Knowledge Management and Its Impact on Organizational Performance - Research Paper Example

Research Methods for Managers Research Proposal Template for N1054 *Please use this template for completing your Research Proposal. Do not redesign this template. The font is Arial and the font size is 12; spacing is single; full justification. Your ID: 109003 Title of Research: Knowledge Management and its Impact on Organizational Performance Introduction The advent of global competition and the emerging challenges that are facing organizations and the industry today are creating pressure on organizations. The establishment of long-term goals competitive advantage from a knowledge and information management point of view is not effective in terms of allowing a business to gain sufficient access to external and internal information resources (Brinkerhoff, 2005). Today, it is appropriate for an enterprise to exploit not only the assets that it owns, but what it knows. This approach is referred to as knowledge management, and is can be established effectively in commercial enterprises (Becerra-Fernandez & Sabherwal, 2010). Today, this concept is taking development establishment, particularly in the case of large bilateral and multilateral enterprises by storm (Ahn & Chang, 2009). In a simple sense, knowledge management refers to effective use of the knowledge that an organization has as well as the ability that it has with respect to learning from past experiences (Ahn & Chang, 2009). An economy that is based on knowledge is emerging, and knowledge management is being dispersed to various academic circles as well as in the business environment (Niu, 2008). Though a large number of organizations are investing in knowledge management initiatives, most of these tend to retain a technical perspective on a large proportion (Asoh, et al., 2008). The major problem that prevails in the case of this focus is the exclusion as well as neglect of the potential benefits that may be realized from this initiative. This paper will evaluate whether knowledge has significant impact in terms of boosting the performance of an organization. Literature review (Literature Review Recent surveys reveal that issues such as measuring the value of knowledge management as well as evaluating its performance play a vital role in assisting managers to make appropriate decisions in an enterprise (Teruya, 2012). With the growing role of knowledge management in terms of boosting the competitiveness of an enterprise, managers are developing interest in evaluating and measuring both the performance and benefits of knowledge management (Carrillo, 2010). As a result, a vital research issue comes up regarding how most organizations have initiated knowledge management to develop suitable metrics that allow them to gauge the effectiveness that results from the initiative that they embark on. This means that there is a need to adopt metrics to justify the knowledge management initiatives that an enterprise adopts (Bose, 2008). The underlying assumption in this case is that it is possible to view knowledge from a unified perspective. This is because it circulates within an enterprise where it creates knowledge assets, and also influences the way in which an enterprise performs (Holt, et al., 2004). As a result, it has a number of multi-faceted traits, such as state of having a good access to information, object, state of mind, or the potential that affects actions in the future (Chai, et al., 2011). Knowledge management refers to a systematic process that targets capturing as well as communicating knowledge to people for them so use. Other people regard knowledge management as understanding your knowledge assets, and how you can generate profits from them. To understand knowledge management in simple terms, it implies sharing what you have with other people. Based on these illustrations, the emphasis of knowledge management is to emphasize on the knowhow of humans and the manner in which it helps to bring value to an enterprise. However, it is not easy to utilize the expertise of an individual to realize maximum returns in an enterprise (Chai, et al., 2011). As a result, knowledge management is applied to create room for disciplined and systematic actions that an organization can adopt so as to realize value from the knowledge that is has available to it (UNC, 2013). In this perspective, knowledge targets people’s understanding and experiences towards an organization, and sources of information such as reports and documents that are available inside an enterprise as well as the surrounding environment (Wickramasinghe, 2010). Effective management of knowledge demands an effective combination of social, organizational, and managerial initiatives that go along with it, especially with respect to the deployment of relevant knowledge (Coakes, 2003). Also, frameworks for Evaluating Performance of Knowledge Management must be adopted in Organizational Performance. So as to manage knowledge in a successful manner, it deserves to be measured. However, it is not yet clear how this move can be enacted (Levinson, 2014). Measuring the amount of contribution that knowledge management makes towards an organization poses challenges because it is not tangible. Practitioners of knowledge management are usually requested to provide empirical evidence on its contribution towards realizing the objectives of a corporation (Coakes, 2003). However, it is not possible to come up with proper measurement since knowledge cannot be measured. It is not simple to evaluate the impact that knowledge management has on the performance of an organization since this issue is not the only one that influences the performance of an enterprise. It may be influenced by other forces such as conditions within the industry and the competitive environment (Wickramasinghe, 2010). Research questions/Hypotheses and/or Research objectives This research aimed at answering a number of questions pertaining to the impact of knowledge management on the performance of an organization. These are as follows: Is it worthwhile for a business enterprise to invest its efforts in the knowledge management concept?; Can the investment of knowledge management in an enterprise allows a firm to emerge successful in the industry?; Does the concept of knowledge management allow an enterprise to become effective in its operations or make it to become more productive? Is the implementation of knowledge management concept capable of reducing costs, boost the profitability of a firm and improve the decision making process? Does the knowledge management have an impact on the organizational performance? Does the major problem that prevails in the case of knowledge management work as potential benefits that may be realized in Organizational performance? Does the concept of knowledge management adopt the concept of developmental establishment of an enterprise? Who are the targets of knowledge management in the current society? What are the objectives of knowledge management in boosting the performance of an organization? Research Objective: The research aims at evaluating whether knowledge has significant impact in terms of boosting the performance of an organization. Research Method Various assessments have been carried out towards the contribution of knowledge management on the performance of an enterprise. For instance, Ahn and Chang offer a mechanism of assessing the contribution of knowledge towards the performance of an enterprise by encompassing processes and products to serve as intermediaries (Ahn & Chang, 2009). Knowledge of a product is heavily associated with the specific product that a company offers. Knowledge of processes is related with the activities that are undertaken in an enterprise at every stage in the value chain. This ranges from inbound logistics to care that is provided to a customer (UNC, 2013). Holt et al. in the same manner adopted four metrics to undertake assessments on the knowledge of an enterprise by targeting individuals, context, process, and content knowledge measures (Holt, et al., 2004). These approaches allow people to associate knowledge with the performance of an enterprise in an explicit manner, as well as offer valuable insight on the way knowledge can be managed (Levinson, 2014). However, initiatives pertaining to knowledge management should be able to demonstrate their value as well as benefits so as to realize sufficient support from various stakeholders (UNC, 2013). As a result, a number of researchers categorize the performance of knowledge management into internal measurement, external measurement, and organizational-oriented analysis, project oriented analysis, as well as the Success Case method (Niu, 2008). Internal Performance Analysis: Internal performance form of measurement emphasizes on the efficiency of a process and goal achievement (Haugh, 2009). These methods evaluate the performance of knowledge management by evaluating the gap that prevails in the case of target as well as current value (Haugh, 2009).. The common mechanisms that can be adopted in this case include NPV, ROI, BSC (Balanced Score Card), activity-based evaluation, performance-based evaluation among other models (Niu, 2008). Analysis of External Performance: The external performance measurement compares the performance of a company with various benchmark companies, the average of the industry or primary competitors (Teruya, 2012). For instance, benchmarking is a process that targets the one who sets standards, who is the best and what the standard is (DeFillippi, 2012). By applying the benchmarking concept to an enterprise, it is essential to ask which company adopts the best manufacturing standards (Moballeghi & Galyani, 2011). In this case, firms can be able to develop an understanding of the relevance of knowledge performance by comparing a firm with its competitors (Bresnen, et al., 2010). Project-Oriented Analysis: Most projects target the development of new processes and products. In this case, obvious opportunities tend to present themselves, especially with respect to emergence of novel ideas as well as cross-functional learning (Holt, et al., 2004). This plays a crucial role with respect to boosting the innovative potential and capacity of an enterprise (Bresnen, et al., 2010). Organization-Oriented Analysis: There is rising importance pertaining to management of effective knowledge in organizations, and it is crucial for organizations to be able to measure their position on the subject (Moballeghi & Galyani, 2011). Timetable Internal Performance Analysis, Analysis of External Performance, Project-Oriented Analysis and Organization-Oriented Analysis takes one year where there is measurement and determination of the efficiency of a process and goal achievement (Carrillo, 2010). In this case, Internal Performance Analysis takes 2 months, Analysis of External Performance takes 3 months, and Project-Oriented Analysis takes 4 months, while Organization-Oriented Analysis takes 4 months. All totalling to a time frame of 1 year, equivalent to one financial year of a company (Del-Ray-Chamoro, et al., 2008). The analysis targets an entire organizational based on multi-layering and multi-dimensional aspects of an enterprise (Kamara, et al., 2011). Practical issues relating to the operationalization of the research programme Success Case Method (SCM) The SCM method provides an effective framework with respect to measuring the impact of knowledge management implementations on the performance of an enterprise. SCM originally appeared in the field of human resource development so as to evaluate the impact that they have on return on investment (Jennex, 2007). It was developed with an aim of address the minimal effectiveness of the traditional approach towards evaluation, and in reporting cases of success while in the field of evaluating programs (King, 2009). Being motivated by the need to evaluate the effect of training in the context of managing performance as opposed to traditional methods, the SCM method seeks to identify the success that is associated with training so as to process performance or the weaknesses that prevail in the course (Jennex, 2007). In addition, it is intended to help individuals to identify the processes that work, which ones have not, and the results that have been realized, which are more important, the appropriate initiatives to embark on so as to improve the outcome of future efforts (Khosrowpour, 2004). The SCM model stipulates that it is possible for organizations to learn how they can improve their performance by analyzing the performance of those that have been highly successful and those who have been least successful in the market (King, 2009). By applying these qualitative methods, then it is possible for SCM to pinpoint those extremes that are not possible to witness in the case of quantitative methods. References Ahn, J H & Chang, S G. 2009. Assessing the contribution of knowledge to business performance: The KP3 Methodolog, Desicion Support Systems, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 403-416. Asoh, D, Belardo, D & Neilson, R. 2008. Knowledge management: issues, challenges, and oppostunities for governments in the new economy, IEEE Press, Big Island. Becerra-Fernandez, I & Sabherwal, R 2010, Knowledge Management: Systems and Processes, M.E. Sharpe, Boston. Bose, R. 2008. Knowledge management metrics, Industrial Management and Data Systems, vol. 104, no. 6, pp. 457-468. Bresnen, M L, Edelman, S, Newell, H & Swan, J. 2010. Social practices and the management in project environments, International Journal of Project Management, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 157-166. Brinkerhoff, R O. 2005. The success case method: Finf out quickly whats working and whats not, Berret-Koehler, San Francisco. Carrillo, F J. 2010. Capital cities: A taxonomy of capital accounts for knowledge cities, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 28-46. Chai, K H, Gregory, M & Shi, Y. 2011. Bridging islands of knowledge: A framework of knowledge sharing mechanisms, International Journal of Technology Management, vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 703-727. Coakes, E. 2003. Knowledge Management: Current Issues and Challenges, Idea Group Inc, New York. DeFillippi, R J. 2012. Project-based learning, reflective practices and learning outcomes, Management Learning, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 5-10. Del-Ray-Chamoro, F M, Roy, R, Wageb, B & Steele, A 2008, A framework to create key performance indicators for knowledge management solutions, Journal of Knowlegdge Management, vol. 7 , no. 2, pp. 46-62. Haugh, R. 2009. ROI: Return on Investment? Or Relying on Instinct, Hospitals and Health Networks, vol. 76, no. 1, pp. 38-40. Holt, D T, Bartczak, S E, Clark, S W & Trent, M R. 2004. The development of an instrument to measure readiness for knowledge management, IEEE Press, Big Island. Jennex, M E. 2007. Knowledge Management in Modern Organizations, Idea Group Inc, New York. Johnson, B. 2011. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, Academic Conferences Limited, London. Kamara, J, Anumba, M C & Carrillo, P M 2011, A clever approach to selecting a knowledge management strategy, International Journal of Project Management, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 205-211. Khosrowpour, M. 2004. Issues & Trends of Information Technology Management in Contemporary Organizations, Idea Group Inc, New York. King, W R. 2009. Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning, Springer, New York. Levinson, M. 2014. Knowledge Management Definition and Solutions, viewed 22 April 2014, . Moballeghi, M & Galyani, G. 2011. Knowledge management and measuring its impact on organizational performance, International Conference on Financial Management and Economics , vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 315-318. Niu, K H. 2008. Understanding Knowledge Management and Organizational Adaptation and the Influencing Effects of Trust and Industrial Cluster, ProQuest, Texas. Teruya, S A. 2012. Measuring performance improvemen: A knowledge management perspetive, Performance improvement, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 33-39. UNC. 2013. What Is Knowledge Management?, viewed 22 April 2014, . Wickramasinghe, G N. 2010., Principles of Knowledge Management, M.E. Sharpe, Boston. Read More