The scientific interest in knowledge management (KM) recently has increased rapidly. Hence a lot of different concepts and approaches emerged from this KM boom and finally led to a rather diffuse and scattered understanding of KM. Previous research studies show many different factors which influence the success of KM. The main interest so far was directed towards the influencing organisational factors. Individual factors like motivation, knowledge structure or job satisfaction have been largely neglected although they must be considered as crucial. In this paper it is argued that measuring success of KM has to take into account individual, as well as, organisational factors. In order to analyse the significance of individual influences on the organisational success of KM issues a research study combining qualitative and quantitative methods was conducted. A pilot study in 20 enterprises aimed to identify relevant individual and organisational factors influencing the KM success. The data was collected with half-standardised interviews. Results indicate that the discovered criteria show a high reliability and therefore can be used in a follow-up study. Individual factors like motivation, cognitive abilities in knowledge creation and the ability to transfer and externalise knowledge could be found. Business objectives, common concepts and a higher accountability of employees are reliable influencing factors on an organisational level.

Objectives

In the last years the concept of knowledge management (KM) has gained importance. This led to a rapid increase of interest in the KM research field. One scope in KM research is the success of KM. Success is an important aspect especially for organisations, but it is debatable what makes KM successful. Previous research studies dealt with organisational influence factors and neglected the individual ones. However the individual components seem to be crucial for the success of KM. This study analyses the effectiveness of individual influence factors on the success of organisational KM. The purpose is to draw consequences for improving individual KM especially for small and medium-sized enterprises. Therefore a pilot study is made to establish relevant influencing factors.

Theoretical framework

The concept KM has become more and more important both in practice and in research. Accordingly KM is mainly debated in the management practice and in academic research. Some researchers even see an explosion of interest in the concept of KM (Despres & Chauvel, 2000). Knowledge and the management of knowledge evolved in the last years into a crucial factor of production. Hence both are relevant for the success of an organisation. In the future it can be assumed that organisations will categorise themselves as knowledge-intensive.

To tackle this challenge they will have to implement KM in all departments of an organisation. Thus KM will increase in relevance in due course. But the growing interest in KM has not only positive consequence. On the one hand it leads to a large amount of different approaches and concepts, on the other hand it also contributes to a diffuse and scattered understanding of KM. Due to that it is very hard to deduce valid conclusions for a successful KM. The vital questions therefore are: How successful is the respective KM in the organisation? What are the factors influencing success? Previous research studies identified a lot of different factors, but they are not yet empirically tested. These studies mainly deal with organisational factors (Jashapara, 2005). The human component in KM has been largely neglected, although it certainly is an important aspect (Sharp, 2003). Knowledge is complex especially if it is defined as active and dynamic (Hildreth & Kimble, 2002). It includes experience, understanding, judgment, insight and also intuition (Veng Seng, Zannes, & Pace, 2002). Management of knowledge has to cope with all these different aspects of knowledge. KM therefore can be defined as the activity to accumulate, classify, search, distribute and apply knowledge on demand. Because of that especially, aspects of creating knowledge are vital criteria in KM and also relevant for the success of KM. In this paper it is argued that measuring the success of KM always has to take into account individual and organisational factors. The main reason for this assumption is that individual factors bear relevant subjective meanings for KM.

Research question

In order to analyse the individual influences on the success of organisational KM issues a pilot study is conducted. For analysing relevant success influencing factors the following research question was posed:

?         What are influencing factors – individual and organisational ones – of the KM success?

Methods

Sample

The subjects (n=20) were employees from (1) small and (2) medium-sized enterprises. Each were divided into two groups of different hierarchical level: (a) employees with an intensive access to KM (like knowledge workers, seniors or decision makers), and (b) employees who directly make use of KM tools.

Instruments

(1)   Integrative literature review and meta-analyse which aim to get a valid set of theoretical established influencing factors.

(2)   Half-standardised interviews were used (a) to verify the detected factors from the literature review, and (b) to explore more possible influencing factors. The field manual is deduced from the results of the literature review.

Measures

The organisational and individual criteria of KM were investigated in two steps. (1) 60 primary studies were reviewed by an integrative literature review and meta-analysis. (2) Based on the results of the integrative literature review a qualitative study was conducted. Half-standardised interviews were used for data collection. The interviewees had to mention individual and organisational influencing factors for KM. With a qualitative data analyse similar statements were combined to adequate influencing factors. The detected criteria should be used to develop a research instrument (questionnaire) for a follow-up study and therefore their reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) is analysed.

Results and conclusion

Different reliable criteria were found which influence the KM success. Beside motivation, central individual criteria are cognitive abilities and epistemic believes. Both had a high reliability. On the organisational level the theoretical established factors could be mainly verified. Facility equipment, management style or a peripheral organisation structure are crucial influencing factors. The results confirm that individual and organisational criteria must be included into an analyse of the KM success. The next step is to analyse the nature of the relation that consists between the individual and organisational criteria of KM.

References

Despres, C., & Chauvel, D. (2000). A thematic analysis of the thinking in knowledge management. In C. Despres & D. Chauvel (Eds.), Knowledge horizons: The present and the promise of knowledge management (pp. 55-86). Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Hildreth, P. M., & Kimble, C. (2002). The duality of knowledge. Information Research, 8, paper 142.

Jashapara, A. (2005). The emerging discourse of knowledge management: A new dawn for information science research? Journal of Information Science, 31, 136-148.

Sharp, D. (2003). Knowledge management today: Challenges and opportunities. Information Systems Management, 20, 32-37.

Veng Seng, C., Zannes, E., & Pace, R. W. (2002). To contributions of knowledge management to workplace learning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 14, 138-147.