Knowledge Management Systems, Autonomy and Control: How to Regulate? A Case-Study in an Industrial Company

Abstract

There is a general agreement that knowledge represents a sustainable competitive advantage for enterprises working in turbulent and unpredictable environments (Drucker, 1993; Grant, 1996; Alavi and Leidner, 2001). As knowledge becomes essential, organizations are restructuring themselves in order to better use this valuable asset. The implementation of knowledge management systems (KMSs) has led to the emergence of new organizational forms such as post-bureaucratic and decentralized organizations. In fact, these systems seem to affect the control and the autonomy of organizational actors. On the one hand, KMSs enhance horizontal communication and encourage self-organizing and self-managing teams. They facilitate access to information and contribute to individuals’ cognitive development. Hence, employees have greater levels of autonomy that allow them to better address problematic situations. Besides, technologies are socially constructed. Their use is structured by employees’ interpretation and mental models (Orlikowski, 1996). In this respect, KMSs supported by these technologies amplify ‘uncertainty zones’ (Crozier and Friedberg, 1977) and employees’ autonomy. Additionally, knowledge sharing largely depends on employees’ willingness and engagement. On the other hand, KMSs control organizational actors’ activities through formalizing their collaboration practices and informal exchanges, and increasing the transparency of their work and interactions.