Introduction
Organizational Memory (OM) is part of collective memory researches related to active action which searches for augmentation of the organizational capital by helping organizations in using habitual practices and embedded information mutually to predict and solve problems. Organizational Memory entails the coding of information sieved through different forms of intellectual capital; structural, relational, and human. Putting these intellectual capital forms into the practice of remembrance produces four interrelated but different OM models. These include; storage bin model, narrative model, innovative model, and the political resource model.
OM as an intangible asset
Proper management of OM increases its potential of improving the economic value of a firm. Efficient management of information in the form of OM enhances a firm’s capability of learning and developing innovative products and services. Secondly, it enhances a firm’s ability to adapt and maintain greater stability during change thus lowering business costs and time required to bring in new members or reorient those who are changing positions. Intellectual capital can therefore be categorized into three forms; human, structural, and relation-intellectual capital. Human capital is the intangible asset resulting due to a firm’s ability to employ, retain, and promote intelligence well trained and entrusted persons. Structural capital is concerned with policy issues, standard operating procedures, job description, reporting structures, and their impact on a firm’s organizational culture when harmonized. Relational-intellectual capital is the nature and quality of inter-organizational and intra-organizational associations created by a firm in its environment. OM has four basic models: Storage bin, Narrative, Innovative, and Political resource.
The storage bin model
Storage bin addresses retrieval of information for future use and time embedded aspects of the OM. The main emphasis in this model is on the location and design of the collective memory. These lessen the retrieval duration of the required information, experience, and the quality of information missing, spoiled, and /or irretrievable from the storage.
The narrative model
The main emphasis here concerns modalities of motivating the retrieval and use of information and experiences in the OM. In contrast, there is no focus on retention as emphasized by storage bin models. The pertinent issues here involve retrieval of information and experiences using an interpretation of once stored information by current users. These issues improve understanding, elucidation, and learning to stem from the use, recovery, and information recontextualization in the OM. There is no prioritization of initial storage of information but a sequence of vibrant processes required for the creation and recreation of the firm’s change adaptation and learning process.
The innovative model
The model seeks to use information and experiences in the OM to predict problems, come up with creative solutions, and develop a collection of new information and experiences. The model develops intelligent capital by trying to incorporate OM into a firm’s effort at creative problem-solving. The innovative model introduces change which necessitates OM revision extension and amendment. These new ideas and innovativeness are used to deal with uncertainty and problems in a firm.
Political resource model
The model is based on power and authority bestowed upon an individual to control a firm thus gaining OM legitimacy. The main components of this model include the conferment of power, status, and privileges. Here, various translations of the past in an attempt to win the adoption by the management team. The source of intellectual capital arises from the managers’ ability to welcome new information and experiences, the stability of tenure of the leaders, and their interest in the OM.
Conclusion
In many instances, adverse result on intellectual capital has been recorded. This is blamed on OM as a memory level build and end-users motives. Models developed to enhance consistency have several weaknesses and uncommon agreement. The storage modelers hung on stability, reliability, and certainty in organizational memory to store and retrieve information. They see no association between power and memory but only believe in the rationality design of the model. They hold that power acquirers select what ought to be inserted into the firm’s remembrance for future reclamation. Its main weakness is the gathering of dust and therefore must be frequently used. The narrative model has been blamed on focusing on the short attention span of a changeable organizational culture. It cannot aid the conversion of possible innovation into strategy as it assumes a simple guarantee, assembled upon followers’ request; it overemphasizes function at the expense of specificity. They hold to the use of explanation and recontextualization as life breathing. The organizational politics and conflicts within firms serve as a problem solver to them. These followers are open-minded but do not embrace the best practices of others and are insufficiently engaged with a habit, immovability, and suspicious agendas. Political modelers are challenged on the basis of forfeiture and pushing self-perception, grounded in the culture of organizations. This model possesses simple postulations regarding intensity, ubiquity, and concern self behavior. Also, this model suffers from its limited focus on information and experiences accuracy backed by OM. Summarily; the intellectual capital arena is immensely complex due to reversals concerning the treatment of OM, the emergence of interesting recommendations, and descriptive application on changing intangible benefit to financial stipulations. Therefore, closer scrutiny of the OM models depicts a rethinking gap expected of intellectual students. The focus should be the determination of when which practice is most useful.