Important Lesson Learned from Zigbee Technology

I think the most important lesson learned from the Zigbee venture is what has already been found out about the proper way to start a new venture. According to the Effectuation Theory of Entrepreneurship, developed by Professor Saras Sarasvathy, University of Virginia, there are two types of thinking when starting a new venture; “effectual” and “causal” thinking. Casual or predictive reasoning or rationality involves having a pre-determined goal and using the resources available to find the most efficient way to achieve that goal as in the case of Zigbee.

Effectual reasoning is different, as it does not start with a specific goal in mind. It begins with a set of means (resources) and goals only emerge over time through the of interactions of the founders with the stakeholders. For example, effectual thinkers are like explorers who set out on voyages to unknown places.

In other words, effectuation principle holds the view that, contrary to causal reasoning that says you have to plan first and the execution comes second, effectual reasoning depends on execution. As already stated above, the reason is that most entrepreneurs use what they have got to start with. Plans are not static and many people with experience with start-ups will agree that predetermined plans are changeable and sometimes do not reflect the realities. I have heard many instances where business founders have said that they never used the plans because the realities on ground were entirely different form predictions to the extent that the plan became irrelevant.

Also effectuation Theory focuses on the cost, what is called “Affordable loss”. The process of evaluating any venture starts with the evaluation of the means or resources (cost) and from there, the goal is determined. Goals and risk (cost) have to go hand - in – hand.

I think when embarking on a new venture flexibility is required and surprises should be seen not as bad news but as potential clues to exploit new markets. Basically what this principle says is that entrepreneurs have to be open to change and be prepared to go in a different direction. Causal reasoning does the opposite by doing everything to minimise surprises or bad news as we have seen in this case.

Digital Leadership - The Three Questions!

How much do I know about digital technology? I think to know something is about gaining skills and mastery of a subject both theoretically and practically. I have used social media and have stored things on the cloud and have used mobile applications, but that is all. I think to have mastery of digital technology requires the ability to use it develop competences and strategies that enable digital leadership solutions to be implemented. So, the answer is I do not know a lot about digital leadership at the moment

Traditionally, anything about technology has been left exclusively for the people in the IT department and there are still some “old school” managers that are not interested in technology even in things as simple as email, not to talk about using other social media applications or platforms. I believe the bulk of managers in many organisations need retraining in digital technology to see technology as a friend instead of as a threat.

I think what makes a good digital leader is willingness to embrace and experiment with change and surprises, willingness to develop digital leadership capabilities and willingness to motivate his or her team to develop and adopt digital technology to transform their thinking and the business based on the business goals. For example, imagine what it would be like to have a company in which the CEO is fluent in digital technology. He or she would be interested in developing the digital competence of the workforce. The opposite effect would happen where the CEO does not have any interest in digital technology.

Effective Use of Digital Technology for Knowledge Management

The Foundation SP strategy is concerned with sharing ideas and using technology to leverage existing knowledge within the organisation effectively. I think this aspect of digital technology relates more to knowledge management, i.e. the strategy is how to use digital technology, particularly social media, to share knowledge. For it to be effective, knowledge management processes have to be followed.

Knowledge management (KM) is defined as a strategy developed to identify and leverage the intellectual assets of an organisation in order to sustain competitive advantage (Halawi, Aronson and McCarthy 2005). The strategy is to create an organisational environment that encourages creativity, effectively development and application of knowledge to enhance innovation and create sustainable competitive advantage.

Knowledge can be “tacit” or “explicit”. (Nonaka, 1991; Train and Ebgu 2006). Tacit knowledge is possessed by individuals through experience or intuition and is difficult to formulate or communicate. It is the foundation for action and what causes the commitment of people to a particular craft or profession, technology or product market or work-group or team activities. 

Tacit knowledge may be “technical” or “cognitive”. Technical dimension is sometimes referred as “know-how”, craft or special skills. The cognitive dimension is complex and refers to mental disposition, beliefs, values, viewpoints etc. Explicit knowledge is discrete, codified and can be easily communicated in a symbolic and natural language, for example, manuals, multimedia, electronic media that are available in organisations etc.

In terms of strategic importance, tacit knowledge is generally said to be more important, as it is inimitable and comprise 80% of all knowledge while explicit is 20%.

Knowledge management has a process which has to be followed to make it effective. The first challenge is getting people motivated to share their knowledge and experiences. And how is learning and improvement going to be measured? Tacit knowledge is embedded in individuals and people are not always ready to share their expertise. This cannot be done with technology alone as people have to be prepared to do something before it can be done.

I think the second challenge is that knowledge is often used interchangeably with information so that information technology approach is automatically linked with communication and sharing of knowledge. According to Wilson (2002), there is a clear distinction between knowledge and information. Knowledge is abstract and embedded in the minds of people concerning what they have learned, known and understood. By contrast, information is the expression of knowledge through oral, written, graphic, gestures or body language. So, there has to be a format as to what form this communication and sharing will take.

A digital leader in my organisation would face the same challenges. I think the solution lies in not treating this as a technological issue that is separate from other management issues. As strategy, it is a management issue and has to follow the normal strategic process. It is not a separate process from human resources and learning, and these have to be integrated together, especially now that knowledge is widely known to be a strategic asset and distinctive capabilities have become a source of competitive advantage.

References

Halawi L, Aronson J and McCarthy R (2005) “Resource-Based View of Knowledge Management for Competitive Advantage” The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management Volume 3 Issue 2, pp 75-86, available online at www.ejkm.com

Nonaka, I. (1991) The Knowledge Creating Company, Harvard Business Review November – December 1991, http://www3.uma.pt/filipejmsousa/ge/Nonaka,%201991.pdf

Wilson, T., D. (2002) The ‘nonsense of knowledge management’ Information Research, Vol. 8 No. 1, October 2002, http://informationr.net/ir/8-1/paper144.html