Original Source

Extract of article...

Australian Journal of Information Systems
Special Edition (Knowledge Management) December 2001
..
EXPLORING KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PERCEPTIONS
AMONG INFORMATION SYSTEMS MANAGERS
EMPIRICAL SENSE-MAKING THROUGH FOCUS GROUP RESEARCH

David Yuh Foong LAW
Department of Decision Sciences
Business School,
National University of Singapore
c/o: CMIT, FBA 2, Basement, Business Link, Singapore 117591
davidlaw@bigfoot.com

..
Joo Eng LEE-PARTRIDGE
Department of Decision Sciences
Business School, National University of Singapore
FBA 1, 15 Law Link, Singapore 117591
; jooeng@bigfoot.com


Abstract
..
Despite the increasing knowledge management (KM) awareness and interest among academia and industry, a verydiverse range of views and perceptions still exists. There is a need to appreciate the issues and concerns surroundingKM research and implementation among communities of researchers and practitioners. Our research aims to provide adeeper empirical insight of practitioners in terms of the general level of awareness, the state of practice, and industrial perceptions on KM issues in the context of a growing knowledge-based economy such as Singapore. We chose to explore this topic from an information systems (IS) management perspective, by exploring the levels of KM understanding, the issues of concerns and requirements by chief information officers (CIOs) and senior IS managers, and how they make sense of KM. Sense-making approach through focus group research is the primary methodologyused. Using social cognitive research techniques such as frames of reference, the participants' perceptions aresummarised and presented broadly along the following themes: conceptual awareness of knowledge/KM; facilitators and inhibitors of KM; usefulness and value of KM; KM mechanisms and implementation approaches; factors influencing knowledge sharing, acquisition and capture; effectiveness of KM technologies; and the prerequisites of a KM practitioner. Our findings are discussed in the light of their implications to IS management practice in organisations. The findings also raises new research questions in IS and KM


..
Introduction

Overview, Motivation and Objectives In the context of Singapore, a small nation whose main resource is human skills and knowledge, it needs to transform into a knowledge-based economy in order to survive and compete economically. The ability and need to effectively exploit the intellectual resources within and around a business domain have thus become a major challenge for knowledge-intensive organisations. Knowledge management (KM) technologies and practices will play a major role in supporting knowledge work and related processes.
..
KM is an emerging area of focus where researchers and practitioners of varied background and disciplines approach it from diverse angles and perspectives. From the KM literature, there is no lack of explicit guidelines and approaches developed for KM implementation. Liebowitz ed. (1999) compiled a comprehensive overview of these generic concepts and practical guidelines. KM, given its multidisciplinary and cross-functional nature, as well as its ambiguous definitions and boundaries, its theoretical foundation has not been stabilised, and it has manifested its own cloud of confusion. As KM is an emerging and evolving field, it remains a new an elusive concept to many organisations. Practitioners have encountered difficulties and uncertainties in the adoption and implementation of KM despite their attempts to follow some of the prescribed approaches and guidelines religiously. Some of these difficulties are attributed to specific social, organisational and contextual factors, while others could be due to the mis-conceptualisation of the actual KM problem which results in the deployment of an inappropriate KM solution. Therefore, despite the increasing volume of publications generated on the subject, the practical know-how commonly recommended by consulting firms and the increasing KM awareness and interest in Singapore, a certain degree of ambiguity still exists. It is still generally unclear how an organisation initiates and implements KM projects and exactly how KM can be applied or contribute to business growth and developments. The current lack of both a well-defined view of the subject and empirical insights have motivated this study of KM-related issues in Singapore.
..
The primary objective of our research is to carry out a preliminary qualitative assessment of the general level of awareness, the state of practice, and industrial perceptions on KM issues in Singapore. At this juncture, our research does not aim to discover new KM theories or models and attempting to insert them into theory in literature. Instead our contribution focuses on the construction of social cognitive profiles of practitioners as part of our attempt to understand related industry sentiments and practical issues, even as the practitioners are struggling to make sense of KM concepts themselves. We have chosen to explore this topic from an information systems (IS) perspective. As IS is a key factor behind organisational management and business innovation in Singapore, IS management plays a crucial role in supporting and augmenting business managerial decision-making through the establishment of efficient IS infrastructures. In the context of KM adoption and implementation in organisations, IS managers today face a new set of challenges. These include the need to understand the organisations' business and users' KM needs; aligning the organisations' IS plans to meet these needs; keeping abreast of new and emerging technologies and identifying suitable technologies for KM; and the subsequent task to champion these technologies for their eventual adoption and acceptance in organisations. We surmise that IS managers will play a very important role in supporting new KM initiatives and overseeing IS-based KM implementations. Such considerations have motivated our decision to commence our research on KM issues and perceptions with IS professionals.
..
The study was carried out with a number of chief information officers (CIOs) and senior IS executives from various institutions and organisations based in Singapore. Focus group research was used as an effective method for collecting rich and broad-based qualitative data, and the approach is flexible and appropriate for the study of emerging trends and issues. Such a group setting was also ideal for peer interaction, sharing and exchange of opinions and perceptions. In particular from a sense-making perspective, focus groups are extremely useful mechanisms for exploring fuzzy empirical KM issues and to assess the levels of KM understanding among CIOs and senior IS managers. A series of focus group sessions were conducted and the results were extracted and broadly categorised.
..
This paper presents the collective views and perceptions on KM from an IS practitioner perspective. Using social cognitive structures such as frames of references, the results are broadly framed in categories, such as: awareness and concept of knowledge/KM; facilitators and inhibitors of KM; usefulness and value of KM; KM mechanisms and implementation approaches; factors influencing knowledge sharing, acquisition and capture; effectiveness of KM technologies; and the requirements and qualifications of a KM practitioner. Itincludes an analysis and discussion of these empirical results, and their implications for KM, with a view to facilitate the management, development and deployment of IS-based information and decision support systems as strategic KM enablers in organisations.


..
Page 7...
..
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

The data summarised and presented in the above section serves as a basis for deeper reflection and sense-making from an interpretative and critical perspective, in the empirical context of the participants' backgrounds and work domains. In the following section, theoretical frameworks (figures 1-7) and their corresponding propositions are further induced which are grounded based on the empirical data collected from the focus groups.
..
Analysis of Focus Group Results

Issues surfaced from the focus group discussions generally fall into two main streams. Natural Knowledge Management (NKM) issues generally covers human-centred, non-technical, KM issues and solutions at the individual or organisational level. Artificial Knowledge Management (AKM) issues are usually associated with technical or technology-based KM issues and solutions.
..
Conceptualising Knowledge and Knowledge Management
..
From the data, discussion topics under this category mainly revolved around NKM issues. The literature has diverse views on the concept of knowledge and KM as these concepts are explored from different angles. For instance, according to Awad (1996), knowledge can be classified according to its nature and form, its source, the way it is used, and its purpose and relevance. Foray and Lundvall (1996) propose four different types of knowledge based on their contexts and usage: know-what; know-why; know-how; and know-who. Polanyi (1966) distinguishes between two aspects of knowledge: tacit and explicit knowledge. From a knowledge flow and conversion perspective, Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) postulate four inter-connected, spiralling modes of knowledge conversion based on the assumption that knowledge is created through the interaction between tacit and explicit knowledge. These are socialisation (tacit knowledge sharing between individuals), externalisation (articulating tacit knowledge into explicit concepts), combination (integrating different explicit sources into newexplicit knowledge base) and internalisation (embodying explicit knowledge into tacit forms through organisational practices).
..
Generally, focus group participants were unable to make a clear distinction between information and knowledge, in terms of form and structure. However, attempts have been made to differentiate these two concepts based on their levels of content summary, the manner in which it is internalised within a person, and the contexts of their applications. Comprehension of the concept of tacit and explicit forms of knowledge, as proposed by Polanyi (1966), was also demonstrated, although the process of the flow and inter-conversion of knowledge were not well understood. Some attempts have been made to explore the different types of knowledge such as know-what, know-how, know-why and know-who, as mentioned by Foray and Lundvall (1996). The participants also appeared to have a better grasp of the concept and procedures of KM than the more abstract concept of what is or is not "knowledge" and "information". This is not surprising since KM maybe regarded as a process with various types of activities associated with it such as knowledge capture, sharing, storage, distribution, etc., which could be easily conceptualised and broken down into more tangible sub-processes and components. Existing Organisational Structures and Practices NKM issues were mainly discussed along this thread of topics. Currently, according to the focus group participants, most organisations have yet to formulate or adopt a formal KM agenda, despite the growingawareness and interest in KM. Having a team of KM practitioners and the right organisational culture are considered the two most important factors that drive KM. Existing organisational practices such as staff suggestion schemes, discussion sessions, human resource functions (rewards, appraisals, defining new KMroles and responsibilities) to facilitate and motivate knowledge sharing; managing business operations in line with quality management practice requirements; increased interest and support from the CEO and top management; all of which could be ideal foundations for creating a conducive KM culture and for the development of a good organisational NKM strategy. Some of these issues are commonly elaborated by authors in KM practice-oriented literature (eg. Liebowitz ed. 1999; Cortada and Woods eds 1999).