知识管理实施案例

June 5, 2006 11:38 00136 Journal of Information & Knowledge Management, Vol. 5, No. 2 (2006) 107–115 c© iKMS & World Scientific Publishing Co. Knowledge Management Implementation in SMEs: A Framework and a Case Illustration Abdelkader Daghfous∗ School of Business and Management American University of Sharjah P.O Box 26666, Sharjah, U.A.E adaghfous@aus.edu Muhammadou M. O. Kah School of Information Technology and Communications Abti-American University of Nigeria, Lamido Zubairu Way P.M.B. 250, Yola, Adamawa State, Nigeria mkah@american.edu Abstract. In today’s hyper-competitive marketplace it is pivotal for firms to master the art of integrating disparate sources of knowledge. Managing knowledge requires a complex combination of new tools, infrastructure, intellectual capi- tal, processes, strategies, and their coexistence and integra- tion with the existing ones. Although knowledge management (KM) implementation appears relatively risky and overwhelm- ing, it starts with a few steps and requires assistance from inside and outside the organisation. This paper examines the implementation of KM from a dynamic capabilities perspec- tive (Teece et al., 1997) and proposes a model that summarises the normative framework, which suggests that an organisation builds the requisite infrastructure to be in a position to embark on the path towards successful KM implementation. Based on a case study of a UAE based firm, this paper illustrates the utility of the framework as a guide in efforts to manage knowl- edge, draws practical recommendations for managers and pol- icy makers enabling them to develop their organisations in the global knowledge economy. The paper also proposes ideas for future research. Keywords: Knowledge management (KM); adoption and implementation; infrastructure; dynamic capabilities; Middle East Countries. 1. Introduction The triad of Europe, Japan, and the US has been the main focus of research and debates on the role of knowledge in the competitiveness of firms in the global economy. With the exponential growth in Internet usage and its world- wide availability, information technology (IT) has been hailed as the saviour of developing countries and their ticket out of poverty and marginalisation. Advocates of this development path succeeded in steering private and public investments towards advancing IT implementation, infrastructure, research, and educational programs. For instance, among Arab countries, the UAE boasts the high- est number of telephone lines, websites, and Internet users per 1000 residents (UNDP, 2002). Like Egypt’s Smart Village and Jordan’s Silicon Hills, the UAE also has two IT free zones, namely Dubai Internet City and Dubai Media City. The realisation that bridging the digital divide is only a small step towards global competitiveness resulted in a new focus on human development, human resource devel- opment, and continuous learning. For instance, the Arab Human Development Report (2002) recognised the value of knowledge and innovation in global competitiveness and as an explanatory variable in the study of the dig- ital divide. In addition, several studies have shown that a performance advantage granted by easily imitated IT is short lived (e.g. Dehning and Stratopoulos, 2003). In the Middle East, this paradigm shift is timely and critical for better private and public investments that aim at growth, development, and competitiveness. Although the value of knowledge may not be new, managing it and leveraging it for competitive advantage is new and perhaps even nec- essary for survival in the global marketplace. Various strategies (e.g., see Earl, 2001; Hansen et al., 1999) and approaches of systematically implementing and integrating Knowledge Management (KM) with the rest of an organisation’s practices and operations have been studied without arriving at comprehensive KM models, ∗Corresponding author. 107 June 5, 2006 11:38 00136 108 A. Daghfous and M. M. O. Kah partly because the concept is still relatively young. Suc- cessful KM requires companies to identify, evaluate, and alter the existing capabilities that can support knowl- edge management (Gold et al., 2001). The objective of this paper is to build on such research by providing a framework of KM implementation based on the dynamic capabilities approach. The framework focuses on assessing and setting a target for a company’s infrastructures (both organisational and technological) that need to be built before KM processes can be adopted and implemented along an evolutionary path. This paper starts with a the- oretical background on KM, followed by a framework of the dynamic capabilities that need to be developed to suc- cessfully implement KM. Finally, a case study conducted in one of the Sharjah Airport International Free (SAIF) Zone companies in the UAE is presented. 2. Knowledge Management Ming Yu (2002) found that most organisations seek four main benefits of KM. These benefits are capturing and sharing best practices, providing training or corporate learning, effectively managing customer relationships, and delivering competitive intelligence. Other advantages of successful KM implementation include fewer mistakes, less redundancy, quicker problem solving, better decision making, reduced research development costs, increased worker independence, enhanced customer relations, and improved service (Fernandez, 1999). Knowledge can be either explicit or tacit in nature (Davenport et al. 1998). Explicit knowledge is informa- tion that can be easily articulated and shared with others, while tacit knowledge is personal knowledge residing in individual’s heads; and it is very difficult to codify (Gupta and McDaniel, 2002). A key objective of KM is to ensure that the right knowledge is available to the right person at the right time in a manner that enables timely decision- making (Hariharan, 2002). Although KM has achieved a level of popularity among many firms worldwide, it has no unique or standardised definition (Nonaka, 1994). Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) define knowledge as a true justi- fied belief. Tuomi (1999) questions this definition, claim- ing that we know the world in the same way as facts, through socially constructed and historically developed distinctions. Leonard and Sesipar (1998) define knowledge as information that is relevant, actionable and based par- tially on experience. O’Dell and Grayson (1998) define knowledge as what people in organisations know about their products, customers, processes, mistakes, and suc- cess. Furthermore, Davenport and Prusak (1998) define knowledge as a fluid mix of framed experience, values, contextual information and expert insight that provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new expe- riences and information. KM is also conceived as the process of opening communication channels and foster- ing knowledge flow in the firm through teamwork so that it can be used, enhanced, and built upon to leverage the performance of individuals and consequently the whole firm (LaMonica, 2001). In other places in the literature, KM is defined as the process of capturing and organising individual and organisational knowledge within its con- text and making it accessible to everyone in the company. Thus, KM enables companies to optimise the use of their collective knowledge to achieve business goals and acquire a sustainable competitive advantage (Davenport et al., 1998). 3. Knowledge Management Activities and Processes There are virtually an unlimited number of KM related activities that a firm can implement. In this section, they are grouped into four main categories, namely knowl- edge creation (generation), conversion (codification and storage), transfer (access and absorption), and applica- tion (use). 3.1. Knowledge creation Knowledge creation processes or acquisition pro- cesses means doing both, capturing outside knowledge, and developing new knowledge from existing content (Davenport et al., 1996). Knowledge is created as a prod- uct of socialisation. For instance, new tacit knowledge can be created out of existing tacit knowledge through shared expertise and creative problem solving, (Leonard- Barton, 1995). Meanwhile, Davenport and Prusak (1998) identified five modes of knowledge generation, which are acquisition and rental from outside sources, use of dedi- cated resources such as R&D facilities, fusion of different perspectives, adaptation to avoid core rigidities (also see Leonard-Barton, 1995), and establishment of formal and informal networks of knowers. 3.2. Knowledge conversion Knowledge conversion or codification processes include locating knowledge, evaluating it for usefulness and rel- evance, and eventually codifying it (Leonard-Barton, 1995). The purpose here is to store and reapply knowl- edge and workable solutions as procedures that can be Sharjah is one of the Emirates in the UAE. June 5, 2006 11:38 00136 Knowledge Management Implementation in SMEs: A Framework and a Case Illustration 109 used instead of replicating the work every time a problem occurs (Maryam and Leidner, 2001). Hence, knowledge codification organises knowledge and makes it explicit, portable, accessible, and applicable to everyone who needs it in the firm. IT plays a key role in storing this codified information and making it available when needed. 3.3. Knowledge transfer Many entities are involved in transferring knowledge in an organisation. For instance, knowledge is transferred between individuals, individuals and explicit sources, peo- ple and groups, multiple groups, and from groups to the whole firm (Maryam and Leidner, 2001). Knowledge transfer is driven by communication processes and infor- mation flows within the company and among its part- ners. Effective knowledge transfer depends on three main factors: (1) mutual willingness of knowledge supplier and receiver to exchange knowledge, (2) existence and qual- ity of transfer channels, and (3) absorptive capacity of the recipient. Although availability of transfer channels is vital to achieving effective knowledge transfer, they are of no value if the recipient does nothing with the transmitted knowledge. Knowledge transfer could also be inhibited or slowed down by factors such as lack of trust, lack of com- mon language, lack of time and meeting places (Davenport and Prusak, 1998), and lack of absorptive capacity of the recipient (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990). 3.4. Knowledge application The principal source of a firm’s competitive advantage resides in the application of knowledge rather than in the knowledge itself (Alavi and Leidner, 2001). Applica- tion of knowledge refers to the commercial application of knowledge to achieve organisational objectives (Lane and Lubatkin, 1998). Grant (1996) identified three primary mechanisms for the integration of knowledge, which are: (1) directives (rules and standards developed for efficient communication to non-specialists), (2) organisational rou- tines, and (3) creation of self-contained task teams for problems with high uncertainty and complexity (Alavi and Leidner, 2001). 4. Technological Infrastructure Requirements Specific organisational and technological infrastructures are prerequisites to ensure smooth KM implementation. Most KM projects rely on IT as an important enabler to support the activities of knowledge creation, codifica- tion, transfer and application. For instance, at the cre- ation stage, IT can be used for active and continuous learning, hence, the generation of new knowledge. Tech- nologies such as data warehousing and mining, broad knowledge repositories, software agents and intranets can facilitate the creation of a virtual place or space, which is at the heart of knowledge creation. Other technolo- gies can include information systems designed to support collaboration, coordination and communication to facil- itate teamwork, thereby increasing contact with others (Maryam and Leidner, 2001). KM technologies could also be used to aug- ment knowledge storage and retrieval through the use of computer storage technologies and sophisticated retrieval techniques such as query languages, multime- dia databases, and database management systems. These tools increase the speed at which organisational knowl- edge could be accessed. Meanwhile, document man- agement technologies can be used for storing explicit knowledge that is dispersed among the different units in an organisation. However, for rich tacit knowledge, multi- media technologies such as videoconferencing can be used to transfer this type of knowledge to remote locations. IT can also contribute to the effective application of knowl- edge by embedding knowledge into organisational routines and procedures. Such technologies include decision sup- port systems, expert systems and artificial intelligence, constraint-base systems and workflow automation sys- tems that automate the routing of work related doc- uments, rules and information (Maryam and Leidner, 2001). The above-mentioned technologies are effective tools for storing vast amounts of data and information and promoting the processes of knowledge creation, stor- age/retrieval, transfer and application. However, these technologies lack the ability to codify or create tacit knowledge. Therefore, they fail to duplicate or codify human intelligence, intuition, and experience. Another shortcoming of KM technologies is their inability to ensure that the knowledge available in repositories will be accessed and used effectively. 5. Organisational Infrastructure Requirements Organisational infrastructure encompasses a large variety of components and aspects. This section focuses only on managerial systems and corporate culture. 5.1. Managerial systems Managerial systems are particularly important for defining access privileges to knowledge and controlling its creation and flow (Leonard-Barton, 1995). For instance, June 5, 2006 11:38 00136 110 A. Daghfous and M. M. O. Kah hiring individuals who have the necessary knowledge as well as the learning potential would increase the likeli- hood of success of KM initiatives. Once on the job, edu- cational and other learning programs would enhance their expertise and skills. This, however, necessitates a certain amount of slack time, space, and resources so that employ- ees can acquire knowledge and share it with others. The reward system is also a key component of this infrastruc- ture since its reflect management’s commitment to KM as well as affects employees motivation to create, codify, share, and use knowledge productively. 5.2. Cultural values and norms In addition to managerial systems, values and norms of corporate culture act as screening mechanisms that fil- ter the ‘what and how’ aspects of knowledge (Sbarcea, 1998). A learning environment, in which individuals are respected, failure is tolerated, and the management is open to new ideas and innovations, supports KM. A cru- cial corporate value in a KM firm is the commitment of upper management to the continuous support of knowl- edge codification and sharing. This commitment would result in the formation of productive formal and informal communication networks important for transferring tacit and explicit knowledge (Birkinshawm, 2003). Such cor- porate values and norms also facilitate and promote the establishment of a system and an environment of knowl- edge sharing, as opposed to knowledge hoarding. 6. The Dynamic Capabilities Approach to KM Implementation The dynamic capabilities approach used in this paper sug- gests that to implement KM in an organisation, inter- nal and external competencies should be integrated, built, and reconfigured to respond to a changing environment. Certain capabilities, namely organisational and techno- logical infrastructures, should be developed to success- fully implement and integrate KM into the organisation (Nonaka, 1994). These infrastructures evolve along certain evolutionary paths comprised of business processes, which in turn interact and support the various KM initiatives (Teece et al., 1997). 7. A Knowledge Management Implementation Framework The proposed framework (see Fig. 1) includes three main phases: Initiation, adoption, and implementa- tion. Since the dynamic capabilities approach follows a sequential path, implementation of knowledge activities ADOPTION Modify positions to accommodate KM processes IMPLEMENTATION Apply KM processes along evolutionary path Knowledge creation Knowledge conversion Knowledge transfer Knowledge application and protection INITIATION Enthusiastic Individual KM Objectives Infrastructure Assessment Fig. 1. A knowledge management implementation framework. cannot take place before adopting organisational and tech- nological infrastructures. 7.1. Initiation KM projects are likely to be generated by an enthusi- astic individual who is committed to the initiative and is willing to find the capital and human resources neces- sary for the project. Knowledge-specific objectives must be aligned with the corporate objectives. Examples of these KM objectives are (1) “creating knowledge reposi- tories,” (2) “improving knowledge access,” (3) “enhancing the knowledge environment,” and (4) “managing knowl- edge as an asset” (Davenport et al., 1998). Once these objectives are set, they need to be communicated to all employees in the company. This lays the founda- tion for a clear beginning for a KM initiative. The final step in initiation is assessing the current organisational and technological infrastructure (current position) to see how far they are from the target (future position), and what processes need to be adopted throughout that path (Mullin, 1996). 7.2. Adoption During this phase, company positions are modified in order to create a positive orientation towards KM, which is an important prerequisite for successful application of knowledge activities. It is not enough to assume that once knowledge is created, converted, transmitted and applied, people would immediately start using it or participating in its activities. Therefore, the motivational component June 5, 2006 11:38 00136 Knowledge Management Implementation in SMEs: A Framework and a Case Illustration 111 of KM adoption and implementation should be a top pri- ority. Employees need to understand what KM is about, and what benefits they would gain from applying it. 7.3. Implementation Once the infrastructures for implementing KM are in place, knowledge activities can be executed. An organ- isation embarking on the path to KM implementation first creates knowledge or captures it, then converts it into usable forms, transfers it, and finally uses and protects it (Soliman and Spooner, 2000). Along this path, the organ- isational and technological infrastructures established in the previous stages are utilised extensively and continu- ously updated to enhance the speed and effectiveness of these knowledge activities. 8. A Case Illustration Simons (1994) explained that to become more attractive suppliers to original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), small manufacturers must become “knowledge giants.” He asserted that, besides price, quality, and service, knowl- edge has become the fourth key supplier selection fac- tor. Yet et al. (2001) found that SMEs had a mecha- nistic approach to knowledge and lacked investment in KM approaches and systems. Zetie (2002) also found that SME managers feel more comfortable with change con- cepts such as TQM than with KM. Similarly, Rahman (2004) found that only 36% of the SMEs surveyed in Malaysia were practising formal KM, compared with 59% in the education sector and 57% of government depart- ments and agencies. This case study is based on a private company located in the Sharjah Airport International Free (SAIF) Zone area in the UAE, which represents a major commerce hub in the Middle East. The SAIF Zone was the world’s first ISO 9001 certified airport free zone and gained an excellent re