Indicators of knowledge management capability for KM effectiveness
| Published date | 18 May 2010 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/03055721011050677 |
| Pages | 183-203 |
| Date | 18 May 2010 |
| Author | Somnuk Aujirapongpan,Pakpachong Vadhanasindhu,Achara Chandrachai,Pracob Cooparat |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management |
Indicators of knowledge
management capability for KM
effectiveness
Somnuk Aujirapongpan
Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand
Pakpachong Vadhanasindhu
Faculty of Commerce and Accountancy, Chulalongkorn University,
Bangkok, Thailand
Achara Chandrachai
Faculty of Commerce and Accountancy and
CHULA UNISEARCH, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand, and
Pracob Cooparat
SpringBoard for Asia Foundation, Bangkok, Thailand
Abstract
Purpose – This purpose of this paper is to synthesize and propose the indicators of knowledge
management capability (KMC) in different knowledge management (KM) processes to assess KM
effectiveness. It also intends to provide useful indicators for those who are interested in the study of
KMC to create effective KM, who can utilize the aforementioned indicators as guidelines in the
development of empirical definitions by testing them.
Design/methodology/approach – This paper is a literature review research, through which
indicators of KMC for KM effectiveness are synthesized, utilizing related documents, literature and
other research studies and the characteristics of which are evaluated by the KM experts as specified in
qualitative research.
Findings – The results of the research suggest two main aspects of KMC for KM effectiveness: first,
a resource-based perspective, which comprises technology, structure and culture; and second,
a knowledge-based perspective, which comprises expertise, learning and information. It is suggested
that there are 84 indicators in KMC for KM effectiveness, which can be divided into: 22 indicators on
KMC-knowledge acquisition; 21 indicators on KMC-knowledge creation; 19 indicators on
KMC-knowledge storage; and 22 indicators on KMC-knowledge application.
Originality/value – Apparently the existing research concerning KMC does not reveal clear
conclusions nor designate indicators of KMC in both aspects: resource-based perspective and
knowledge-based perspective. The consequence is a lack of direction and precision in developing KMC
to achieve its effectiveness. This paper therefore provides clear visions on important aspects of KMC
whereby the various indicators of their components need to be developed to enrich the concept and
further the development of KM. It also provides future researchers with useful means to assess the KM
effectiveness in different KM processes.
Keywords Knowledge management, Knowledge processes,Quality indicators
Paper type Literature review
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0305-5728.htm
This research is supported by Chulalongkorn University 90th Anniversary Fund.
Indicators of
KMC for
KM effectiveness
183
Received 6 August 2009
Revised 20 October 2009
Accepted 11 March 2010
VINE: The journal of information and
knowledge management systems
Vol. 40 No. 2, 2010
pp. 183-203
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0305-5728
DOI 10.1108/03055721011050677
Introduction
In the age of knowledge-based economy, its economy depends on the creation,
distribution and application of knowledge as the main drivers to create growth and
security for the organization, and its survival needs the transformation of the strategy
of the business from scale-based competition to speed-based competition by creating
competitive advantage utilizing knowledge, skill, experience and technology.
Therefore knowledge is vital and is power in any endeavor to attain success.
Activities thus need related knowledge which may be constructed by the practitioners
or imported from outside, as well as the application of the knowledge which may be
inherent in people and is clear-cut to be integrative and specific to the context of the
work of the practitioners, the agencies or the organizations (Petrash, 2001). Hence, the
knowledge used to achieve the objectives needs a process or a procedure in systematic
knowledge management (KM). Since 1990, KM is no longer merely a science of
organizational management, with the emphasis on technological and networking
applications, but a new scienceto which the world‘s leading organizations have given
utmost importance and continually provided increasingly efficient KM development
processes, in order to empower practitioners, including the increase in productivity and
organizational innovations (Carneiro, 2002; Cardinal et al., 2001; Darroch and
MaNaughton, 2002; Pyka, 2002; Adams and Lamont, 2003; Shani et al., 2003).
For KM to be successful and effective for the organizations, it is necessary to
consider the important principles, which, from the literature reviews of Wiig (1993);
Marquarde(1996); Beckman (1997); Davenport and Prusak(1998); O’Dell and Grayson
(1998) and Wild and Griggs (2008), can be formed into five main principles, as follows:
(1) The organizations and all of their personnel must realize the importance and
value of KM: knowing and understanding how KM is useful and is capable of
helping the organizations and the personnel. These are the important roles of
the administrators of the organizations whose leadership is in KM, including
setting the visions and clear strategy in utilizing KM to develop the
organizations.
(2) KM must be the combination of man and technology since successful KM does
not depend on mere technology but needs knowledgeable men with
commitment, and determination to learn, in order to bring knowledge to
develop and resolve problems in their work. It also needs the capability of
technology in creating convenience and supporting the accessibility in
knowledge acquisition from within and outside the organizations, including the
storage, dissemination of and application of knowledge to the organizations to
enable KM to attain its purposes.
(3) Creation of a learning culture, exchanging and sharing of knowledge are
important since they will affect the creation of new knowledge for the per sonnel
and the organizations. The administrators of the organizations must realize the
value of their personnel and emphasize the motivation and promotion of
knowledge exchanges and sharing through various activities, i.e. seminars,
group activities and team work, which need continual and constant
undertaking.
(4) KM is a continuous and serious process: it is not a project nor does it have an
ending period. Therefore, the organizational structuring, working procedures
VINE
40,2
184
To continue reading
Request your trial