Differences in workforce in the 20th and in the 21st century
In the 20th century all was about achievement of a finite goal and delivering goods and services to make money. In 21st century it is about the infinite goal of delighting the customers, though the organization is making money but as the consequence of the delight it creates for the customers and not as a goal.
The employees are being treated as the human resources who were being mined and exploited and discarded at any time necessary. This was very antipathetic to the innovation because any innovation risks destabilizing the simple, linear, finite world that has been created which has made the system to become an end to it. For entire of 20th century it worked well enough.
Why knowledge management is of more concern to the leader in 21st century
This is because the company has to satisfy the changing needs of the customer’s preference and tastes through innovation which can only be attained through knowledge management.
How succession planning impacts knowledge management
When there is succession planning it improves on the employee attraction and retention which ensures that there is continuity of leadership in the organization and to a lesser extend of contribution to the strategic direction.
Amid on, Debra M, (Jul/Aug 1996). The Challenge of Fifth Generation R&D. Research Technology Management.
Taylor and McGraw, (2004). Succession management practices in Australian organizations. International Journal of Manpower
This is the question to be answered
I do agree that there are distinct differences between the goals of the 20th and 21st Century organizations. About the question of why knowledge management is more of concern to 21st Century organizations, how do you see the uniqueness of the generations affecting organizations? Why would this be so important when focusing on the transfer of knowledge?