent Times. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2016). New skills for the digital economy. OECD Digital Economy Papers. Paris. 258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavlou, P. A., & El Sawy, O. A. (2011). Understanding the elusive black box of dynamic capabilities: The elusive black box of dynamic capabilities. Decision Sciences, 42(1), 239–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pawlowski, J. M., Bick, M., Peinl, R., Thalmann, S., Maier, R., Hetmank, L., et al. (2014). Social knowledge environments. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 6(2), 81–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pawlowsky, P., Gözalan, A., & Schmid, S. (2011). Wettbewerbsfaktor Wissen: Managementpraxis von Wissen und Intellectual Capital in Deutschland-Eine repräsentative Unternehmensbefragung zum Status quo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Heppelmann, J. E. (2014). How smart, connected products are transforming competition. Harvard Business Review, 92(11), 64–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samulowitz, H., Sabharwal, A., & Reddy, C. (2014). Cognitive automation of data science. In ICML AutoML Workshop.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seeber, I., Bittner, E., Briggs, R. O., De Vreede, G. –J., De Vreede, T., Druckenmiller, D., Maier, R., Merz, A., Oeste-Reiß, S., Randrup, N., Schwabe, G., Söllner, M. (2018). Machines as teammates: A collaboration research agenda. In Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), 3–6.1.2018, Waikoloa, HI, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spender, J. C. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm: Making Knowledge. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 45–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spiro, K. (2017). 70:20:10 challenges: Turning curation into knowledge sharing. https://elearningindustry.com/turning-curation-into-knowledge-sharing-70-20-10-challenges.

  • Stahl, G., Anderson, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective, 2006. Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, 409–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (2009). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management: Organizing for innovation and growth. Oxford University Press on Demand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (2017). Dynamic capabilities and (digital) platform lifecycles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Telekom. (2015). Arbeit 4.0. from https://www.telekom.com/medien/konzern/285970.

  • Thornhill, J. (2017). Data capitalism is cashing in on our privacy . . . for now. Financial Times.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tushman, M. L., & O’reilly, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), 8–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urbinati, N. (2014). Democracy disfigured: Opinion, truth, and the people. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Van Doren, C. L. (1991). A history of knowledge: Past, present, and future. New York: Random House Digital, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Der Aalst, W., & Damiani, E. (2015). Processes meet big data: Connecting data science with process science. IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, 8(6), 810–819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing innovation: The evolving phenomenon of user innovation. Journal für Betriebswirtschaft, 55(1), 63–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Hippel, E., & Von Krogh, G. (2003). Open source software and the “private-collective” innovation model: Issues for organization science. Organization Science, 14(2), 209–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Krogh, G. (2012). How does social software change knowledge management? Toward a strategic research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 21(2), 154–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Krogh, G., & Roos, J. (1996). Five claims on knowing. European Management Journal, 14(4), 423–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waizenegger, L., Remus, U., & Maier, R. (2016). The social media trap—How knowledge workers learn to deal with constant social connectivity. IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoo, Y., Boland, R. J., Lyytinen, K., & Majchrzak, A. (2012). Organizing for innovation in the digitized world. Organization Science, 23(5), 1398–1408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O., & Lyytinen, K. (2010). Research commentary—The new organizing logic of digital innovation: an agenda for information systems research. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 724–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zack, M., Mckeen, J., & Singh, S. (2009). Knowledge management and organizational performance: An exploratory analysis. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(6), 392–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuboff, S. (2016). The secrets of surveillance capitalism. Frankfurt: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wiesbaden Business School, RheinMain University of Applied Sciences, Wiesbaden, Germany

    Klaus North

  2. Dept. of Information Systems, Production and Logistics Management, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria

    Ronald Maier

  3. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, Bonn, Germany

    Oliver Haas

Authors
  1. Klaus North
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ronald Maier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Oliver Haas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Klaus North .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Wiesbaden Business School, RheinMain University of Applied Sciences, Wiesbaden, Germany

    Klaus North

  2. School of Management, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria

    Ronald Maier

  3. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), Bonn, Germany

    Oliver Haas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

North, K., Maier, R., Haas, O. (2018). Value Creation in the Digitally Enabled Knowledge Economy. In: North, K., Maier, R., Haas, O. (eds) Knowledge Management in Digital Change. Progress in IS. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73546-7_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation