academicjournals
|
Vol.
7(20), pp.
2011-2019, 28 May,
2013
DOI: 10.5897/AJBM12.028
ISSN
1993-8233 © 2013 Academic Journals
|
|
African
Journal of Business Management
|
|
|
|
|
Article
The
optimal pattern modeling of knowledge management
systems establishment in public sector organizations: A case study in Tavanir
organization
Ghaffari Rahman1* and Ghaffari Somayyeh2
1University
of Tehran, Iran. 2Electricity
Distribution Corporate of Mazandaran State, Iran.
Accepted16
May, 2012
Today,
knowledge is seen as the main asset for major organizations and a resource to
achieve sustainable competitive advantage and in the developing business world,
the importance of knowledge management in organizations is increasing every day. The fact that many organizations neglect knowledge
management is because of their vague understanding of the concept that exists
in organizations. To overcome such a long-established challenge, it is
necessary to set forth the basic definition of
knowledge management, and an appropriate model should be presented which
includes the circumstances and characteristics of organizations. Since there
are many models which implement knowledge management in organizations. In this
paper, we try to provide an appropriate and domestic model
to exemplify the optimal pattern of knowledge management in public sector
organizations, especially those which are related to Tavanir organization. To
test this, our proposed model is measured through the distribution of a questionnaire with 89% Cronbach alpha among senior managers and
experts from Tavanir related organizations in Mozandaran province.
Key words: Social capital, knowledge management, knowledge management models,
optimum models.
INTRODUCTION
"Lester
Taro", the
famous economist, says: the basis for wealth foundation and economy today is
the knowledge and expertise. Taro is speaking about a revolution which has its
force roots in the brains and takes up its value from the minds. With the advent of the third industrial revolution, knowledge has changed into a
uniquely competitive advantage. Today, many fortune companies have special
projects in the area of knowledge management (KM), and in particular they try
to achieve their common goals and specific commercial objectives
(Bergern, 1386).
Now,
as for an economic investment it is essential to have a proper and modern
management, we need to have management for the optimal use and expedite
preparation, use and expansion of knowledge. Knowledge
management is a way which improves the development practices, sharing and using
knowledge in an environment and build values out of the produced knowledge. The
Aim of knowledge management is creating a system by which the proper knowledge
at a proper time and proper place is provided for
individuals.
Today, knowledge management has increasingly turned into a vital stage
for three reasons. First, in many organizations mental assets along with the
physical and financial properties has gained importance. Second, while the post- World War II generations are leaving the
organization, the fact is that a huge asset of knowledge that they possess will
be lost if there is no attempt to keep them. Finally, the third point is that a
good knowledge management system reduces unnecessary duplication of the work and increase organization efficiency (Robbins, 2009).
Knowledge processes (knowledge activities) can be considered as a
structured coordinator for the effective management of knowledge (Gold et al.,
2001). For example, knowledge processes include activities such as creating,
sharing, storing and using the knowledge. Since the knowledge
processes indicate the main knowledge functions, competencies provide necessary
infrastructure for the organization to enhance the effectiveness of knowledge
processes (Sarvey, 1999). Organizational performance is defined as the possible degree to which the corporate business achieves their goals
of business (Elenkov, 2003). This can be determined through organizational
learning, profitability or other obtained financial benefits by knowledge
management. Employees and managers' enthusiasm and interest will be lost
without assessing the success of knowledge management (McDermot and O'Dell,
2001).
The
type of leadership style and people management has undergone enormous changes
over time and over different periods of life and evolution
of human civilization. By the same token, we can mention the sources of power
for managers in the evolution of societies and social Darwinism. Table 1
completely illustrates the point.
At the hunting age despite having tribal war survival efforts, the most important source of power were tribal populations and hunting
areas. It should be noted that the clubbing style has been the most appropriate
management of primitive human and hunting age culture. At agricultural era,
the land was the most important strategic source for the man, so
the whipping style as to force people to work more and train them was
considered best management style. In the industrial age, due to the emergence
of a phenomenon called the Industrial Revolution, the owners of capital were considered the power source. But in the era that we live in which is
called the post- industrial age or information age, the most important source
of power for organizations and managers is knowledge management, and management
style and leadership also depends on their ability to
usefully process the information. Today, if organizations are to remain
sustainable in global competitions, they use knowledge as a crucial source in
order to appear successful against their rivals (Park, 2010).
Drucker (1998) believes that although, in past ages
a literate was a person who could read and write, literacy at information age
means someone who could effectively learn the provided information in an
environment and teach others. As it can be seen in the table the predictable age after the post-industrial age is the age of wisdom in which
the most skilled one is its strategic power, and the management style based on
spirituality and humanity is the top leadership of that era (Toffler, 1996).
Toffler
(1996) in his book "the Third Wave" states that in
the world today economic growth factor is not the investment, manpower or raw
materials, but rather new knowledge and ideas are causing economic prosperity
and countries property is the offspring function science and opinions.
In an era where many scholars and scientists have thought of nuclear
explosions and nuclear era, the era of knowledge explosion and information
transaction has occurred. So, maybe that is why some believe that every five
years and half the volume of knowledge will be doubled (the
knowledge explosion era) (Iranzadeh, 2006).
Organizations
in the new era should serve as a time machine to move from the past into the
future in an uninterrupted manner (Iran born, 1384).
Intangibles
are the most important thing that must be managed to reach success (Sabuie
et.al., 1997).
Knowledge management
The
Chambers dictionary (2000) defines knowledge in this way "fixed opinion,
something which is known, learned information, learning
science, practical skills, knowledge, understanding and so on".
Knowledge is a structured combination of data which is reached through
processes, rules, practices and experience. In other words, knowledge
is a concept which is emerged through thinking.
Knowledge is only born in the minds of people. Krechner (1997) who
compares the information and knowledge on "what is knowledge"
provides valuable explanations. He believes that the information processed by
the human brain becomes knowledge and gains values.
Therefore, knowledge includes processing, creating
or using the information in the people's brain. Corbin et al. (2007) also
believe that the difference between information and knowledge is the perception
degree and formulating the skills and experience in the two (information and
knowledge) (Corbin et al., 2007). Markuez (2001) has suggested that knowledge
itself is not considered the source of competition among organizations, but
this is the appropriate and correct use of them which serves as one
advantage (Sedra and Gable, 2010).
Some features of knowledge based on McDermot and O'Del (2001) and Ali
(1997) is provided here:
1)
Knowledge
is disordered and cluttered.
2) Knowledge is self-organizing.
3) The most important factor of knowledge transfer is
the language.
4)
Knowledge
is slippery like a fish.
5) Knowledge is multidimensional.
6) Knowledge is a social phenomenon.
7)
Providing
and distributing knowledge help its growth.
8)
Knowledge
is presented in different methods.
Knowledge
management and related strategic concepts have been considered as the important
components and elements for the survival of the organization and maintain its
competitive position (Martensson, 2000). Knowledge management is referred to
a process of gaining experience and intelligence in an organization and using
it for nurturing innovation through continuous learning. Knowledge management
is in fact a key to gain a competitive nuclear advantage in an organization (Wang and Xiao, 2009).
Knowledge management helps organizations to become
more flexible and also helps them to serve as learning environments (Yahya and
Goh, 2002).
Harvey and Denton provided reasons that show that knowledge management
is regarded as a competitive advantage in an
organization (Harvey and Denton, 1999).
1)
The
nature of the production factors has shifted from capital, labor force,
especially intellectual labor,
2)
Rapid
changes have occurred in the world of business,
3)
Wide
(overall) acceptance of the fact that knowledge has a competitive advantage,
4)
Increasing
managers and employees dissatisfaction of the traditional management concepts,
commanding and controlling management,
5) The highly competitive nature of global business,
6) Increased customer demand.
Knowledge management goals
Weick
(1993) believes that knowledge management can enable organizations to improve
their usual performance to a creative performance along with consciousness. The
purpose of knowledge management is to discover new perspectives on learning,
knowledge creation and development
of local and foreign competition through a deliberate approach in contemporary
world (Ford, 1996).
In
early 2000, the knowledge management motto, creation, dissemination and use of
knowledge and information of high quality to achieve individual
and organizational learning were discussed. Knowledge management is more than a
mere thinking about how to manage an organization; it is a strategic asset for
the organization. Figure 1 shows a conceptual model of this research.
Knowledge management enablers
A
variety of enablers of knowledge management are shown in knowledge management
literature. Among these cases, change management, organizational culture, structure, people and information technology (IT) are included in the
research model. Studies have shown that strengthening the competence of knowledge management systems improves the
overall knowledge management system (Sedra and Gable, 2010).
STRATEGIES AND APPROPRIATE CHANGE
MANAGEMENT
From
the late 1990s, knowledge management is considered as the major force of
organization change and value creation, as it is referred to as reforming
economy leading to large body of changes in the world (Liew,
2008).
Hubert Saint (1977) states that knowledge management
strategy provides a framework within which the organization has a goal setting
activities to leverage knowledge assets. Strategy also express the processes,
tools and infrastructure needed for knowledge to be effectively distributed (Chatzkel and Liebowitz, 2000). Knowledge management in any
organization requires the existence of a manager or an informed leader that is
influential in the organization. Organizational culture in which
"innovation" is seen as a dominant value of
knowledge management is a facilitating elements.
Knowledge strategies are divided into two categories of encryption and
personalization. Encryption strategy focuses on the combination of knowledge in
the organization to enable us to put the knowledge
into a coherent field and make it available to organizations' employee.
Such approach includes separating knowledge from its owners that is knowledge
should be effectively extracted and encoded. Personalization strategy
identifies the tacit dimensions of knowledge and assumes that knowledge
essentially is spread through informal communication in which sharing knowledge
will develop through interaction and dialogue from person to person (Desouza,
2002). Introduce knowledge management to organizations is a strategic issue; therefore, it requires infrastructure preparation and pre-planned strategy in the organization
(Liew,
2008).
Organizational
culture
Culture
is one of the most important factors for successful knowledge management.
Culture is not only defined as being "knowledge is valuable and
precious" but also defined as "knowledge should be kept within the
organization as the competitive advantage and
organizational innovation" (Lewin et al., 1997). Organizations must have
an appropriate culture, so that it can encourage the people to create and share
knowledge within the organization (Holsapple, 2001).
People do not refuse to share knowledge and are not
indifferent to the organization and are not afraid to share their knowledge
(Davenport and Prusak 1998). Researchers have shown that the type
and style of organizational culture (especially adhocracy culture in
organizations) will be very effective in supporting the implementation of
knowledge management processes (Jones, 2009).
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
The
structure of an organization can be both facilitative and debilitative for
knowledge management realization as Ichjio emphasizes that the company should maintain stability in their organizational structure to
protect and support their knowledge (Ichjio, 1998).
Human
resources (human capital)
Human
capital is one of the most important type of knowledge or intellectual assets
in the organization because these assets are the sources
of creativity. This type of tacit knowledge assets exist within the staffs of
an organization which is one of the most vital factors influencing the
performance of each organization. Human resources are the top factor in organizational knowledge creation and have the most vital role in
implementing knowledge management (Pouloudi, 2006). Therefore, it is very
important to manage those who are willing to create and share knowledge
(McDermot and O'Dell, 2001). Knowledge and competence
(jurisdiction) may be acquired through recruiting new people with new skills
(Stonehouse, 1999).
Human
capital represents the tacit learned knowledge in the minds and thoughts of
employees. Human capital is an important source of innovation and recreation in an organization and it (human capital) is defined as a
combination of employees' competencies, thinking and creativity.
Technology
Technology
helps to manage knowledge (Gold et al., 2001). Today, new technology in the
changing global information technology environment is the
IT (Vidogah and Moreton, 2009). IT means the degree to which knowledge
management through the use of IT is supported. Many researchers have found that
IT is the most determining factor in creating knowledge. IT affects the knowledge creation in different ways. Firstly, IT facilitates the
collection, storage and exchange of information on a scale that was
unattainable in the past and will endorse the process of knowledge creation.
Secondly, the developed technology will integrate
distinctive knowledge processes. This
integration can eliminate the barriers of communication between different
sections of an organization. Thirdly, IT supports all knowledge creation styles
and is not only restricted to the explicit (visible) knowledge transfer. In order to achieve the desired results, organizations
should not only have an appropriate IT infrastructure, but also must integrate
computer and human systems, network technologies and other organizational
arrangements so that they can effectively acquire, store and use
knowledge (Meso,
2000).
Knowledge management processes
A
number of studies have focused on the knowledge management
processes. They have separated knowledge management into several processes. For
example, Alavi and Leinder have identified four processes such as: creation,
storage, transfer and application of knowledge as knowledge management
processes (Alavi and Leinder, 2001). These processes (often but not always) are simultaneously placed
in a linear sequence (Beckman,1999).
Among these processes activities related to knowledge creation
(knowledge creation and construction) (Demarest, 1997) are important because
knowledge creation is a strategic weapon in the modern world; without creating
a permanent knowledge, the business will be doomed to failure. Knowledge
creation is a continuous process where individuals and groups within a company
and between companies share their explicit and
tacit knowledge (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). Knowledge creation is a dynamic
process of interaction between tacit and explicit
knowledge in different levels of organizations. Knowledge that has been created
can be transferred from a person to another person, or it can be stored at
individual, group, or organization level.
Nonaka
and Takeuchi (1995) argue that tacit and explicit knowledge
can complement each other and affect each other in the innovative activities of
individuals. Explicit knowledge refers to the employees' expertise and
knowledge that is visible and can be easily learned and transferred. But tacit knowledge refers to the intangible skills and
competencies of employees who normally seek knowledge and experience. A model
of knowledge creation process based on this critical
assumption is developed that human knowledge is created through social interaction between tacit and explicit knowledge in which the
interaction is referred to as conversion. It should be noted that such a
conversion does not happen inside people, but rather it occurs between them and
within an organization (Bijres, 1999). The interaction between
tacit and explicit knowledge (Nonaka and
Takeuchi,
1995) (Table 2).
Knowledge
management models
Different
models have been suggested for knowledge management by many researchers and
perhaps due to cultural differences and management, the model is not still
approved (Afrazeh, 2009), that is may be the biggest reason for the importance
of a domestic model which is culturally appropriate in any society. Different
models of Knowledge Management would be briefly outlined here.
Hessig model
Hessig model (2000) is composed of the following four processes.
Create:
That refers to ability to learn and communicate. Store: Through which an
organized storage capability that enables quick search of information, access
to information and effective sharing of knowledge is
provided. Spread: The process helps to develop a collective spirit in which
individuals work as partners to pursue common goals.
Use:
This process will develop the idea that creating new knowledge will be possible
through objective knowledge application.
Mark model (M. Mac Alrvy)
MacAlrvy
(2002) defined a new intellectual framework for knowledge management which is
called "knowledge life cycle ". He divided his process of knowledge
creation into two large processes namely knowledge production and knowledge
continuation.
Knowledge
production is process of creating new organizational knowledge which is
done through group learning, gaining knowledge and information and knowledge assessment. This process is synonymous with organizational
learning 2.
Knowledge continuation; this section is
accomplished through some activities that prescribe the distribution and
sharing knowledge which include special projects like knowledge distribution,
search, teaching, sharing and other social activities.
Seven "C" model
This
model is based on seven words beginning with letter «C»
which is given by the America Productivity and Quality Center. The component
along with descriptions of each model is given in Figure "2".
Nonaka and Takeuchi model
The
tacit and explicit knowledge concepts are classified by
Nonaka to design organizational learning theory. In his model, unlike previous
models, he focuses on two types of knowledge "implicit or tacit" and
"explicit" and their conversion to one another and also how they are
created on all organization levels. In this dynamic model, he expressed
how to use and convert these knowledge and
how
knowledge management is assumed to move in spiral manner
in both field according to Figure "3".
Knowledge management in government agencies
Perhaps
the last 15 years could be considered as the boom years of knowledge management
in the public sector. According to Fortune magazine
statistics in 2002, 90% of the world's top 500 companies have had formal
programs for knowledge management. But over the years government agencies were
lagging behind. According to the Organization Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) report published in 2003, the organization
should implement the principles and models of knowledge management based on the
following reasons.
1) Knowledge as being changed to the most important source of effective
activities and measures of the organization.
2) Government agencies authorship instead of ownership in the new era.
3) Globalization.
4) Private sector capabilities.
5) Citizens' knowledge increase.
6)
The
loss of experienced workforce in government
organizations (OECD, 2003, P, 5-12).
But
in recent years, various researches with the title of knowledge management have
been conducted in government agencies (Abtahi and Salavati, 1385). Recent
researchers' studies are represented in Table 3.
METHODOLOGY
The
current study aims at determining the empirical relationships in
the field of interaction between knowledge management components and thus trying to develop an appropriate pattern for domestic
implementation of knowledge management in government agencies. Consider applied
objectives and data collection the research is
descriptive and correlational. In order to determine the reliability of the
test, the Cronbach's alpha method was used. This method is used to calculate
the internal coordination of the various features of measuring tools.
For
this purpose, an initial sample including 30 questionnaires as pre-test was
prepared and then by using the obtained data from questionnaires and
statistical package for the social sciences
Human resources Information
technology Strategy___________
0.493
significant 0.378
significant
0.320
significant 0.032
not significant
0.419
significant 0.309
significant
0.240 significant
(SPSS)
statistical software, the correlation coefficient was calculated for the total
items using Cronbach alpha which was 89%.
The
populations of this study were the managers and experts from Tavanir
organization and related companies of Mozandaran province
and because the data in the study are of quantitative type, the Pearson
correlation was used to test the correlation.
RESULTS
AND DATA ANALYSIS
Implementation
of knowledge management systems over several years can create specific norms of
knowledge assets (including intangible assets or
intellectual property) in the organization (Lee et al., 2004). Our findings
also show that knowledge management capabilities are considered the key factor in the effectiveness of organizations. Effective
implementation of knowledge management system also
depends on the knowledge infrastructure capabilities (structure, culture and
technology) and capabilities in accurately implementing the knowledge
management processes in organizations (Anderson,
2009).
Conceptual model and research hypotheses
In
this conceptual model, culture, structure, information technology, human
resources and strategy are the independent (exogenous) variables and
knowledge creation variable is endogenous mediator variable and endogenous variable functions is (final variable). Model hypotheses
1) Culture has a direct, positive and significant effect on knowledge
creation.
2) Structure has a direct, positive and significant effect on knowledge
creation.
3) Human resources have a direct, positive and significant effect on
knowledge creation.
4) Information
technology has a direct, positive and
significant effect on knowledge creation.
significant effect on knowledge creation.
5) Strategy
has a direct, positive and significant effect on
knowledge creation.
knowledge creation.
The
model in standard estimation point is as follows. Model relational indices
indicated a poor match of the structural model (path analysis) that are due to
the degree of freedom compared to chi square which equals to 4.58 and greater
than the acceptable value of 3 and the root mean square
error of approximation (RMSEA) value is 0.08 but it can be improved by applying
some changes in the software.
Regarding the obtained significant values, the hypothesis regarding the
effect of culture, information technology, strategy and knowledge
creation is confirmed because the significant value is greater than 1.96 (Table
knowledge management in power distribution organization
of Mozandaran province is the organizational structure.
Fortunately,
the effect of changing management styles and strategic planning in Tavanir in
providing intelligent knowledge management system has been highly
influential.
As
the final suggestion, the Tavanir organization should maintain its long term
objectives and in order to achieve diversity and conservation law should
provide appropriate structure for dealing with environmental changes and responding to changes.
REFERENCES
Afrazeh A (2009). Knowledge Management; concepts, models, measurement
and implementation. Amir Kabir University publication. second edition. Tehran.
Winter, p. B6.
Alavi M, Leidner DE (2001). Review: Knowledge Management
and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues.
Manage. Infor. Syst. Quarter.
Ali V (1997). The Knowledge Evolution, Expanding Organization. Boston:
Buttler Worth-Heinemann.
Anderson KK (2009). Organizational Capabilities
as Predictors of Effective Knowledge Management: An Empirical Examination. A
Dissertation for Doctoral of Business Administration. School of Business and
Entrepreneurship Nova Southeastern University.
Chatzkel J, Liebowitz J (2000). Efficiencies from knowledge management
technologies in a military enterprise. J. Knowl. Manage.,
6(10):
S9-49.
Corbin R, Dunbar CB, Zhu Q (2007). A three-tier knowledge
management scheme
for software engineering
support and
innovation.
J. Syst. Software. B0(20): 1494-1S0S. Davenport TH,
Prusak L (199B).
Working Knowledge: How
Organizations
Manage What they Know. 1st edition. Boston (MA).
Harvard
Business School Press. Demarest M (1997). 'Understanding knowledge management.' Long
range
plan. S0(S):S74-SB4. Drucker PF (199B). The coming of the new organization. In
Harv. Bus.
Rev.
pp. 1-19. Boston, MA Elenkov DE (200S). Knowledge Management Enablers,
Processes, and
Organizational
Performance: An Integrative View and Empirical
Examination.
J. Manage. Inform.
Syst., 20(1): 1. Gold A, Malhotra A, Segars A (2001). Knowledge management: An
organizational
capabilities perspective, J. Manage. Inform. Syst.,
1B(1):
1BS-214
Holsapple
CW (2001). A formal knowledge management ontology:
Conduct,
activities, resources, and influences. J. Am. Soc. Inform. Sci.
Technol.,
SS( 7):
S9S-612. Hubert S (1977). Information Architecture and Knowledge
Management".
Kent
State University. Retrieved
18
April
2013. Iranzadeh
S (2006). Fourth Wave organization and management in
the
new
millennium. Ofogh-e-Danesh
Publication. Tabriz. Spring, p.84. Jones MB (2009). Organizational
Culture and Knowledge Management:
An
Empirical Investigation of U.S. Manufacturing Firms. A Dissertation
for
Doctoral of Business
Administration. School of Business and
Entrepreneurship
Nova Southeastern University. Lee KC, Sangjae L, Inwon K (2004). KMPI:
measuring knowledge
management
performance. Inform. Manage. 42(1):469-4B2. Lewin AY, Long CP, Timothy NC
(1997). The Coevolution of New
Organizational
Forms. Organ. Sci. Liew A
(2008).
Strategic Integration of Knowledge Management and
Customer
Relationship Management. Martensson M (2000). A critical review of
knowledge management as a
management
tool. J. Knowl. Manage.,
4(3): 204-216. McDermot
R, O'Dell C (2001). Overcoming Cultural Barrier to Shearing
Knowledge.
J. Knowl. Manage., 6(1):4S-S3.
Nonaka I, Takeuchi H (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company.
Oxford
University Press. Park B (2010). Knowledge transfer capacity of multinational
enterprises
and
technology acquisition in international joint ventures. Inter. Bus.
Rev.
41:38-46
Pouloudi MD (2006). Towards the development of a novel taxonomy of
knowledge management systems from a learning perspective, an integrated
approach to learning and knowledge infrastructures. J. Knowl. Manage., 10(6):
64-80.
Robbins PS (2009). Organizational Behavior. 13th edition.
Pearson international edition.
Sedra D, Gable GG (2010). Knowledge Management Competence for
Enterprise System Success. Journal of Strategic Information Systems. Australia.
Stonehouse GH (1999). Learning and knowledge management in the intelligent organization. Participation and Empowerment:
Int. J., 7(5):
131-144.
Sabuie K (1997). The New Organization Wealth: Managing and Measuring
Knowledge-Based Assets. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Toffler A (1996). Third Wave, translated by
Shahin dokht Kharazmi, Nashr-e-No publication, first edition 1362.
Vidogah R, Moreton R (2009). Improving Knowledge Management in the
Health Service: Re-Engineering Approach towards Successful Implementation.
Information Systems Development.
Wang J, Xiao J (2009). Knowledge management audit framework and
methodology based on processes. J. Technol. Manage.,
4(3): 239249.
Zack M, Mckeen J, Singh S (2009), ''Knowledge management and
organizational performance: an exploratory analysis''. J. Knowl.
Manage. 13(6):392-409.
