Affiliation:
1. Saint Petersburg University
Abstract
The purpose of the study.In the economy of the 21st century, knowledge is the main source of obtaining sustainable competitive advantages of enterprises, and knowledge management (KM) is the main mechanism for ensuring and maintaining it. People and knowledge they possess, know-how, ability to innovate, trust relationships with customers and partners, and other intangible assets are becoming the most important sources of development for an organization. KM is traditionally carried out with the help of the following components: information technology, organizational processes and structures, corporate culture and people. In addition, there are complex tools of KM, which usually combine several KM components: a library of documents (knowledge base, corporate memory), communities of practice, lessons learned, etc. The purpose of this study is to illustrate the application of KM practices in companies in the oil industry of the Russian Federation.Materials and methods.This article used the analysis of secondary data sources, and also reviewed in detail two cases, describing KM in the activities of oil companies in Russia. In order to understand at what stage is the development of the knowledge management system (KMS) in oil companies of Russia it’s necessary to compare the use of KM tools in foreign and domestic practice, this paper is based on information, provided in open sources. Observations are formed and the most prominent examples of the use of KM tools are indicated.Results.The article provides an overview of KM tools, examples of their use in the oil and gas industries, and also examined the domestic practice of their use, based on cases of Russian oil companies. Examples of the use of KM tools, based on technologies and employees in foreign and Russian oil companies are pre-sented. On the example of cases of two well-known Russian oil companies, the stages of formation and de-velopment of knowledge management system in a company were considered, specific practices of KM, which appeared in companies at the respective stages of KMS development, were presented, as well as fea-tures of KM in each company.Conclusion.For a number of reasons, oil companies are advocates of the proactive use of KM systems. In the course of the analysis, the trends of KM in the oil sector of the Russian economy were identified: com-plexity of use, poor acceptance of innovations, not related to production/technological processes, the begin-ning of the emergence of a policy of active knowledge sharing, a move towards creating a flexible KM sys-tem. This article will draw the attention of Russian managers to the issue of knowledge management and other intangible assets and identify management practices that will help Russian companies to successfully develop and compete, based on their intellectual capital. The article will also be of interest for specialists in knowledge management and practitioners from related fields.
Publisher
Plekhanov Russian University of Economics (PRUE)
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Environmental Science
Reference28 articles.
1. Bair J.H. The state of the product in knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge Management. 1998; 2(2): 20–27.
2. Marwick A. D. Knowledge management technology. IBM systems journal. 2001; 40(4): 814830.
3. Maier R., Hädrich T., Peinl R. Enterprise knowledge infrastructures. Springer Science & Business Media; 2009.
4. Gavrilova T.A., Kudryavtsev D.V. Glava 25 Informatsionnyye tekhnologii upravleniya znaniyami = Chapter 25 Information technologies of knowledge management. In: Monografiya «Innovatsionnoye razvitiye: ekonomika, intellektual’noye razvitiye, upravleniye znaniyami» ed. Mil’nera B. Z. = Monograph “Innovative development: economics, intellectual development, knowledge management” ed. Milnera B. Z. Moscow: Infra-M; 2009. [Internet] Available from: http://bigc.ru/publications/bigspb/km/itkm/ (cited: 08.04.2018) (In Russ.)
5. King W.R. Integrating knowledge management into IS strategy. Information Systems Management. 1999; 3: 70–72.