Docstoc

Scenario-Based Hypermedia Design

Document Sample
Scenario-Based Hypermedia Design Powered By Docstoc
					Knowledge Management Enablers, Processes, and
          Organizational Performance:
   An Integration and Empirical Examination

                    May. 24, 2002

        Advisor Professor: Heeseok Lee
      Doctoral Candidate: Byounggu Choi

                Graduate School of Management
       Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology
                   지적사항 및 개선사항

            지적사항                          수정내용
                       • 기존 연구의 장단점 비교
• 기존 연구와의 차별성
                       • Chapter 2 (2.2 Synthesis of previous studies)

                       • 연구 모형의 이론적 배경
• 연구 모형의 이론적 근거
                       • Chapter 3 (3.1 Theoretical Background)

                       • 1기업의 다수의 중간관리자
• 표본의 대표성
                       • Chapter 5 (5.1 Sample and Data Collection)

                       • 이론 및 실무적 함의
• 결과의 함의               • Chapter 5 & 6
                        (5.7 & 6.6 Findings and Implications)

                       • 지식경영 전략과 지식경영 프로세스
• 지식경영 전략의 중요성
                       • Chapter 6

                       • Case study
• 기업 현상 관찰의 필요성
                       • Chapter 6 (6.5 Case Study)
                                                                          Doctoral Dissertation


                           Table of Contents
    I. Introduction                  V. Survey Results
        1.1 Research Background            5.1   Sample and Data Collection
        1.2 Research Objectives            5.2   Sample Characteristics
            and Questions                  5.3   Reliability and Validity Test
        1.3 Research Procedure             5.4   Analysis Results
        1.4 Significance of the Research   5.5   Findings and Implications

    II. Literature Review            VI. Research Extensions
        2.1 Knowledge and                  6.1   Extensions Background
            Knowledge Management           6.2   Extended Research Framework
        2.2 Empirical Study of             6.3   Sample and Measures
            Knowledge Management           6.4   Results
                                           6.5   Case Study
                                           6.6   Findings and Implications
    III. A Research Model
        3.1 Theoretical Background
        3.2 Variables
        3.3 Hypothesis               VII. Conclusion
                                           7.1   Summary of the Research
    IV. Research Methodology               7.2   Contributions of the Research
        4.1 Survey Methodology             7.3   Limitations of the Research
        4.2 Measurement Development        7.4   Directions of Future Research
KAIST                                                                                 CISers
                                                                                        Doctoral Dissertation


    Research Background                                                           I. Introduction



         KM has become a frequently discussed in academics
           • Knowledge (Davenport and Prusak, 1998; Nonaka, 1994)
           • Knowledge Processes (Grover and Davenport, 2001; Lee and Kim, 2001; Lee, 1999)
           • Intellectual Capital (Han et al., 2000; Roos and Roos, 1997; Sveiby, 1997)
           • KM Framework (Alavi, 1997; Choo, 1998; Demarest, 1997; Lee and Kim, 2001)



         KM still remains a hazy to most people                    (Junnarkar, 1997)

         Empirical Study on knowledge management
           • Relationships among knowledge management components
           • Integrative perspective
           • Process-oriented perspective

         Knowledge management strategies
           • Which knowledge is unique or valuable (Han et al., 2000)
           • How knowledge supports firm’s market positions (Grant, 1999; Teece, 2001)
           • KM strategy and knowledge management processes
KAIST                                                                                               CISers
                                                                            Doctoral Dissertation


    Research Objectives and Questions                                  I. Introduction




         Integrative view of knowledge management
           • Relationships among knowledge management components

           • Process-oriented knowledge management perspective

           • Relationship between KM strategies and KM processes




         Specific research questions
           • Components of the knowledge management

           • Relationship between enablers and KM processes

           • Relationship between KM processes and organizational Performance

           • Relationship between KM strategies and KM processes


KAIST                                                                                   CISers
                                                                                                           Doctoral Dissertation


    Research Procedure                                                                               I. Introduction


            Key Concepts                         Research Procedure                 Key Concepts

 •Conceptual relationships                               Research
  among KM components
                                                         Objective

 •KM strategy study
 •KM enablers study
                                                         Literature
 •KM creation study
 •Organizational performance study                        Review

 •System thinking theory
 •Knowledge-chain model                                                       •Organizational change model
 •Social capital theory                       Theoretical        Framework    •Strategy contingency model
 •Input-process-output model                  Framework           Extension
 •Socio-technical theory


 •Validated measures                          Measurement       Measurement   •Validated measures by previous studies
 •Total design method                         Development        Extension    •Total design method



 •Field survey (probability sampling)                                         •Field survey (probability sampling)
 •Reliability and validity test                                   Survey &
                                                Survey                        •Reliability and validity test
 •Interrater reliability and agreement test                      Case Study   •Interrater reliability and agreement test
 •Multiple regression analysis                                                •Clustering analysis
                                                                              •Case study
 •Statistical results                          Research           Extension   •Statistical results
                                                Results            Results


 •Implications                                            Research            •Implications
 •Research directions in KM                               Findings            •Research directions in KM
KAIST                                                                                                                  CISers
                                                                                  Doctoral Dissertation


    Significance of the Research                                            I. Introduction




         For academics
            • Provide integrative research model for empirical study

            • Consider process-oriented knowledge management perspective

            • Provide dynamic model




         For practitioners
            • Provide basic guidelines for knowledge management

            • Find which enablers are critical for knowledge creation processes

            • Sharpen their organizational performance




KAIST                                                                                         CISers
                                                                                          Doctoral Dissertation


    Knowledge and Knowledge Management                                          II.Literature Review


    Knowledge and knowledge management

                                                              Definition of Knowledge
            Author        Definition of Knowledge
                                                                      Management
                                                         KM as the systematic underpinning,
           Demarest      Knowledge as the actionable
                                                         observation, instrumentation, and
            [1997]       information
                                                         optimization of the firm's knowledge
                         Knowledge     as   thoughts,    KM as development of processes to
                         capabilities and information    link knowledge requirement to
         Ernst & Young
                         which can be enhanced and       business strategies as well as to
            [1998]
                         mobilized to value              provide access, and representation
                                                         of knowledge
                         Knowledge as information        KM as activities which create a firm
        Leonard-Barton that is relevant, actionable,     capabilities
             [1995]      and based at least partially
                         on experience
           Nonaka &      Knowledge as a justified        KM as a knowledge conversion
        Takeuchi [1995] true belief                      activities for knowledge creation
                         Knowledge as the whole set      KM as allowing organization to
            Spek and
                         of insight, experience, and     explicitly enable and enhance the
        Spijervet [1997]
                         rules                           productivity and value
                         Knowledge      as      facts,   KM as a set of distinct and well-
              Wiig
                         concepts, judgments, and        defined approaches and processes
             [1995]
                         procedures                      designed to manage knowledge
KAIST                                                                                                 CISers
                                                                                        Doctoral Dissertation


    Knowledge and Knowledge Management                                        II.Literature Review


    Classification of knowledge

                Author                                 Classification
        Anderson & APQC [1996]     Tacit, Explicit
         Arthur D. Little [1998]   Tacit, Explicit
                                   Generality and Analyticity
                                     Pattern, Theory, Case, Know-how
              Bock [2001]
                                   Representativeness
                                     Tacit, Implicit, Explicit
              Delphi [1998]        Tacit, Explicit
            Demarest [1997]        Scientific, Philosophical, Commercial
          Ernst & Young [1998]     Tacit, Explicit
              KPMG [1998]          Tacit, Explicit
         Leonard-Barton [1995]     Scientific, Industry specific, Firm specific
        Nonaka & Takeuchi [1995]   Tacit, Explicit
        Pan & Scarbrough [1998]    Factual, Behavioral
              Probst [1998]        Individual, Collective
             Ruggle [1997]         Process, Catalog, Experiential
                                   Inner/outer,        Actual/future,      Explicit/implicit,
         Schuppel et al. [1998]
                                   Experience/rationality
                                   Forms
                                     Public, Shared expertise, Personal
              Wiig [1995]
                                   Types
                                     Factual, Conceptual, Expectational, Methodological
KAIST                                                                                               CISers
                                                                                                   Doctoral Dissertation


    Knowledge and Knowledge Management                                                  II.Literature Review


    Knowledge management processes

                Author                                           KM Process
         Arthur D. Little [1998]   Acquisition and creation, Saving, Dissemination, Use
             Delphi [1998]         Capturing, Sharing, Leveraging, Feeding
            Demarest [1997]        Construction, Embodiment, Dissemination, Use
         Ernst & Young [1998]      Planning, Acquiring, Applying, Assessing
                                   Creation, Application, Exploitation, Sharing and dissemination,
             KPMG [1998]
                                   Encapsulation, Sourcing, Learning
           Lee & Kim [2001a]       Accumulation (acquisition and creation), Integration, Reconfiguration
                                   Problem solving, Implementing and integrating, Experimenting,
         Leonard-Barton [1995]
                                   Importing
           Nevis et al [1995]      Acquisition, Dissemination, Utilization
                                   Sharing tacit knowledge, Creating concepts, Justifying concepts,
        Nonaka & Takeuchi [1995]
                                   Building a archetype, Cross leveling knowledge
        Pan & Scarbrough [1998]    Generation, Processing, Storage, Dissemination, Use/reuse
            Pentland [1995]        Construction, Organization, Distribution
                                   Knowledge       goal,   Identification,  Acquisition,   Development,
             Probst [1998]
                                   Distribution, Preservation, Use, Measurement
             Ruggle [1997]         Generation, Codification, Transfer
                                   Use and multiplication, Development and acquisition, Transfer,
         Schuppel et al. [1998]
                                   Institutionalization
          Stein & Zwass [1995]     Acquisition, Retention, Maintenance, Search and retrieval
            Szulanski [1996]       Initiation, Implementation, Ramp-up, Integration
         Walsh & Ungson [1991]     Acquisition, Retention, Retrieval
               Wiig [1995]         Creation, Manifestation, Use, Transfer
            Wijnhoven [1998]       Acquisition, Retention, Search, Maintenance, Dissemination
KAIST                                                                                                          CISers
                                                                                                     Doctoral Dissertation


    Knowledge and Knowledge Management                                                    II.Literature Review


    Knowledge management enablers

                Author                                               KM Enablers
        Anderson & APQC [1996]      Organizational culture, IT, Strategy, KM processes, Leadership, Evaluation
         Arthur D. Little [1998]    Organizational culture, IT, Strategy, KM processes, Content
             Delphi [1998]          Organizational culture, IT, Strategy, KM processes
            Demarest [1997]         Culture, Operational, Technical
         Ernst & Young [1998]       Organizational culture, IT, Strategy, KM processes, Knowledge content
             KPMG [1998]            Organizational culture, IT, Strategy, KM processes
          Lee & Kim [2001a]         Knowledge worker, Content, IT, KM processes
                                    Strategic intent, Core capability, Signature skill, Creative abrasion,
         Leonard-Barton [1995]      Continuous, experimentation, information-porous boundaries, Cognitive
                                    variety
           Nevis et al [1995]       Ten factors (ex. openness, operational, variety, leadership)
                                    Organizational intention, Autonomy, Fluctuation and creative chaos,
        Nonaka & Takeuchi [1995]
                                    Information redundancy, Requisite variety
        Pan & Scarbrough [1998]     Culture and strategy, Technology, Organizational learning, Measurement
            Pentland [1995]         Social interaction
              Probst [1998]         Top management support, Organizational structure
            Szulanski [1996]        Knowledge content, Source and recipient, Context
        Spek and Spijervet [1997]   Organization and personnel, IT, Management, Culture and motivation
         Walsh & Ungson [1991]      Individual, Culture, Transformation, Structure, Ecology, External archives
               Wiig [1995]          Task/process, People, Structure, Power
                                    Individual, Culture, Transformation, Structure, Ecology, External archives,
            Wijnhoven [1998]
                                    System
KAIST                                                                                                            CISers
                                                                                    Doctoral Dissertation


    Knowledge and Knowledge Management                                    II.Literature Review




         Summary
           • Little attention for tacit knowledge in knowledge storing research

           • No common way of characterizing KM processes and enablers

           • No common generic KM framework




         Generic KM framework
           • Creating generic framework that unifies knowledge management concepts

           • Finding interrelationship among knowledge management components

           • Organizing and consolidating knowledge management processes

           • Understanding knowledge management enablers in a comprehensive way




KAIST                                                                                           CISers
                                                                                                                Doctoral Dissertation


    Empirical Study of Knowledge Management                                                           II.Literature Review


      KM                     KM
    Enablers               Enabler
                              1
                                                                                  Organizational
                   KM
                               Bennet &                                            Performance
                 Enabler
                    2          Gabriel
                               [1999]



                             KM                                                           KM
                           Enabler                                                    Satisfaction
                              n                        Becerra-Fernandez &
                                                        Sabherwal [2001]

        Lee & Kim[2001b]       Zander & Kogut [1995]
                               Appleyard [1996]
                               Szulanski [1996]
                               Hansen [1999]
           KM                  Bock & Kim [2002]
        Processes                                                                        ROA
                             KM
                           Process
                              1                              Gold et al. [2001]

                                                                                         ROS
                             KM
                           Process
                              2

                                                                                     Organizational
                                                                                     Effectiveness

                              KM
                            Process
                               n                                                       Note: ROA = Return on Assets
KAIST                                                                                        ROS = Return on Sales          CISers
                                                                                                                                                    Doctoral Dissertation


    Empirical Study of Knowledge Management                                                                                        II.Literature Review



                                            KM                             KM                      Organizational
                     Study                                                                                                             Findings
                                          Enablers                       Processes                  Performance
 Relationship                       Structure, Culture
                 Bennet & Gabriel                                                                                   Effect of change-friendly culture on the number of
among enablers                      Size, Environment                        N/A                        N/A
                     [1999]                                                                                          KM methods employed.
                                    KM method
                                                                                                                    Codifiability, teachability, and
                 Zander & Kogut     Characteristics of
                                                               Transfer (time to transfer)              N/A          parallel development have significant
                     [1995]          social knowledge
                                                                                                                     effects on the time to transfer.
                                                                                                                    Public sources of knowledge are much more
                                                               Transfer                                               prevalent in knowledge transfer
                    Appleyard       Industry & national         (number of times the respondents                      in semiconductors than in the steel industry;
                                                                                                        N/A
                     [1996]         characteristics             provide and receive                                 Public sources of technical knowledge
                                                                knowledge in a given period)                         play a larger role in knowledge transfer
                                                                                                                     in Japan than in the United States.
 Relationship                       Characteristics of the                                                          Recipient's lack of absorptive capacity,
   between          Szulanski        knowledge transferred     Transfer                                              causal ambiguity, and an arduousness
 enablers and                                                                                           N/A
                     [1996]          source, recipient,        (four-stages transfer processes)                      of the relationship are the major
   processes                         context                                                                         impediments to knowledge transfer.
                                    Weak ties (distant &        Transfer (percentage of a
                     Hansen                                                                                         Weak ties impede the transfer of
                                     infrequent relationships); project’s total knowledge               N/A
                     [1999]                                                                                          complex knowledge.
                                    Knowledge characteristics that come from other divisions)
                                    Reward, IT service quality Sharing ( perceived quality of                       Reward and IT service quality are critical
                   Lee & Kim
                                    Top management support      shared knowledge, perceived             N/A          management drivers to influence climate maturity
                    [2001b]
                                    Climate maturity            sharing level)                                       and finally lead to high knowledge sharing.
                                    Expected rewards                                                                Expected associations and contribution are the
                                                               Sharing (perceived attitude,
                   Bock & Kim       Expected associations                                                            major determinants of the knowledge sharing
                                                                intention, and number of times          N/A
                     [2002]         Expected contributions                                                          Expected reward and IT usage are not ignorantly
                                                                the actual sharing behavior)
                                    IT usage                                                                         related to knowledge sharing.




KAIST                                                                                                                                                           CISers
                                                                                                                                                           Doctoral Dissertation


    Empirical Study of Knowledge Management                                                                                                II.Literature Review




                                               KM                               KM                     Organizational
                       Study                                                                                                                   Findings
                                             Enablers                         Processes                 Performance
                      Bierly &                                                                               ROS           Innovators and explorers are more profitable
                                     KM strategy                                  N/A
 Relationship     Chakrabarti [1995]                                                                         ROA            than exploiters and loners.
   between                                                                                                                 Collaborative know-how allows firms to achieve
 enablers and                                                                                          Tangible benefits
                      Simonin          Collaborative experience                                                             greater organizational benefits;
 performance                                                                      N/A                   (ROI, ROA)
                       [1997]          Collaborative know-how                                                              Collaborative experience alone does not ensure
                                                                                                       Intangible benefits
                                                                                                                            that a firm will benefit from a collaboration.
                                                                                                                           Socialization is suitable for broad and
                                                                                                                            process-oriented tasks, externalization for focused
                  Becerra-Fernandez Task (process or content        Creation (socialization,                                and content-oriented tasks, combination for broad
                    & Sabherwal      orientation; focused or         externalization, combination,      KM satisfaction     and content-oriented tasks, and internalization
  Relationship         [2001]        broad domain)                   internalization)                                       for focused and process-oriented tasks;
     among                                                                                                                 Combination and externalization affect
   knowledge                                                                                                                knowledge satisfaction.
    enablers,                          Infrastructure capability    Process capability (acquisition,                       Infrastructure and processes capabilities
 processes, and      Gold et al.                                                                        Organizational
                                        (technology, structure,     conversion, application,                                contribute to the achievement of organizational
  performance         [2001]                                                                             effectiveness
                                        culture)                    protection)                                             effectiveness.
                                     Social-perspective                                                 Organizational     Culture and centralization contribute to knowledge
                                                                    Creation (socialization,
                                      (structure, culture, skill)                                         Creativity        creation process.
                     This paper                                      externalization, combination,
                                     Technical-perspective                                              Organizational     Creation is critical organizational creativity and
                                                                     internalization)
                                      (IT support)                                                       performance        finally lead to high organizational performance.
 * Shaded areas highlight dependent variables.




KAIST                                                                                                                                                                  CISers
                                                                                 Doctoral Dissertation


    Empirical Study of Knowledge Management                            II.Literature Review



         Synthesis
           • Integrative model

                Becerra-Fernandez and Sabherwal, 2001; Gold et al., 2001

                Better chance of improving their firm’s performance

           • Role of knowledge management processes

                Clarify the role of knowledge management processes

           • Knowledge management performance

                Knowledge satisfaction

                Conventional performance measures

           • Knowledge creation or use

                Knowledge transfer or sharing process

                Object-perspective measures

KAIST                                                                                        CISers
                                                                                       Doctoral Dissertation


    Theoretical Background                                                III.A Research Model



         Three major factors
           • Enablers, processes, organizational performance

                 Beckman, 1999: Demarest, 1997; O’Dell and Grayson, 1999

           • KM enablers (or influencing factors)

                 Organizational mechanisms for intentionally fostering knowledge

                 Stimulate knowledge management processes

                 Enablers can enhance an organization’s ability to manage knowledge

           • KM processes (knowledge management activities)

                 Structured coordination for managing knowledge effectively

                 Creation, sharing, storage, and usage [Alavi, 1997; Beckman, 1999]

           • Organizational performance

                 Organizational learning, profitability or other financial benefits

                 Without measurable success, passion from employees will vanish
KAIST                                                                                              CISers
                                                                                  Doctoral Dissertation


    Theoretical Background                                              III.A Research Model



         Systems thinking theory
           • Cross-functional and multifaceted discipline

                 A variety of components make up knowledge management

                 Understanding of their interaction is important

                 A holistic view is very useful

           • Systems thinking theory considers problems in their entirety

                 Describe complex and dynamic characteristics of KM in a systematic

                   fashion [Tsoukas, 1996]

                 Ensure that the same important components are addressed and

                   compared by KM endeavors [Schlange, 1995]

           • Provide systematic mechanisms

                 How knowledge enablers can improve organizational performance

                 Connections between KM processes and organizational performance.

KAIST                                                                                         CISers
                                                                                  Doctoral Dissertation


    Theoretical Background                                              III.A Research Model



   Social capital theory
        • Use to explain a wide range of social phenomena [Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998].

        • Networks of relationships constitute a valuable resource [Bourdieu, 1986]

        • Social capital can be categorized into three dimensions

              Structural dimension: overall pattern of connections between actors

              Relational dimension: assets created and leveraged through relationships

              Cognitive dimension: resources providing shared representations,

                interpretations, and systems of meaning among parties

        • Describe the relationship between KM enablers and KM processes

              Social capital facilitates the development of intellectual capital through

                 exchange and combination

              Intellectual capital: knowledge and knowing capability

        • Systematic mechanisms for how KM enablers can improve KM processes

KAIST                                                                                         CISers
                                                                                  Doctoral Dissertation


    Theoretical Background                                              III.A Research Model




   Input-process-output model
        • The relationships among these three components is nothing new

              Input-process-output model by Hackerman and Morris [1978]

              One of the most pervasive of all conceptual devices in business context

        • Input factors affect output through certain kinds of interaction processes

              How resources are converted into products

        • KM may be conceptualized

              KM enablers affect organizational performance through KM processes




KAIST                                                                                         CISers
                                                                                   Doctoral Dissertation


    Theoretical Background                                               III.A Research Model



         Knowledge chain model
           • Knowledge-chain model proposed by Holsapple and Singh [2001]

           • Primary activities: manipulating knowledge resources

                 Acquisition, Selection, Generation, Internalization, Externalizing

           • Secondary activities: supporting and guiding the primary activities

                 Measurement, Control, Coordination, Leadership

           • Leadership is different

                 Enabling conditions for achieving organizational outcome through the

                    other activities

                 Leadership can be thought of as a knowledge enabler

                 The other activities as knowledge processes

           • Clarify the relationships among knowledge components

           • Clarify the role of knowledge management processes
KAIST                                                                                          CISers
                                                                                      Doctoral Dissertation


    Theoretical Background                                                  III.A Research Model




         Theoretical framework
           • Knowledge processes and organizational performance

           • Establishing this relationship will always be difficult [Davenport, 1999]

                 Many factors influence the relationship

                 Trace causality to any single factor like KM may be risky

           • To avoid this danger and establish credibility

                 Intermediate outcomes

                 Knowledge satisfaction or organizational creativity [Davenport, 1999]

           • Help confirm that enablers ultimately create business value.




KAIST                                                                                             CISers
                                                                                          Doctoral Dissertation


    Theoretical Background                                                  III.A Research Model


                                       Systems Thinking Theory



                                                         Intermediate            Organizational
         Enablers                   Process
                                                           Outcome                Performance




               Social Capital Theory
        Social capital        Intellectual capital




                                    Input-Process-Output Model
           Input                     Process                            Output



                                       Knowledge Chain Model
                                  Primary and
        Leadership         three secondary activities                   Competitiveness
KAIST                                                                                                 CISers
                                                                                    Doctoral Dissertation


    Variables                                                            III.A Research Model



         Highlights a few major factors
           • Not to propose a model

                 Delineates all of the relationships underlying KM

                 Generate a longer list of possible KM enablers or processes

           • Develop a parsimonious model

                 Key factors


         KM enablers
           • A variety of KM enablers [Ichijo et al., 1998; Leonard-Barton, 1995;

              Lee and Kim, 2001a; Sawhney and Prandelli, 2000]

           • Organizational culture, structure, people, and information technology




KAIST                                                                                           CISers
                                                                                      Doctoral Dissertation


    Variables                                                             III.A Research Model



         Culture
            • Organizational culture is essential for successful KM

               [Davenport et al., 1998; Gold et al., 2001; Lee and Kim, 2001b]

            • Culture is the most important factor for effective KM [Chase, 1998]

                  80 percent of the people who participated in the survey

            • Culture is a basic building block to KM

            • Culture defines

                  what knowledge is valued

                  what knowledge must be kept inside the organization [Long, 1997]


         Collaboration, trust, and learning
            • Basis on the concept of care [Eppler and Sukowski, 2000; Krogh, 1998]

            • Care is a key enabler for organizational relationships [Krogh, 1998].

            • Care characterizes interactions between receivers and providers
KAIST                                                                                             CISers
                                                                                  Doctoral Dissertation


    Variables                                                           III.A Research Model



         Structure
           • Organizational structure may encourage or inhibit KM

             [Gold et al., 2001; Hedlund, 1994; Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995

           • Organizations’ structures should be organized

                 Close to the context for knowledge creation

                 Able to act for knowledge creation

           • Many researchers have proposed organizational structure




         Centralization and formalization
           • Key variables underlying the structural construct

           • Effects on KM within organizations are widely recognized to be potent

             [Eppler and Sukowski, 2000; Jarvenpaa and Staples, 2000; Lubit, 2001]


KAIST                                                                                         CISers
                                                                                    Doctoral Dissertation


    Variables                                                             III.A Research Model



         People
            • Heart of creating organizational knowledge [Ndlela and Toit, 2001]

                   10 percent technology and 90 percent people [Zack, 1999c]

                   People who create and share knowledge

            • Managing people who can and are willing to create and share




         Skill
            • Skills are the dimension most often associated with KM

            • Admitting new people with desirable skills

            • T-shaped skills

               [Iansiti, 1993; Johannenssen et al., 1999; Leonard-Barton, 1995]

            • Meaningful and synergistic conversations with one another


KAIST                                                                                           CISers
                                                                                      Doctoral Dissertation


    Variables                                                             III.A Research Model


         Information technology
            • Technology contributes to knowledge creation [Gold et al., 2001]

                  Information technology and its capabilities [Scott, 1998; Zack, 1999c]

            • Information technology (IT) is widely employed

                  Connect people with reusable codified knowledge

                  Facilitates conversations

                  Qualifies as a natural medium for knowledge flow [Gold et al., 2001]

            • Unavoidable to scale up KM projects [Borghoff and Pareschi, 1997]

            • IT is enablers to managing knowledge effectively [Ndlela and Toit, 2001]


         Information technology support                 [Stonehouse and Pemberton,

        1999]

            • ITs within an organization determine how knowledge is used and accessed

            • IT support is essential for initiating and performing KM

KAIST
            • Support the various types of knowledge activities [Gold et al., 2001]               CISers
                                                                                  Doctoral Dissertation


    Variables                                                           III.A Research Model



         Socio-technical theory
           • Enablers may be addressed according to a socio-technical theory

                 Describes an organization from the social and technical perspectives

                 The two perspectives are not unique to MIS research

                     [Bostrom and Heinen, 1977]

           • Two jointly independent but correlative interacting components

           • Social perspective

                 Attributes of people, relationships among people, and structure

                 Organizational culture, organizational structure, and people

           • The technical perspective

                 Technology required to transform inputs to outputs

                 Information technology support

           • Impact of each knowledge enabler independently

KAIST                                                                                         CISers
                                                                                    Doctoral Dissertation


    Variables                                                            III.A Research Model



         Processes
           • A number of studies have addressed knowledge management processes

                 Several processes [Alavi, 1997; Choo, 1996; Lee and Kim, 2001a]

                 Concurrent and not always in a linear sequence [Beckman, 1999]


         Creation
           • Strategic weapon in today’s global marketplace [Parent et al., 2000]

           • Gaining much attention as a potential source of competitive advantage

           • Relatively little empirical evidence [Raven and Prasser, 1996]

           • SECI model [Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995]

                 Widely accepted [Scharmer, 2000] in many research areas

                     OL, joint ventures, NPD, and IT [Kidd, 1998; Scharmer, 2000]

                 Not only knowledge creation but also knowledge transfer

                     both of them should be considered in KM [Krogh and Grand, 2000]
KAIST                                                                                           CISers
                                                                                       Doctoral Dissertation


    Variables                                                                III.A Research Model



         Intermediate outcome
            • Link KM processes with intermediate outcomes [Davenport, 1999]




         Organizational creativity
            • Key to the understanding of organizational effectiveness and survival

               [Woodman et al., 1993]

            • Seed of all innovation [Amabile et al., 1996]

            • The very heart of knowledge management [Gurteen, 1998]

            • Transforms knowledge into business value

            • Relatively little attention despite its high potential [Vicari and Troilo, 2000]

            • More interesting for a country like Korea or Italy




KAIST                                                                                              CISers
                                                                                   Doctoral Dissertation


    Variables                                                            III.A Research Model



         Organizational performance
           • Not a trivial task

                  Strongly affects the behavior of managers and employees

                  Ultimate test of any business

           • KM’s achievement has been relatively light [Davenport, 1999]

         Methods
           • Four groups

                  Financial measures [Bierly and Chakrabarti, 1996]

                  Intellectual capital [Han et al, 2000; Roos and Roos, 1997]

                  Tangible and intangible benefits [Simonin, 1997]

                  Balanced scorecard [Kaplan and Norton, 2000; Kight, 1999]

           • Deshpande et al. [1993] and Drew [1997]

           • Variation of the balanced scorecard method
KAIST                                                                                          CISers
                                                                                       Doctoral Dissertation


    Variables                                                                III.A Research Model


         Knowledge Management
               Enablers

                         Culture

                      •Collaboration
                                        Knowledge               KM
                      •Trust
                      •Learning          Creation          Intermediate       Organizational
                                         Process             Outcome           Performance
        perspective
          Social




                         Structure

                      •Centralization
                      •Formalization    •Socialization
                                        •Externalization   •Organizational    •Organizational
                                        •Combination         creativity        performance
                         People         •Internalization

                      •Skill
        perspective
         Technical




                        Information
                        Technology

                      •IT Support

KAIST                                                                                              CISers
                                                                                   Doctoral Dissertation


    Hypothesis                                                           III.A Research Model


         Collaboration
           • Degree to which people in a group actively support and help one another in

              their work [Hurley and Hult, 1998]

           • Knowledge creation requires a collaborative culture [Gold et al., 2001]

                 Collaborative interactions

                 Reduce fear and increase openness to other members

           • Tightens individual differences [Leonard-Barton, 1995]

                 Shared understanding about an organization’s environments

                 Supportive and reflective communication [Fahey and Prusak, 1998]

           •Biotechnology industry [Zucker et al., 1996]

                 Significance of collaborative interactions in knowledge creation

                 Encourage both formally and informally among different members

           • Key enabler for knowledge creation [Krogh, 1998; O’Dell and Grayson, 1999]

           • H1: Positive relationship between collaboration and knowledge creation
KAIST                                                                                          CISers
                                                                                    Doctoral Dissertation


    Hypothesis                                                            III.A Research Model


         Trust
           • Maintaining reciprocal faith in each other in terms of intentions and behaviors

              [Kreitner and Kinicki, 1992]

           • Facilitate open, substantive, and influential information exchange

                   High participation in knowledge exchange and social interactions

                   People seek advice from trusted colleagues

           • The investment of trust can be thought of as a leap of knowledge transfer

                   Lack of trust is one of the key barriers against knowledge transfer

                   The exchange of knowledge is not amenable to enforcement by contract

           •Critical in a cross-functional or interorganizational team

                   Withholding information because of a lack of trust [Hedlund, 1994]

                   Distrust leads people to hide or hoard their knowledge

                   Facilitating trust among cross-functional or interorganizational team

           • H2: There is a positive relationship between trust and knowledge creation
KAIST                                                                                           CISers
                                                                                   Doctoral Dissertation


    Hypothesis                                                          III.A Research Model



         Learning
           • Degree to which it is encouraged in organizations [Hurley and Hult, 1998]

           • Learning infuses an organization with new knowledge [Hurley and Hult, 1998]

                 Help individuals play a more active role in knowledge creation

                 Learning is positively related with knowledge creation

                 Encouraged to ask questions [Ndlela and Toit, 2001]

                 Develop a deeply ingrained learning culture [Quinn et al., 1996]

           • Knowledge creation capacity is increased by various learning means

                 Education, training Krogh [1998], and mentoring [Swap et al., 2001]

           • Continuous learning environment [Ndlela and Toit, 2001; Nevies et al., 1995]

                 Opens up the possibility of achieving scale in knowledge creation



           •H3: There is a positive relationship between learning and knowledge creation
KAIST                                                                                          CISers
                                                                                    Doctoral Dissertation


    Hypothesis                                                          III.A Research Model


   Centralization
        • Locus of decision authority and control within an organizational entity

            [caruana et al., 1998, Ein-Dor and Segev, 1982]

        • Centralization

              Reduce creative solutions

              Hinder interdepartmental communication and sharing of ideas

              Cause distortion and discontinuousness of ideas

              Hinder constant flow of communication and ideas

        • Decentralization

              Facilitates spontaneity, experimentation, and the freedom of expression

              Participatory work environments

              Downplay the concentration of decision-making authority

              Kao

        • H4: Negative relationship between centralization and knowledge creation
KAIST                                                                                           CISers
                                                                                 Doctoral Dissertation


    Hypothesis                                                         III.A Research Model


   Formalization
        • Degree to which decisions and working relationships are governed by formal

              rules, standard policies, and procedures [Rapert and Wren, 1998]

        •Flexibility

               Knowledge creation requires flexibility and less emphasis on work rules

               New ideas seems to be restricted when strict formal rules

               Accommodate better ways of doing things

        • Variation [Wilkstrom and Norman, 1994].

               Provides more options and allows rich stimulation and interpretation

               Low formalization permits openness and variation

        • Unhindered communications and interactions [Bennett and Grbriel, 1999]

               Formality stifles the communication and interaction

               Easy access to knowledge and its flow [Jarvenpaa and Staples, 2000]

        •H5: Negative relationship between formalization and knowledge creation
KAIST                                                                                        CISers
                                                                                Doctoral Dissertation


    Hypothesis                                                        III.A Research Model




   T-Shaped skill
        • Skills are both deep and broad [Leonard-Barton, 1995]

        • Explore particular knowledge domains and their various applications in

           particular products

        • T-shaped skills are extremely valuable for creating knowledge

              Knowledge springs from the interaction of different knowledge sets

              Integrate diverse knowledge sets [Leonard-Barton, 1995]

              Ability both to combine theoretical and practical knowledge

              See how their branch of knowledge interacts with other branches

              Expand their competence across several functional branch areas

              Meaningfully interact with one another [Madhavan and Grover, 1998]

        • H6: Positive relationship between T-shaped skills and knowledge creation


KAIST                                                                                       CISers
                                                                                  Doctoral Dissertation


    Hypothesis                                                          III.A Research Model



   IT Supports
        • Degree to which knowledge management is supported by the use of

           information technologies [Gold et al., 2001]

        • IT is a crucial element for knowledge creation [Gold et al., 2001]

              Facilitate rapid collection, storage and exchange of data on a scale

              Easy access to the required knowledge [Ndlela and Toit, 2001]

              Integrates fragmented flows of information and knowledge

              Eliminate barriers to communication among departments

              Fosters all modes of knowledge creation [Bolisani and Scarso, 1999]

        • Collaborative works, communication, searching and accessing, and storing

           [Gold et al., 2001; Lee and Kim, 2001b; Ndlela and Toit, 2001; Roberts, 2000]



        •H7: Positive relationship between IT support and knowledge creation

KAIST                                                                                         CISers
                                                                                  Doctoral Dissertation


    Hypothesis                                                          III.A Research Model


   Organizational creativity
        • Capability of creating valuable and useful products, services, ideas, procedures

           or processes by individuals working together in a complex social system

        • Knowledge plays an important role in organizational creativity

           [Vicari and Troilo, 2000; Woodman et al, 1993].

        • Better creating mechanism are more creative organization [Glynn, 1996]

        • Creativity is not necessarily related to the amount of knowledge but rather the

          way in which knowledge is created and shared [Amabile, 1988]

        • Knowledge creation unleash organizational creativity

        • Impact of knowledge creation on organizational creativity

        • Knowledge creation is positively correlated with creativity

           [Koh, 2000; Vicari and Troilo, 2000]

        • H8: Positive relationship between the knowledge creation process and

              organizational creativity
KAIST                                                                                         CISers
                                                                                   Doctoral Dissertation


    Hypothesis                                                           III.A Research Model



   Organizational performance
        • Assessed by the use of global output measures in comparison with key

            competitors [Deshpande et al., 1993; Drew, 1997]

        • Organizational creativity represents a dramatic organizational change

              Tangible results of corporate creativity are the organizational change

              Without creativity, organizations may fail to adapt to change

        • Goals of organizational change include the various organizational performance

              Organizational effectiveness, survival, improvement, or innovation

        • Relationship between performance and creativity

              Field study of Seagate Corporation [Shani et al., 2000]

              Arthur Anderson Worldwide Quinn et al. [1996]

              Improvements of creativity lead to better organizational performance

        • H9: Positive relationship between organizational creativity and performance.

KAIST                                                                                          CISers
                                                                                                                 Doctoral Dissertation


   Survey Methodology                                                                              IV. Research Methodology



        Procedures                    Contents
        1. Research Design
           1) Survey type                  Cross-sectional and field survey, causal and statistical study
           2) Mix of research methods      A single research method
           3) Unit of analysis             Organization
           4) Respondents                  Middle managers in organizations
           5) Research hypotheses          9 hypothesis related to knowledge management enablers, processes,
                                             creativity, and organizational performance
           6) Design for data analysis     Multiple regression method
        2. Sampling Procedures             Pilot survey                   Main survey
         1) Type of sampling               Nonprobability sampling,       Probability sampling
                                           Nonsystematic selection        Systematic selection
         2) Criterion                      Convenience sample             2000’ Annual Corporation Reports


         3) Sample size                    114 organizations              127 organizations (1290 middle managers)
         4) Survey type                    Field survey                   Field survey
        3. Data Collections                Pilot Survey                   Main Survey
         1) Pretest of questions           With middle manager            Through the pilot survey
         2) Response rate                  63%                            49%
         3) Mix of data collections        Single methods                 Single methods
        4. Data Analysis                   Pilot Survey                   Main Survey
         1) Testing method                 Multiple regression            Multiple regression
         2) Level of Significant           P-value (0.01, 0.05, 0.1)      P-value (0.01, 0.05, 0.1)
         3) Analysis tool                  SPSS 8.0                       SPSS 10.0
KAIST                                                                                                                        CISers
                                                                                                     Doctoral Dissertation


   Measurement Development                                                             IV. Research Methodology



        Variable         Operational Definition                                        Indicator     Item
        Collaboration    Degree of authority and control over decisions                5 items       II: 1:
                                                                                                     1)-5)
        Trust            Degree of reciprocal faith in others’ intentions, 6 items                   II: 2:
                         behaviors, and skills toward organizational goals                           1)-6)
        Learning         Degree of opportunity, variety, satisfaction, and 5 items                   II: 3:
                         encouragement for learning and development in                               1)-5)
                         organization
        Centralization   Degree of authority and control over decisions                5 items       II: 4:
                                                                                                     1)-5)
        Formalization    Degree of formal rules, procedures, and standard 5 items                    II: 5:
                         polices                                                                     1)-5)
        T-shape skill    Degree of understanding his/her own and others' 5 items                     II: 6:
                         task areas                                                                  1)-5)
        IT support       Degree    of   IT    support   for   collative   work,   for 4 items        II: 7:
                         communication, for searching and accessing, for                             1)-5)
                         simulation     and    prediction,    and   for   systematic
                         storing

KAIST                                                                                                            CISers
                                                                                                           Doctoral Dissertation


   Measurement Development                                                                IV. Research Methodology


        Variable          Operational Definition                                               Indicator      Item
        Knowledge         How well the knowledge creation processes delivered 20 items                        III: 1-
        creation process matches the organizations' expectation                                               5
        Socialization     Degree of tacit knowledge accumulation, extra-firm 5 items                          III: 1:
                          social   information     collection,    intra-firm          social                  1)-5)
                          information    gathering,     and      transfer        of    tacit
                          knowledge
        Externalization   Degree of creative dialogue, deductive and inductive 5 items                        III: 2:
                          thinking, use of metaphors, and exchanged ideas                                     1)-5)
        Combination       Degree of acquisition and integration, synthesis and 5 items                        III: 3:
                          processing, and dissemination                                                       1)-5)
        Internalization   Degree   of   personal     experiences,   simulation          and 5 items           III: 4:
                          experimentation                                                                     1)-5)
        Organizational    Degree   of   belief   that   organizations       is    actually 5 items            IV:        1:
        Creativity        producing       creative        (novel/useful)              ideas                   1)-5)
                          (services/products)
        Organizational    Degree of overall success, market share, growth rate 5 items                        V:         1:
        Performance       profitability, and innovativeness in comparison with                                1)-6)
                          major competitors
KAIST                                                                                                                  CISers
                                                                                  Doctoral Dissertation


   Sample and Data Collection                                              V. Survey Results


   Listed companies
        • To include major companies in Korea

        • Annual Corporation Reports by Maeil Business Newspaper [2000]


   Data collection
        • Interviews and mail

        • Interviews were used to investigate the current detailed status of KM

              Individually or in a small group session from half to one hour

              Investigation included knowledge management practices

        • Questionnaire-based survey

        • 5 to 15 middle managers

              Play key roles in managing knowledge [Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995]

        • For questionnaires

              A multiple-item method was used

KAIST
              Six point Likert scale                                                         CISers
                                                                                  Doctoral Dissertation


   Sample Characteristics                                                   V. Survey Results




   Response rate
        • 451 responses were collected from 63 firms

        • 426 responses from 58 firms were analyzed


   Characteristics
        • Three industry types: manufacturing, service business, and financial business

        • The majority of these firms are in the service industry

        • Thirty-two firms have annual total sales revenue of 1 billion dollars or more

        • Thirty-one firms have 1000 employees or more




KAIST                                                                                         CISers
                                                                                 Doctoral Dissertation


   Sample Characteristics                                                  V. Survey Results



         Total sales revenue

                                                    Number of
            Range                                     Firms      Percent
            Less than $ 100 million                     10        17.3
            $ 100 million to below $ 500 million        12        20.7
            $ 500 million to below $ 1 billion           4         6.9
            $ 1 billion to below $ 5 billion            25        43.1
            $ 5 billion to below $ 10 billion            3         5.2
            $ 10 billion and above                       4         6.9
               Total                                    58        100.0

         Total number of employees
                                                   Number of
            Range                                    Firms      Percent
            Less than 200                               6         10.3
            200 to below 500                            8         13.8
            500 to below 1000                           8         13.8
            1000 to below 3000                         10         17.2
            3000 to below 10, 000                       9         15.5
            10,000 to below 30,000                      7         12.1
            30,000 and above                            5         8.6
               Total                                   58        100.0
KAIST                                                                                        CISers
                                                                                                                    Doctoral Dissertation


   Reliability and Validity Test                                                                             V. Survey Results



         Test results

                                                                                   Convergent
                                                                                                     Discriminant
                                                                                     Validity
                                                                 Reliability                            Validity
               Measure          Acronym       Mean    S.D.                        (Correlation of
                                                              (Cronbach alpha)                       (Factor loading
                                                                                  item with total
                                                                                                    on single factors)
                                                                                    score-item)
            Knowledge            KCP      4                       0.9203
            Creation
            Process
              Socialization       KCS     5 3.8467   0.4241       0.8364         0.7479             0.942
              Externalization     KCE     5 4.0025   0.4246       0.9146         0.7837             0.919
              Combination         KCC     5 4.1721   0.4178       0.8576         0.8481             0.877
              Internalization     KCI     4 3.8227   0.4041       0.8902         0.8873             0.853


            Organizational        OC      5 3.8114 0.4960         0.8709         0.6744; 0.7027; 0.795; 0.818;
            Creativity                                                           0.7044; 0.7631; 0.821; 0.861;
                                                                                 0.6428          0.770

            Performance
              Organizational      OP      5 4.0199 0.6751         0.8661         0.7783; 0.5619; 0.870; 0.709;
              Performance                                                        0.7502; 0.7236; 0.853; 0.865;
                                                                                 0.6383          0.772




KAIST                                                                                                                           CISers
                                                                                                          Doctoral Dissertation


   Reliability and Validity Test                                                                   V. Survey Results



         Test results
                                                                               Convergent       Discriminant
                                                               Reliability       Validity          Validity
                                        # of
             Measure         Acronym           Mean    S.D.    (Cronbach      (Correlation of       (Factor
                                       items
                                                                 alpha)       item with total     loading on
                                                                                score-item)     single factors)
          Knowledge
          Management
          Enablers
            Collaboration      COL      5      3.9634 0.4035     0.8792      0.6974;   0.7682; 0.812; 0.865;
                                                                             0.7420;   0.6804; 0.847; 0.793;
                                                                             0.6838            0.800
            Trust              TRU      6      3.6452 0.5964     0.8932      0.7002;   0.7230; 0.798; 0.815;
                                                                             0.7166;   0.7410; 0.810; 0.828;
                                                                             0.6987;   0.7082 0.794; 0.804
            Learning           LEA      5      4.2178 0.3887     0.8968      0.6702;   0.7656; 0.783; 0.857;
                                                                             0.7063;   0.7953; 0.813; 0.879;
                                                                             0.7942            0.878
            Centralization     CEN      5      3.1524 0.4252     0.8481      0.6176;   0.6968; 0.760; 0.818
                                                                             0.6236;   0.6844 0.763; 0.810
                                                                             0.6638            0.793
            Formalization      FOR      5      3.5418 0.5295     0.8475      0.5605;   0.7175; 0.706; 0.840;
                                                                             0.7592;   0.7265; 0.868; 0.846;
                                                                             0.5225            0.669
            T-shaped           TSK      5      4.2285 0.3107     0.8309      0.6973;   0.6012; 0.807; 0.750;
              skills                                                         0.7037;   0.5911; 0.829; 0.743;
                                                                             0.5747            0.732
            IT Support         ITS      5      4.4878 0.5552     0.8614      0.6244;   0.6292; 0.757; 0.760;
                                                                             0.7656;   0.7021; 0.866; 0.823;
                                                                             0.6881            0.810
KAIST                                                                                                                 CISers
                                                                          Doctoral Dissertation


   Reliability and Validity Test                                 V. Survey Results



         Interrater reliability and agreement



                                         Indexes
                                                    ICC (1,k)    rwg(J)
          Variables
                                   Socialization     0.6627     0.8138
          Knowledge    creation   Externalization    0.6468     0.8815
          processes                Combination       0.5252     0.8522
                                  Internalization    0.5285     0.8633
                                   Collaboration     0.6081     0.8691
                                       Trust         0.8037     0.8929
                                     Learning        0.6863     0.8927
          Knowledge
                                   Centralization    0.5632     0.8426
          management enablers
                                   Formalization     0.6983     0.8393
                                  T-shaped Skills    0.5236     0.8203
                                    IT Support       0.7515     0.8460
          Organizational creativity                  0.7390     0.8552
          Organizational performance                 0.8397     0.8601


KAIST                                                                                 CISers
                                                                                                        Doctoral Dissertation


   Analysis Results                                                                          V. Survey Results


  Knowledge Management
         Enablers
                         Knowledge Creation
                              Process

        Collaboration




            Trust
                           Socialization



          Learning




        Centralization    Externalization
                                                         Organizational    = 0.6338, t = 6.1313***
                                                                                                  Organizational
                                                           Creativity                           Performance


        Formalization
                           Combination



          T-shaped
            skills



                          Internalization
         IT Support                           Supported hypotheses are in bold type.
                                                    and ***: p < 0.01;       and **: P < 0.05;            and *: P < 0.1
KAIST                                                                                                               CISers
                                                                                                                  Doctoral Dissertation


   Analysis Results                                                                                         V. Survey Results


                             Knowledge
                                                Socialization Externalization Combination Internalization
                         Creation Processes                                                                    Organizational
          Variables                              R2 = 0.837      R2 =0.733     R2 = 0.658   R2 = 0.714
                             R2 = 0.879                                                                          Creativity
                                                F = 36.553 *** F = 19.619*** F = 13.749*** F = 17.857***
                            F = 51.771***

                                = 0.2085        = 0.3017     = 0.2477       =-0.0694      = 0.2692
  Collaboration (H1)                                                                                                 N/A
                               t = 2.4901**     t = 3.1036*** t = 1.9941*     t = -0.4938    t = 2.0947**

                                = 0.3525        = 0.2379      = 0.3079      = 0.4041      = 0.3182
         Trust (H2)                                                                                                  N/A
                               t = 3.5907***    t = 2.0873**   t = 2.1140**   t = 2.4515**   t = 2.1118**

                                = 0.2138        = 0.3096     = 0.1296       =0.1612      =0.1895
        Learning (H3)                                                                                                N/A
                               t = 2.2498**     t = 2.8054*** t = 0.9191      t = 1.0102     t = 1.9985*

                                = -0.2030       = -0.1755    = -0.2144      = -0.1353     = -0.2025
 Centralization (H4)                                                                                                 N/A
                               t = -2.6745**    t = -2.0142** t = -1.9039*    t = -1.0618    t = -1.7381*

                                  = -0.013      = -0.0520     = -0.1165     = 0.0018      = 0.1152
  Formalization (H5)                                                                                                 N/A
                                t = -0.2162     t = -0.5262    t = -1.2891    t = 0.0267     t = 1.3194

                                = 0.0443        = 0.0286      = 0.0560      =0.0205       = 0.0545
 T-shaped skills(H6)                                                                                                 N/A
                               t = 0.7411       t = 0.4139     t = 0.6339     t = 0.2053     t = 0.5958

                                = 0.0611        = -0.0111     = 0.1124      = 0.2516      = -0.2025
   IT Support (H7)                                                                                                   N/A
                               t = 0.8911       t = -0.1388    t = 1.2029     t = 2.1848**   t = -1.7381

    Organizational
    Creativity (H8)             = 0.9035         = 0.2957      = 0.2906     = 0.1778       = 0.2371
                                                                                                                     N/A
      R2 = 0.819               t = 15.7786***   t = 2.0883**   t = 2.2281**   t = 1.8835*    t = 2.6010**
     F = 59.914***
   Organizational
  Performance (H9)                                                                                               = 0.6338
                                  N/A               N/A            N/A            N/A             N/A
     R2 = 0.402                                                                                                 t = 6.1313***
    F = 37.592***
  Supported hypotheses are in bold type.
  ***: p < 0.01; **: P < 0.05; *: P < 0.1
KAIST                                                                                                                         CISers
                                                                                    Doctoral Dissertation


   Findings and Implications                                                  V. Survey Results



   Cultural factors
        • Shaping cultural factors are crucial for knowledge management

               Groups are most creative when their members collaborate

               Stop holding back when members have trust [Humer et al., 1998]

               Transmitting tacit knowledge

               Transforming tacit into explicit [Gold et al., 2001, Scott, 2000]

        • Focus on information technology

               70% of all KM articles in 1998 [Swan et al., 2000]

               Most firms initiated KM in the domain of technology

        • Face difficulties in KM

               Lack of adequate culture [DeTienne and Jackson, 2001; Lubit, 2001]

               Focus on IT can be a risky proposition [Davenport and Prusak, 1998]

        • Build KMS with the consideration of a firm’s culture

               Interpretative organizational learning support systems

               Action-reflection-trigger (ART) systems [Nonaka et al., 1998]
KAIST                                                                                           CISers
                                                                                      Doctoral Dissertation


   Findings and Implications                                                   V. Survey Results




         Combination
           • IT support affects combination

                 Highlights the characteristic of knowledge combination

                 IT is critical for codifying explicit knowledge

                 Efficiency using explicit knowledge [Levinson and Asahi, 1995]

           • Trust affects combination

                 Simply improving the IT does not provide a competitive advantage

                 General Motors case [Shaw, 1997]

                 Without trust, the investment in IT remain untapped

                 S company, a Korean clothing manufacturing company

           • Lack of trust is a barrier to IT facilitation of knowledge combination

                 Disk industry in the U.S. Scott [2000]

                 Communication of even explicit knowledge is difficult without trust

                 Managers should pay careful attention to the potential impact of IT
KAIST                                                                                             CISers
                                                                                    Doctoral Dissertation


   Findings and Implications                                                  V. Survey Results



         Formalization
           • Formalization weakens knowledge management [Glynn, 1996]

           • No relationship between formalization and knowledge creation

           • Reflects the two different aspects of formalization

           • Ambidextrous model

                 Not only an inhibiting but also an encouraging factor [Rogers, 1983]

                 Inhibit tacit related activities such as consideration of new concepts

                     Socialization and externalization

                Encourage explicit related activities such as codification

                     Combination and internalization

           • Needs further exploration

                 All β values are not statistically significant

                 More careful investigation of externalization

                 Expression of tacit knowledge

                 Conversion of tacit into explicit knowledge
KAIST                                                                                           CISers
                                                                                     Doctoral Dissertation


   Findings and Implications                                                   V. Survey Results




         Information technology

           • IT could facilitate knowledge creation

           • IT support is not significantly related with knowledge creation

                 IT does not support all modes of knowledge creation directly

                 Accessing the tacit knowledge is not possible simply by an intranet or a

                     database [DeTienne and Jackson, 2001]

                 Contrastive view [Bolisani and Scarso, 1999]

                 Tacit-to-tacit results from the transfer of codified knowledge

           • Current state of IT

                Not affect socialization, externalization, or internalization directly


KAIST                                                                                            CISers
                                                                                 Doctoral Dissertation


   Findings and Implications                                               V. Survey Results




         T-Shaped skill

           • T-shaped skills [Johannessen et al., 1999; Madhavan and Grover, 1998]

           • No relationship between T-shaped skills and knowledge creation

           • Importance of T-shaped management systems

                 Break out of the traditional corporate hierarchy

                 Encourage people to share knowledge [Hansen and Oetinger, 2001]

                 Current formal organizational incentives encourage I-shaped skills

                 Fail to provide any clear career path

                 Without an environment in which T-shaped skills flourish, people with

                    T-shaped skills will not attempt to create new knowledge


KAIST                                                                                        CISers
                                                                        Doctoral Dissertation


   Findings and Implications                                      V. Survey Results




         Role of knowledge management processes



                             Knowledge    Organizational Organizational
                               creation     creativity     creativity
                            (beta values) (beta values) (beta values)
             Collaboration    0.2085**      0.2144*        0.1316
                 Trust        0.3525***     0.3916***      0.1353**
               Learning       0.2138**      0.2015*        0.1291
            Centralization    -0.2030**     -0.1808*       -0.1047
             Formalization    -0.0130       -0.0390        -0.0296
            T-shaped skills   0.0443        0.1682**       0.1514**
              IT support      0.0611        0.0949         0.0493
              Knowledge
                                                           0.7442***
               creation




KAIST                                                                               CISers
                                                                                    Doctoral Dissertation


    Extensions Background                                               VI. Research Extensions



         Importance of KM strategies
           • Enablers can enhance firm’s capability to manage knowledge (Ichijo et al., 1998)
           • How to use enablers is unclear
           • KM strategies determine how to use knowledge resources (Hansen et al., 1999)



         Three research areas         (Zack. 1999)
           • Which knowledge is valuable: Intellectual Capital
           • How knowledge support a firm’s competitive advantages:
              Resource-based theory
           • Relationship between KM strategies and knowledge creation process



         Integrative view
           • How the KM strategies can support knowledge creation process
           • Integrative view helps managers sharpen their KM strategy



KAIST                                                                                           CISers
                                                                                               Doctoral Dissertation


    Extensions Background                                                          VI. Research Extensions



         System Strategy
           • Codifying and storing organizational knowledge
           • Knowledge is codified via information technology (Davenport et al., 1999)
           • Sets of rules about what to do (Bohn, 1994)

         Human Strategy
           • Knowledge sharing through interpersonal interaction (Swan et al., 2000)
           • Internal and opportunistic knowledge (Jordan and Jones, 1997)
           • Experienced and skilled people


           Strategy                                    Features
                        Emphasize codified knowledge in knowledge management processes;
            System      Focus on codifying and storing knowledge via information technology;
                        Attempts made to share knowledge formally
                        Emphasize dialogue through social networks and person-to-person contacts;
            Human       Focus on acquiring knowledge via experienced and skilled people;
                        Attempts made to share knowledge informally




KAIST                                                                                                      CISers
                                                                                          Doctoral Dissertation


    Extensions Background                                                     VI. Research Extensions




                                               Focused view
                                   (Swan et al 2000; Hansen et al 1999)
        Human oriented degree




                                                                     Balanced view
                                                            (Choi & Lee 2000; Zack 1999a;
                                                    Jordan & Jones 1997; Bierly & Chakrabarti 1996)



                                                          Dynamic view
                                                          (Bohn 1994)




                                System oriented degree




KAIST                                                                                                 CISers
                                                                                                          Doctoral Dissertation


    Extensions Background                                                                   VI. Research Extensions



               Criteria                     KM Strategy       Research       Industry           Suggested
                           Researcher
        View                                 Category        Methodology    Application        KM Strategy

                           Swan et al.       Cognitive                     Manufacturing        Community
                                                                Case
                             (2000)         Community                        Financial
          Focused
                          Hansen et al.    Codification
                                                                Case         Consulting           80-20
                            (1999)        Personalization

                                              Passive
                           Choi and Lee   System-oriented
                                                              Empirical         All              Dynamic
                             (2000)       Human-oriented
                                              Dynamic

                                           Conservative
                          Zack (1999a)                          Case            All             Aggressive
                                            Aggressive
         Balanced
                          Jordan & Jones Tacit-oriented
                                                             Conceptual         All              Balanced
                              (1997)     Explicit-oriented

                                              Explorer
                            Bierly &
                                              Exploiter                                           Explorer
                           Chakrabarti                        Empirical    Pharmaceutical
                                               Loner                                             Innovator
                             (1996)
                                             Innovator

                                          Pure expertise
         Dynamic           Bohn (1994)                       Conceptual         All          Dynamic Change
                                          Pure procedure


KAIST                                                                                                                 CISers
                                                                     Doctoral Dissertation


    Extended Research Framework                          VI. Research Extensions




                                     Structure




Environmental                                                      Organizational
                Strategy   People   Processes     Management
  Variables                                                          Outcome



                                    Information
                                    Technology




KAIST                                                                            CISers
                                                                                            Doctoral Dissertation


    Extended Research Framework                                                 VI. Research Extensions




                                             Formulation


        Input                                                    Processes                Output

                                  Strategy
    Environmental   Formulation              Implementation   Organizational           Performance
    Variables                                                 variables




                                                                  Formulation




KAIST                                                                                                   CISers
                                                                                          Doctoral Dissertation


    Extended Research Framework                                               VI. Research Extensions




                                    Enablers and Processes
                                                                      Organizational Outcome
                                             Structure

                 Strategy
              implementation
   Strategy                                                          Intermediate      Organizational
                                                KM
                               People                      Culture     Outcome          Performance
                                             Processes



                                             Information
                                             Technology




                                 Strategy
                               formulation

KAIST                                                                                                 CISers
                                                                                    Doctoral Dissertation


   Sample and Measures                                                 VI. Research Extensions




         Sample
           • 5 to 15 middle managers in each firms
           • Mail survey


         Research Constructs
           • Multiple-item
           • 6 point Likert scale
           • Creation processes (Nonaka et al., 1994)
           • Strategy (Choi and Lee, 2000)
           • Organizational performance (Desphande et al., 1993; Drew, 1997)




KAIST                                                                                           CISers
                                                                                 Doctoral Dissertation



   Sample Characteristics                                           VI. Research Extensions



         Sample Characteristics
           • 441 responses from 61 out of 100 firms were returned
           • 17 responses from 3 firms were eliminated
           • 424 responses from 58 firms were analyzed

         Industry
             Industry Type (Main) Industry Type (Sub)   Frequency   Percent
                                  Machinery                 5         8.6
                                  Electronics               3         5.2
                                  Chemistry                 5         8.6
             Manufacturing
                                  Pharmaceutical            3         5.2
                                  Food/beverage             2         3.4
                                  Others                    1         1.7
                                  Insurance                 5         8.6
             Financing            Banking                   4         6.9
                                  Security                  5         8.6
                                  Construction              6        10.3
                                  Retailing                 4         6.9
             Service              Transportation            5         8.6
                                  Communication             9        15.5
                                  Others                    1         1.7
             Total                                         58       100.0

KAIST                                                                                        CISers
                                                                               Doctoral Dissertation



   Sample Characteristics                                         VI. Research Extensions


         Total sales revenue
           Range                                  Frequency   Percent
           Less than $ 50 million                    7         12.1
           $ 50 million to below $ 100 million       3         5.2
           $ 100 million to below $ 500 million      12        20.7
           $ 500 million to below $ 1 billion        4         6.9
           $ 1 billion to below $ 5 billion          25        43.1
           $ 5 billion to below $ 10 billion         3         5.2
           $ 10 billion and above                    4         6.9
              Total                                  58       100.0
         Number of total employees
            Range                                 Frequency   Percent
            Less than 100                            2         3.4
            100 to below 200                         4         6.9
            200 to below 500                         8         13.8
            500 to below 1000                        8         13.8
            1000 to below 3000                       10        17.2
            3000 to below 10, 000                    9         15.5
            10,000 to below 30,000                   7         12.1
            30,000 and above                         5         8.6
               Total                                 58       100.0
KAIST                                                                                      CISers
                                                                                                          Doctoral Dissertation



   Reliability and Validity                                                              VI. Research Extensions


         Reliability and validity
                                              Reliability Convergent Validity     Discriminant Validity
                 Measure         Acronym Item (cronbach (correlation of item with   (factor loading on
                                                alpha)     total score-item)          single factors)
            Knowledge
            Creation Process
               Socialization      KC_S     5     0.8589    0.5977; 0.7330;        0.737;   0.843;
                                                           0.6937; 0.6859;        0.815;   0.815;
                                                           0.6565                 0.785
               Externalization    KC_E     5     0.8845    0.7298; 0.7675;        0.862;   0.851;
                                                           0.6527; 0.7061;        0.835;   0.815;
                                                           0.7539                 0.702
               Combination        KC_C     5     0.8524    .5915; 0.6573;         0.859;   0.834;
                                                           0.7439; 0.7118;        0.793;   0.760;
                                                           0.6306                 0.728
               Internalization    KC_I     5     0.8763    0.7083; 0.7443;        0.854;   0.849;
                                                           0.7517; 0.7483;        0.847;   0.827;
                                                           0.5944                 0.725
            Knowledge
            Management
            Strategy
               System               S      4     0.8268    0.7134;   0.7263;      0.859;   0.867;
                                                           0.5713;   0.6067       0.745;   0.776
               Human                H      4     0.7902    0.6047;   0.6652;      0.796;   0.837;
                                                           0.6233;   0.5125       0.800;   0.705

            Corporate              CP      5     0.8651    0.7569; 0.5507;        0.856; 0.700;
            Performance                                    0.7670;                0.865; 0.842;
                                                           0.7345; 0.6368         0.772



KAIST                                                                                                                 CISers
                                                                                                Doctoral Dissertation



   Performance                                                                   VI. Research Extensions


         Cluster Analysis
                   Group
                                   High               Low             Mean            p-value
           KM strategy
                System             4.45               3.61            3.95              0.00
            Number of cases         23                 35
                Human              4.65               3.96            4.22              0.00
            Number of cases         22                 36

         System Strategy and Performance
             System           Sum of      Degree of       Sum of
                                                                        F-value          p-value
             strategy         Square      Freedom       mean square
             Between           5.49         1.00           5.49          17.17             0.00
              Group
           Within Group       17.92        56.00             0.32
               Total          23.42        57.00

         Human Strategy and Performance
              Human           Sum of      Degree of       Sum of
                                                                         F-value          p-value
             strategy         Square      Freedom       mean square
             Between           5.42         1.00           5.42          16.86             0.00
              Group
           Within Group       18.00         56.00            0.32
               Total          23.42         57.00
KAIST                                                                                                       CISers
                                                                                                    Doctoral Dissertation



   KM Strategies and Creation Processes                                                VI. Research Extensions



                                   4.40

                                   4.30
                                                                          4.34
                                   4.20
        Knowledge creation level




                                            High system                                   4.19
                                   4.10 (High performance)
                                                             4.16
                                   4.00

                                   3.90

                                   3.80     3.89 Low system
                                              (Low performance)
                                   3.70
                                            3.72             3.73         3.76            3.73
                                   3.60

                                   3.50
                                          Socialization Externalization Combination Internalization
                                                      Knowledge creation modes
KAIST                                                                                                           CISers
                                                                                                       Doctoral Dissertation



   KM Strategies and Creation Processes                                                   VI. Research Extensions

                                   4.60

                                              4.39
                                   4.40
                                                            4.20                         4.18
        Knowledge creation level




                                   4.20
                                                High human
                                                                           4.02
                                            (High Performance)
                                   4.00
                                                                           3.98
                                   3.80

                                   3.60                     3.72                         3.74
                                                        Low human
                                   3.40              (Low performance)
                                              3.41
                                   3.20

                                   3.00
                                          Socialization Externalization Combination Internalization
                                                        Knowledge creation modes
KAIST                                                                                                              CISers
                                                                                                         Doctoral Dissertation



   KM Strategies and Creation Processes                                                     VI. Research Extensions


                                                                                                         Low
                                                                         4.02
                          4.00




                                                                                                         Knowledge creation level
                                                                                            4.18
                                                       4.20
        Human strategy




                                      High human
                                  (High performance)




                                  4.39

                                                                                                         High
                          4.50                                                                           High




                                                                                                          Knowledge creation level
        System strategy




                                                                         4.34




                                                                                            4.19
                                                         4.16


                          4.00                High system
                                          (High performance)
                                   3.89                                                                  Low

                                 Socialization      Externalization   Combination   Internalization
                                                       Knowledge creation modes
KAIST                                                                                                                                CISers
                                                                         Doctoral Dissertation



   KM Strategies and Creation Processes                     VI. Research Extensions



         Five firms


                                  Degree Sum of
                        Sum of
          Performance               of    mean    F-value        p-value
                        square
                                 Freedom square
           Between
            Group       3.29       1      3.29    9.14             0.00
            Within
            Group       20.13      56     0.36
            Total       23.42      57




KAIST                                                                                CISers
                                                                          Doctoral Dissertation



   Contribution and Future Studies                                   VII.Conclusion




         Contribution

           • Extend previous studies (Bloodgood & Salisbury, 2001)

           • Propose a “skewed arc model”

           • Illustrates a dynamic features of KM

           • Guideline for building effective KM strategies


         Future Studies

           • Identify relationship between KM enablers and creation processes

           • Particular industries or companies




KAIST                                                                                 CISers

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:4
posted:12/30/2011
language:English
pages:76