Importance and characteristic of knowledge work
The term "knowledge society" did replace the term "information society". But what is knowledge work? One thing is clear: Not every processing of information is knowledge work. Knowledge work isn’t synonymous with research and development and it cannot only be found in top-management positions
Therefore it is reasonable to limit the term "knowledge work" in order to examine the importance and requirements of knowledge work.
Definition and differentation
- Thomas Davenport, Principal of the Babson College in Wellesley, Massachusetts, USA, describes knowledge work as follows: “To create, allocate or apply knowledge is not only the mission of scientists but also the heart of their work. Or to put it another way: thinking for a living.”
- James M. Manyika, Partner at McKinsey, Silicon Valley, USA, further limits the definition and emphasizes the importance of complex practical knowledge ("tacit knowledge") in terms of knowledge work, whereas routine work mainly serves for the processing of knowledge ("transactional labour").
- The Fraunhofer-Institute for Industrial Engineering (IAO), Stuttgart, followed this approach and characterizes knowledge work by three attributes: "novelty" (content-related novelty; the necessity to refresh and expand knowledge; and changes of general conditions), "complexity" of tasks (diversity, severity, responsibility of necessary communication) and "autonomy" of workplace design (in terms of work content, workplace and working time). (Also see forms of knowledge work)
All three definitions distinguish between knowledge work and simple processing of knowledge, which leads to a separation of work in three main groups: "raw-material processing and producing work", "routine and data processing work" and "knowledge work".
Characteristics of knowledge work
Characteristics and experiences as well as the ability to creatively use that knowledge are basic requirements for proper knowledge work.
Hence knowledge work is always "mental work". It is a mixture of individual knowledge and communication. In most cases the actual process of knowledge work remains furtive (also see the term 'tacit work').
The results of knowledge work are seldom quantifiable. In fact the success of knowledge work mainly appears with delay as part of figures and events, which are hard to assign to individual persons or activities.
In 2005 McKinsey already stated that an increase in efficiency of knowledge work is more difficult to obtain than increases in production efficiency or reproductive work. Nonproductive knowledge workers can be a critical cost disadvantage for companies concerned, said the American experts. On the contrary, knowledge work offers a lot of opportunities and competitive advantages to innovative companies.
Importance of knowledge work
The importance of knowledge work in highly developed economies is steadily increasing. Reasons for this are
- the shift of production and routine work (like administration, call center etc.) to external service provider, respectively the shift to countries with lower wages,
- the rationalizing of routine work by the usage of IT and the shift of some work to the customer (e.g. entering data at online-orders).
In 2006 already 41 per cent of all employees in the USA were "knowledge workers". Just 15 per cent of American employees are working in the "raw-material processing and producing" sector, and 44 per cent are working in the "routine and data processing" sector mainly at administrations, health service or as service staff.
This shift to more knowledge work happens slowly, but steadily. It is clearly recognizable when one look at the allocation of newly created job positions. Between 1998 and 2004, 70 per cent of all newly created jobs in the USA have been "knowledge work" jobs and only 30 per cent have been jobs in the "routine and data processing" sector.
In Germany, however, the share of "knowledge work" was only 37 per cent in 2006. In the "raw-material processing and producing" sector worked 25 per cent of all employees and in the "routine and data processing" sector the share was 38 per cent. Yet here too, the different forms of knowledge work become more and more important.
Source: Bureau of Labour Statistics, Washington, USA – quoted in McKinsey Quarterly 2005 No. 4 and Fraunhofer IAO
Hybrid forms of knowledge and routine work
The passages between routine work and knowledge work are fluent.
- Even knowledge workers in the top-management or within the R&D department have to do routine work – and may it only be the completion of forms or a claim for travel expenses.
- On the other side can and must persons, who process information in routine work, be "creative" to handle occasional "special cases" or to efficiently organize their work.
In the above quoted polls of the Bureau of Labour Statistics the assignment of "knowledge work" and "routine and data processing work" was done by typical working tasks of single professional groups. A certain blur of the differentiation and the included date is yet inevitably.
Forms of knowledge work
Even though the differentiation of knowledge and routine work is not always easy, it is reasonable to further distinguish different types of workers within the group of knowledge workers. Employees, who often deal with new and complex tasks and who make independent decisions, need more scope for developments and a different working environment than employees whose tasks are complex as well but often similar and who are limited in their decision making possibilities.
The Fraunhofer IAO differentiates between four types of knowledge work, which are briefly described below:
- Type A: Experience and knowledge are important for this group. Within the group of knowledge workers however, the requirements in terms of novelty and complexity are relatively low. Also the degree of autonomy is limited or at least only existing at an average level. That type of knowledge work contains obvious characteristics of routine and data processing work.
- Type B: This group includes people, whose tasks are outstanding complex and who have a high degree of autonomy in terms of organizing their work. They need a lot of knowledge and experience. The degree of novelty – compared to other forms of knowledge work – is average.
- Type C: The working tasks of this type are characterized by above-average complexity and an outstanding degree of novelty. The difficulty level is high and a lot of knowledge and experience is required. As a result of those circumstances their scope to design and organize their work (autonomy) is limited. Typical representatives of this group are employees in laboratories or other research institutions.
- Type D: This group is characterized by people, whose tasks are extremely complex and have a high degree of novelty. The tasks organize these people almost completely autonomous. High standards are set in terms of knowledge and experience. Typical examples for this type of knowledge workers are consultants or scientists.
Source: Dieter Spath (Ed.), Jörg Kelter, Stefan Rief, Wilhelm Bauer, Udo-Ernst Haner, OFFICE21®-STUDIE, INFORMATION WORK 2009, Potentials of information and communication technologies in office and knowledge work, Fraunhofer IAO, Stuttgart
