What Is a Knowledge Asset?

Knowledge assets are the sum of the value of explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge that enterprises rely on to survive and develop in the era of knowledge economy. It does not have an independent entity form, it exists on a certain carrier, and can bring economic benefits to the enterprise in a certain period of time. It can be divided into four categories: (1) Market assets are market-related intangible asset potentials owned by enterprises, including various brands, customer trust, long-term customers, sales channels, and patent award contract agreements. (2) Intellectual property assets. (3) Human assets refer to group skills, creativity, ability to solve problems, leadership, and corporate management mechanisms. (4) Infrastructure assets refer to the technologies, working methods and procedures that enable enterprises to operate. ^[1]

Knowledge assets

Right!

Knowledge assets are the sum of the value of explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge that enterprises rely on to survive and develop in the era of knowledge economy. It does not have an independent entity form, it exists on a certain carrier, and can bring economic benefits to the enterprise in a certain period of time. It can be divided into four categories: (1) Market assets are market-related intangible asset potentials owned by enterprises, including various brands, customer trust, long-term customers, sales channels, and patent award contract agreements. (2) Intellectual property assets. (3) Human assets refer to group skills, creativity, ability to solve problems, leadership, and corporate management mechanisms. (4) Infrastructure assets refer to the technologies, working methods and procedures that enable enterprises to operate. ^[1]

Knowledge

General knowledge of a business

Knowledge

(A) knowledge is

(A) knowledge and knowledge

Knowledge AssetsWinning a Competitive Advantage in the Information Economy [Book Excerpt]

Max H Boysot: Professor of Strategic Management at ESADE Business School, Barcelona.

"Excerpt"

It took humans about two centuries to understand "energy as the basis of the economy". Does it take two centuries for the question of "knowledge as the foundation of the economy"? Drucker was more optimistic. He said in the 1950s that he hoped that a hundred years later (around 2050) a "epistemology" would be as great as "capitalism". We may wish to agree with Drucker's optimism, because from the perspective of common sense, knowledge is developing at an accelerated rate. Personally, I might as well make a more optimistic estimate. Based on the current research in this field and the current results of information technology and biotechnology, in the next 20 years, around 2030, human beings should "," Knowledge assets "and other" economic foundation "issues have achieved breakthrough and summary theoretical results, and people's large-scale practical results will be earlier than this time-practice is often ahead of theory. (In fact, if you play a word game, human scale knowledge has been practiced for thousands of years.)

If one-dimensional epistemology is adopted, maximizing knowledge growth or organizational learning is to carry out continuous experiments so that the organization can learn its environmental conditions, including how to meet customer needs and cope with competition. But there is an epistemological problem here-unless the knowledge of the environment description is irrelevant to the organization, this interaction cannot be analyzed. If the epistemology adopted is pluralistic, then the enterprise organization can still be regarded as a means to achieve knowledge growth, and the pluralistic epistemology has a greater explanatory power. In addition to the quasi-scientific knowledge recognized in the positivist tradition, it also includes empirical and practical knowledge of "organizational routines". Moreover, companies can be described as places where various types of knowledge interact. In Polanyi's terminology, in addition to external "impersonal" scientific knowledge, there is also "hidden" and "personal" knowledge. For example, tacit personal knowledge of creative entrepreneurship can be leveraged by setting up a business (building a system).

Boysott's plural epistemology is three-dimensional. It uses the three "features" of "abstractable," "codifiable," and "diffusible" as "knowledge assets" as a framework definition-"knowledge" is the "information" extracted from "data" A capability built on the foundation. (A more popular expression is that "knowledge" is operable "information.") Over time, knowledge assets generate a series of useful services that have potential economic value. However, unlike physical assets, knowledge assets can save themselves while sharing with others, and even if they give knowledge to others, they still have a copy. Like people often say, "thoughts can be transmitted like a tinder." However, although the sharing of knowledge assets does not reduce its utility to the original occupants, sharing reduces the (economic) value of the knowledge assets themselves, because knowledge loses scarcity due to sharing. This is the most important paradox of intellectual assets. People protect intellectual property through the patent system, but this is an increasingly fragile system, as knowledge often needs to "diffusion" (dissemination) to complete value. Moreover, usually "diffusion" smooth knowledge is fully "coded" and fully "abstract." (For example, our most common form of knowledge coding and abstraction is to make some kind of knowledge into a product, such as the knowledge about communication into a mobile phone product; for example, to transmit a person's name information than to describe the content of a picture Much simpler.)

Knowledge assets are built through the learning process. -In addition to disseminating knowledge, there are situations where new knowledge is created. -And learning is an ability to make the most of knowledge transfer ("diffusion") in an adaptive way. Much of the learning is derived from what we call the information environment (only metaphorically speaking, sorry), socially organized activities. Some environments encourage learning by sharing an individual's intellectual asset inventory, while some environments encourage learning by accumulating their own intellectual asset creation alone. Interestingly, the degree to which knowledge is structured ("coded") and shared ("diffused") can be used to define different cultures. For example, a culture of bureaucracy likes to operate with fully "coded", "abstract" and "explicit" knowledge. However, this culture is not accustomed to sharing it. Instead, it takes limited action to prevent its "proliferation." As early as the 18th century, Marx pointed out (correctly) that "all bureaucratic hierarchies are essentially the hierarchy of knowledge." On the contrary, in order to make the market more efficient, free market culture has shown a high degree of knowledge sharing. ("Spread"). Of course, market culture also requires a high degree of knowledge coding and abstraction in order to encourage sharing. The most typical example is the process of generating "price".