What is happening in the field of knowledge-intensive work and professional services? Why do\ud
knowledge workers have to work harder to prove their added value and significance on the basis\ud
of the knowledge they hold?\ud
Due to globalization and explosive growth in the use of information technology and media, professional\ud
and complex knowledge is becoming increasingly rapidly and widely available (Stewart,\ud
1997; Davenport and Prusak, 2000; Teece, 2000). As a consequence, not only is competition\ud
between knowledge firms increasing, but, even more important, knowledge gaps between clients\ud
and specialists are being greatly reduced. It is getting harder and harder for knowledge firms and\ud
their workers to prove their surplus value (Dougherty 2000). Time-life-cycles of knowledge and\ud
knowledge-related products and services are decreasing (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995; Weggeman,\ud
1997). While this may be a danger in itself to all sorts of firms (Schilling and Hill, 1998),\ud
the danger of losing added value in terms of applied knowledge is even greater for knowledgeintensive\ud
service firms (KISFs), as the core product of these firms lies in the production and\ud
transfer of this knowledge (Coombs, 1999). Losing the added value of knowledge 'offered' to\ud
clients for KISFs means losing competitive advantage in terms of their core product. In order to\ud
retain their competitive advantage, KISFs have to replace the value of possessing knowledge by\ud
the value of innovation and movement (Dougherty, 2000). Core-competences of professionals\ud
and knowledge workers will have to change from the ability to acquire and highly effectively,\ud
apply knowledge into 'the ability to assimilate new ideas and to transfer those ideas to action\ud
faster than a competitor' (Ulrich et al., 1993). KISFs will have to start to develop innovative capabilities\ud
(Dodgson, 1993; Teece and Pissano, 1994)