Know 4 Updated-II.0

CHAPTER IV
DATA ANALYSIS
AND DISCUSSION
IV.1Main Business Focus

The respondents were asked to mention the main business focus of their company
(Refer question number 1 in Appendix 1). Selection of more than one option was
permitted. The options comprised Animation and Gaming, BPM, Engineering /
Embedded / R & D, Internet and e-commerce, IT Services, and Product. Their
responses are presented in table 4.1.
Table 4.1
Main Business Focus
Main Business Focus
Animation and Gaming
BPM
Engineering / Embedded /
R&D
Internet and e-commerce
IT Services
Product
Source: Primary Data.
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
0
145
(%)
0
12.5
62
5.4
123
1117
123
10.6
96.6
10.6
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.1 that

Discussion: IT services dominates other options with respect to main business focus
of the company.
IV.2Knowledge Sharing Challenges

Please rank the following challenges encountered in your company with respect to
knowledge sharing (1 for highest ranking; 9 for lowest ranking):
a) Routines and procedures followed in your organisation pertaining to
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
knowledge sharing
Content barriers.
Lack of willingness to share knowledge.
Lack of an identity for the individual in the organisation / department.
No knowledge about knowledge sharing.
Personal barriers.
Technology barriers.
Weak culture of sharing.
Weak relationship between a receiver and a sender of knowledge.
IV.2.1 Challenge 1: Routines and procedures

The respondents were asked to rank Routines and procedures followed in your
organisation pertaining to knowledge sharing amongst nine challenges encountered in
the company while engaging in knowledge sharing (Refer Question number 2 in
Appendix 1). The options comprised Rank 1 (highest ranking) up to Rank 9 (lowest
ranking). The analysis is presented in Table 2 and Figure 4.2.
Table 4.2
Routines and procedures
Ranking
Rank 1
Rank 2
Rank 3
Rank 4
Rank 5
Rank 6
Rank 7
Rank 8
Rank 9
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
314
115
76
142
59
74
110
115
151
(%)
27.2
9.9
6.6
12.3
5.1
6.4
9.5
9.9
13.1
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.2 that 27.2% of the respondents gave Rank
1;9.9% of the respondents gave Rank 2; 6.6% of the respondents gave Rank 3; 12.3%
of the respondents gave Rank 4; 5.1% of the respondents gave Rank 5; 6.4% of the
respondents gave Rank 6; 9.5% of the respondents gave Rank 7; 9.9% of the
respondents gave Rank 8; 13.1% of the respondents gave Rank 9 for the knowledge
sharing challenge Routines and procedures.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Rank 1 to the knowledge sharing
challenge Routines and procedures.
IV.2.2 Challenge 2: Content barriers

The respondents were asked to rank Content barriers amongst nine challenges
encountered in the company while engaging in knowledge sharing (Refer Question
number 2 in Appendix 1). The options comprised Rank 1 (highest ranking) up to Rank
9 (lowest ranking). The analysis is presented in Table 3 and Figure 4.3.
Table 4.3
Content barriers
Ranking
Rank 1
Rank 2
Rank 3
Rank 4
Rank 5
Rank 6
Rank 7
Rank 8
Rank 9
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
118
204
148
135
171
126
88
107
59
(%)
10.2
17.6
12.8
11.7
14.8
10.9
7.6
9.3
5.1
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.2 that 10.2% of the respondents gave Rank 1;
17.6% of the respondents gave Rank 2; 12.8% of the respondents gave Rank 3; 11.7%
sharing challenge Content barriers.
challenge Content barriers.
IV.2.3 Challenge 3:Lack of willingness to share

The respondents were asked to rank Lack of willingness to share knowledge
amongst nine challenges encountered in the company while engaging in knowledge
sharing (Refer Question number 2 in Appendix 1). The options comprised Rank 1
(highest ranking) up to Rank 9 (lowest ranking). The analysis is presented in Table 4
and Figure 4.4.
Table 4.4
Lack of willingness to share
Ranking
Rank 1
Rank 2
Rank 3
Rank 4
Rank 5
Rank 6
Rank 7
Rank 8
Rank 9
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
154
167
228
80
93
113
122
103
96
(%)
13.3
14.4
19.7
6.9
8.0
9.8
10.6
8.9
8.3
sharing challenge Lack of willingness to share knowledge.
challenge Lack of willingness to share knowledge.
IV.2.4 Challenge 4:Lack of an identity

The respondents were asked to rank Lack of an identity for the individual in the
organisation / department amongst nine challenges encountered in the company while
engaging in knowledge sharing (Refer Question number 2 in Appendix 1). The
options comprised Rank 1 (highest ranking) up to Rank 9 (lowest ranking). The
analysis is presented in Table 5 and Figure 4.5.
Table 4.5
Lack of an identity
Ranking
Rank 1
Rank 2
Rank 3
Rank 4
Rank 5
Rank 6
Rank 7
Rank 8
Rank 9
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
90
146
136
198
121
121
111
134
99
(%)
7.8
12.6
11.8
17.1
10.5
10.5
9.6
11.6
8.6
sharing challenge Lack of an identity.
challenge Lack of an identity for the individual in the organisation / department.
IV.2.5 Challenge 5:No knowledge about Sharing

The respondents were asked to rank No knowledge about knowledge sharing
amongst nine challenges encountered in the company while engaging in knowledge
sharing (Refer Question number 2 in Appendix 1). The options comprised Rank 1
(highest ranking) up to Rank 9 (lowest ranking). The analysis is presented in Table 6
and Figure 4.6.
Table 4.6
No knowledge about Sharing
Ranking
Rank 1
Rank 2
Rank 3
Rank 4
Rank 5
Rank 6
Rank 7
Rank 8
Rank 9
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
83
60
114
82
269
99
128
126
195
(%)
7.2
5.2
9.9
7.1
23.3
8.6
11.1
10.9
16.9
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.2 that 7.2% of the respondents gave Rank 1;5.2
% of the respondents gave Rank 2; 9.9% of the respondents gave Rank 3; 7.1% of the
sharing challenge No knowledge about knowledge sharing.
challenge No knowledge about knowledge sharing.
IV.2.6 Challenge 6:Personal barriers

The respondents were asked to rank Personal barriers amongst nine challenges
Table 4.7
Personal barriers
Ranking
Rank 1
Rank 2
Rank 3
Rank 4
Rank 5
Rank 6
Rank 7
Rank 8
Rank 9
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
113
107
119
136
112
284
121
82
82
(%)
9.8
9.3
10.3
11.8
9.7
24.6
10.5
7.1
7.1
% of the respondents gave Rank 2;10.3 % of the respondents gave Rank 3; 11.8% of
the respondents gave Rank 4; 9.7% of the respondents gave Rank 5; 24.6% of the
sharing Personal barriers.
challenge Personal barriers.
IV.2.7 Challenge 7:Technology barriers

The respondents were asked to rank Technology barriers amongst nine challenges
Table 4.8
Technology barriers
Ranking
Rank 1
Rank 2
Rank 3
Rank 4
Rank 5
Rank 6
Rank 7
Rank 8
Rank 9
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
43
75
89
113
99
67
256
211
203
(%)
3.7
6.5
7.7
9.8
8.6
5.8
22.1
18.3
17.6
% of the respondents gave Rank 2; 7.7% of the respondents gave Rank 3; 9.8% of the
respondents gave Rank 4;8.6% of the respondents gave Rank 5; 5.8% of the
respondents gave Rank 8;17.6% of the respondents gave Rank 9 for the knowledge
sharing challenge Technology barriers.
challenge Technology barriers.
IV.2.8 Challenge 8:Weak culture

The respondents were asked to rank Weak culture of sharing amongst nine
challenges encountered in the company while engaging in knowledge sharing (Refer
Question number 2 in Appendix 1). The options comprised Rank 1 (highest ranking)
up to Rank 9 (lowest ranking). The analysis is presented in Table 9 and Figure 4.9.
Table 4.9
Weak culture
Ranking
Rank 1
Rank 2
Rank 3
Rank 4
Rank 5
Rank 6
Rank 7
Rank 8
Rank 9
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
182
111
128
87
149
154
113
187
45
(%)
15.7
9.6
11.1
7.5
12.9
13.3
9.8
16.2
3.9
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.2 that 15.7% of the respondents gave Rank 11;9.6 % of the respondents gave Rank 2; 11.1% of the respondents gave Rank 3; 7.5%
sharing challenge Weak culture of sharing.
challenge Weak culture of sharing.
IV.2.9 Challenge 9:Weak relationship

The respondents were asked to rank Weak relationship between a receiver and a
sender of knowledge amongst nine challenges encountered in the company while
engaging in knowledge sharing (Refer Question number 2 in Appendix 1). The
options comprised Rank 1 (highest ranking) up to Rank 9 (lowest ranking). The
analysis is presented in Table 10 and Figure 4.10.
Table 4.10
Weak relationship
Ranking
Rank 1
Rank 2
Rank 3
Rank 4
Rank 5
Rank 6
Rank 7
Rank 8
Rank 9
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
59
171
118
183
83
118
107
91
226
(%)
5.1
14.8
10.2
15.8
7.2
10.2
9.3
7.9
19.6
14.8% of the respondents gave Rank 2;10.2 % of the respondents gave Rank 3; 15.8%
sharing challenge Weak relationship between a receiver and a sender of knowledge.
challenge Weak relationship between a receiver and a sender of knowledge.
IV.2.11 Mean Rankings for Knowledge Sharing Challenges

The mean rankings for knowledge sharing challenges are presented in Table 4.11.
Table 4.11
Mean Rankings for Knowledge Sharing Challenges
Knowledge Sharing
Mean
Position
Challenges
Technology barriers
No knowledge about knowledge sharing
Weak relationship between a receiver and a
Ranking
6.1557
5.5978
5.2950
1
2
3
sender of knowledge
Personal barriers
Lack of an identity for the individual in the
4.9593
4.8901
4
5
organisation / department
Weak culture of sharing
Lack of willingness to share knowledge
Routines and procedures followed in your
4.7552
4.4784
4.4360
6
7
8
4.4325
organisation pertaining to knowledge

sharing
Content barriers
Summary:The highest ranked knowledge sharing challenges were technology

barriers, no knowledge about knowledge sharing, and weak relationship between a
receiver and a sender of knowledge. The least ranked knowledge sharing challenges
were content barriers, routines and procedures, and lack of willingness to share
knowledge.
IV.3 Social Media Environment

3. Please rate the following attributes of in your company (1 = Unsatisfactory, 2 =
Fair, 3 = Satisfactory, 4 = Good and 5 = Excellent). Some indicative examples of
Social Media include Social Networking Sites, blogs, microblogs, chats, forums,
communities, etc. that enable participation, conversation, sharing and creation of
knowledge among the users
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Social interaction within company.

Experience sharing across company.
Observation and listening to the shared multi-media content
Networking / informal relationships.
Mutual trust among associates on social media.
IV.3.1Social interaction within company

The respondents were asked to rate Social interaction within company one of the
social media environment attributes (Refer Question number 3 in Appendix 1). The
options comprised unsatisfactory (lowest rating), fair, satisfactory, good and excellent
(highest rating). Their responses are presented in Table 4.12 and Figure 4.11.
Table 4.12
Social interaction within company
Rating
Unsatisfactory
Fair
Satisfactory
Good
Excellent
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
47
230
367
349
163
1156
(%)
4.1
19.9
31.7
30.2
14.1
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.12 that 4.1% of the respondents rated
unsatisfactory; 19.9% of the respondents rated fair; 31.7% of the respondents rated
satisfactory; 30.2% of the respondents rated good; and 14.1% of the respondents rated
excellent for the social media environment attribute Social interaction within
company.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Satisfactory ratingfor the social media
environment attribute Social interaction within company.
IV.3.2Experience sharing across company

The respondents were asked to rate Experience sharing across company, one of the
Table 4.13
Experience sharing across company
Rating
Unsatisfactory
Fair
Satisfactory
Good
Excellent
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
105
299
368
264
120
1156
(%)
9.1
25.9
31.8
22.8
10.4
100.0
excellent for the social media environment attribute Experience sharing across
company.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Satisfactory rating for the social
media environment attribute Experience sharing across company.
IV.3.3 Observation and listening to shared content

The respondents were asked to rate Observation and listening to the shared multimedia content, one of the social media environment attributes (Refer Question
number 3 in Appendix 1). The options comprised unsatisfactory (lowest
rating), fair, satisfactory, good and excellent (highest rating). Their responses are
presented in Table 4.14 and Figure 4.13.
Table 4.14
Observation and listening to shared content
Rating
Unsatisfactory
Fair
Satisfactory
Good
Excellent
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
92
263
368
322
111
1156
(%)
8.0
22.8
31.8
27.9
9.6
100.0
excellent for the social media environment attribute Observation and listening to the
shared multi-media content.
media environment attribute Observation and listening to the shared multi-media
content.
IV.3.4 Networking / informal relationships

The respondents were asked to rate Networking / informal relationships, one of the
Table 4.15
Networking / informal relationships
Rating
Unsatisfactory
Fair
Satisfactory
Good
Excellent
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
67
213
388
354
134
1156
(%)
5.8
18.4
33.6
30.6
11.6
100.0
excellent for the social media environment attribute Networking / informal
relationships.
media environment attribute Networking / informal relationships.
IV.3.5 Mutual trust among associates

The respondents were asked to rate Mutual trust among associates on social media,
one of the social media environment attributes (Refer Question number 3 in Appendix
1). The options comprised unsatisfactory (lowest rating), fair, satisfactory, good
and excellent (highest rating). Their responses are presented in Table 4.16 and Figure
4.15.
Table 4.16
Mutual trust among associates
Rating
Unsatisfactory
Fair
Satisfactory
Good
Excellent
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
69
145
473
342
127
1156
(%)
6.0
12.5
40.9
29.6
11.0
100.0
excellent for the social media environment attribute Mutual trust among associates on
social media.
media environment attribute Mutual trust among associates on social media.
IV.3.6 Mean Ratings for Social Media Environment

The mean ratings for social media environment attributes are presented in Table 4.17.
Table 4.17
Mean Ratings for Social Media Environment
Social Media Environment
Mean
Position
Rating
Social interaction within company
3.3036
Mutual trust among associates on social media
3.2708
Networking / informal relationships
3.2379
Observation and listening to the shared multi-
3.0839
2.9957
media content
Experience sharing across company
Summary: The highest rated social media environment attributes were Social
interaction within company, and Mutual trust among associates on social media. The
least rated social media environment attributes were Experience sharing across
company, and Observation and listening to the shared multi-media content.
IV.4Individual Behaviour
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following attributes of Individual
Behaviour in your company (1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 =
Agree and 5 = Strongly Agree):
a) Individuals share information with their colleagues in other departments
b) Individuals share their skills with their colleagues in other departments
c) Job rotation leads to sharing information among employees.
IV.4.1 Individuals share information

The respondents were asked to rate Individuals share information with their
colleagues in other departments, one of the individual behaviour attributes (Refer
Question number 4 in Appendix 1). The options comprised strongly disagree (lowest
rating), disagree, neutral, agree and strongly agree (highest rating). Their responses
are presented in Table 4.18 and Figure 4.16.
Table 4.18
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
58
157
331
511
99
1156
(%)
5.0
13.6
28.6
44.2
8.6
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.18 that 5.0% of the respondents rated strongly
disagree; 13.6% of the respondents rated disagree; 28.6% of the respondents rated
neutral; 44.2% of the respondents rated agree; and 8.6% of the respondents rated
strongly agreefor the individual behaviour attribute Individuals share information with
their colleagues in other departments.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Agree rating for the individual
behaviour attribute Individuals share information with their colleagues in other
departments.
IV.4.2 Individuals share their skills

The respondents were asked to rate Individuals share their skills with their colleagues
in other departments, one of the individual behaviour attributes (Refer Question
number 4 in Appendix 1). The options comprised strongly disagree (lowest
Table 4.19
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
15
170
478
394
99
1156
(%)
1.3
14.7
41.3
34.1
8.6
100.0
strongly agree for the individual behaviour attribute Individuals share their skills
with their colleagues in other departments.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Neutral rating for the individual
behaviour attribute Individuals share their skills with their colleagues in other
departments.
IV.4.3 Job rotation

The respondents were asked to rate Job rotation leads to sharing information among
employees, one of the individual behaviour attributes (Refer Question number 4 in
Appendix
1).
The
options
comprised
strongly
disagree
(lowest
Table 4.20
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
30
90
311
512
213
1156
(%)
2.6
7.8
26.9
44.3
18.4
100.0
strongly agree for the individual behaviour attribute Job rotation leads to sharing
information among employees.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Agree rating for the individual
behaviour attribute Job rotation leads to sharing information among employees.
IV.4.4 Mean Ratings for Individual Behaviour

The mean ratings for individual behaviour attributes is presented in Table 4.21.
Table 4.21
Mean Ratings for Individual Behaviour
Individual Behaviour
Mean
Position
Rating
Job rotation leads to sharing information among
3.6817
3.3772
3.3391
employees
Individuals share information with their colleagues in
other departments
Individuals share their skills with their colleagues in
other departments
Summary: The highest rated individual behaviour attribute was job rotation leads to
sharing information among employees. The least rated individual behaviour attributes
was individuals share their skills with their colleagues in other departments.
IV.5Technology
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following attributes of Technology in
your company (1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree and 5 =
Strongly Agree)
a) Information Technologies are used to update and review data; and facilitate
communication with other departments.
b) Individuals use social media to interact with one another.
c) Individuals use intranet network to transfer their information.
d) Systems and software that contribute to sharing information exist across the
company.
IV.5.1 Information Technologies are used

The respondents were asked to rate Information Technologies are used to update and
review data; and facilitate communication with other departments, one of the
technology attributes (Refer Question number 5 in Appendix 1). The options
comprised strongly disagree (lowest rating), disagree, neutral, agree and strongly
agree (highest rating). Their responses are presented in Table 4.22 and Figure 4.19.
Table 4.22
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
30
60
294
578
194
1156
(%)
2.6
5.2
25.4
50.0
16.8
100.0
disagree;5.2% of the respondents rated disagree; 25.4% of the respondents rated
strongly agree for the technology attribute Information Technologies are used to
update and review data; and facilitate communication with other departments.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Agree rating for the technology
attribute Information Technologies are used to update and review data; and facilitate
communication with other departments.
IV5.2 Individuals use social media

The respondents were asked to rate Individuals use social media to interact with one
another, one of the technology attributes (Refer Question number 5 in Appendix 1).
The options comprised strongly disagree (lowest rating), disagree, neutral, agree
and strongly agree (highest rating). Their responses are presented in Table 4.23 and
Figure 4.20.
Table 4.23
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
47
219
420
306
164
1156
(%)
4.1
18.9
36.3
26.5
14.2
100.0
strongly agree for the technology attribute Individuals use social media to interact
with one another.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Neutral rating for the technology
attribute Individuals use social media to interact with one another.
IV.5.3 Individuals use intranet network

The respondents were asked to rate x,one of the technology attributes (Refer
Table 4.24
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
47
125
257
550
177
1156
(%)
4.1
10.8
22.2
47.6
15.3
100.0
strongly agree for the technology attribute Individuals use intranet network to
transfer their information.
attribute Individuals use intranet network to transfer their information.
IV.5.4 Systems and software

The respondents were asked to rate x,one of the technology attributes (Refer
Table 4.25
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
39
100
338
410
269
1156
(%)
3.4
8.7
29.2
35.5
23.3
100.0
strongly agree for the technology attribute Systems and software that contribute to
sharing information exist across the company.
attribute Systems and software that contribute to sharing information exist across the
company.
IV.5.5 Mean Ratings for Technology

The mean ratings for technology attributes are presented in Table 4.26.
Table 4.26
Mean Ratings for Technology
Technology
Mean
Position
Ratings
Information Technologies are used to update and
3.7318
3.6661
3.5926
3.2777
review data; and facilitate communication with

other departments
Systems and software that contribute to sharing
information exist across the company
Individuals use intranet network to transfer their
information
Individuals use social media to interact with one
another
Summary: The highest rated technology attribute was Information Technologies are
used to update and review data; and facilitate communication with other departments.
The least rated technology attribute was Individuals use social media to interact with
one another.
IV.6 Knowledge Sharing through Social Media

Please rate the following attributes of Knowledge Sharing through Social Media in
your company (1 = Unsatisfactory, 2 = Fair, 3 = Satisfactory, 4 = Good and 5 =
Excellent):
a) Knowledge Sharing Readiness.
b) Richness in exchanging Knowledge.
c) Continuous Knowledge Integration.
IV.6.1 Knowledge Sharing Readiness

The respondents were asked to rate Knowledge Sharing Readiness, one of the
knowledge sharing through social media attributes (Refer Question number 6 in
Appendix
1).
The
options
comprised
unsatisfactory
(lowest
Table 4.27
x
Rating
Unsatisfactory
Fair
Satisfactory
Good
Excellent
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
16
258
310
406
166
1156
(%)
1.4
22.3
26.8
35.1
14.4
100.0
excellent for the knowledge sharing through social media attribute Knowledge
Sharing Readiness.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Good rating for the knowledge
sharing through social media attribute Knowledge Sharing Readiness.
IV.6.2 Richness in exchanging Knowledge

The respondents were asked to rate Richness in exchanging Knowledge, one of the
Appendix
1).
The
options
comprised
unsatisfactory
(lowest
Table 4.28
x
Rating
Unsatisfactory
Fair
Satisfactory
Good
Excellent
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
44
253
389
297
173
1156
(%)
3.8
21.9
33.7
25.7
15.0
100.0
excellent for the knowledge sharing through social media attribute Richness in
exchanging Knowledge.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Satisfactory rating for the knowledge
sharing through social media attribute Richness in exchanging Knowledge.
IV.6.3 Continuous Knowledge Integration

The respondents were asked to rate Continuous Knowledge Integration, one of the
Appendix
1).
The
options
comprised
unsatisfactory
(lowest
Table 4.29
x
Rating
Unsatisfactory
Fair
Satisfactory
Good
Excellent
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
110
193
429
289
135
1156
(%)
9.5
16.7
37.1
25.0
11.7
100.0
excellent for the knowledge sharing through social media attribute Continuous
Knowledge Integration.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Satisfactory rating for the knowledge
sharing through social media attribute Continuous Knowledge Integration.
IV.6.4 Mean Ratings for Knowledge Sharing through Social Media

The mean ratings for knowledge sharing through social media attributes are presented
in table 4.30.
Table 4.30
Mean Ratings for Knowledge Sharing through Social Media
Knowledge Sharing through Social Media
Mean
Position
Rating
Knowledge Sharing Readiness
3.3875
Richness in exchanging Knowledge
3.2612
Continuous Knowledge Integration

3.1263
Summary: The highest rated knowledge sharing through social media attribute was
knowledge sharing readiness. The least rated knowledge sharing through social media
attribute was continuous knowledge integration.
IV.7 Socialisation
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following activities of Socialisation
with regards to Knowledge Creation Process in your company (1 = Strongly Disagree,
2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree and 5 = Strongly Agree). These activities aim to
increase and develop the personal (tacit) knowledge through others:
a) Company follows a systematic plan to rotate its staff across different
departments.
b) Detailed face-to-face discussions of work issues are encouraged in the
company.
c) Involving the company in joint projects supports staffs knowledge through
face-to-face interaction with others.
d) Company conducts meetings, seminars, workshops to discuss the updating of
work issues.
e) Company invites its qualified members and external experts to speak about
their beliefs, values and culture.
f) Company encourages informal meetings for tea, coffee, having lunch and
others.
g) Company encourages social activities outside the work place.
IV.7.1 Company follows a systematic plan

The respondents were asked to rate Company follows a systematic plan to rotate its
staff across different departments, one of the socialisation attributes (Refer Question
Table 4.31
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
91
259
358
333
115
1156
(%)
7.9
22.4
31.0
28.8
9.9
100.0
strongly agree for the socialisation attribute Company follows a systematic plan to
rotate its staff across different departments.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Neutral rating for the socialisation
attribute Company follows a systematic plan to rotate its staff across different
departments.
IV.7.2 Detailed face-to-face discussions

The respondents were asked to rate Detailed face-to-face discussions of work issues
are encouraged in the company, one of the socialisation attributes (Refer Question
Table 4.32
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
24
111
329
509
183
1156
(%)
2.1
9.6
28.5
44.0
15.8
100.0
strongly agree for the socialisation attribute Detailed face-to-face discussions of work
issues are encouraged in the company.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Agree rating for the socialisation
attribute Detailed face-to-face discussions of work issues are encouraged in the
company.
IV.7.3 Involving the company in joint projects

The respondents were asked to rate Involving the company in joint projects supports
staffs knowledge through face-to-face interaction with others, one of the
socialisation attributes (Refer Question number 7 in Appendix 1). The options
Table 4.33
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
16
54
494
524
68
1156
(%)
1.4
4.7
42.7
45.3
5.9
100.0
strongly agree for the socialisation attribute Involving the company in joint projects
supports staffs knowledge through face-to-face interaction with others.
attribute Involving the company in joint projects supports staffs knowledge through
face-to-face interaction with others.
IV.7.4 Company conducts meetings

The respondents were asked to rate Company conducts meetings, seminars,
workshops to discuss the updating of work issues, one of the socialisation attributes
(Refer Question number 7 in Appendix 1). The options comprised strongly disagree
(lowest rating), disagree, neutral, agree and strongly agree (highest rating). Their
responses are presented in Table 4.34 and Figure 4.29.
Table 4.34
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
24
126
319
561
126
1156
(%)
2.1
10.9
27.6
48.5
10.9
100.0
strongly agree for the socialisation attribute Company conducts meetings, seminars,
workshops to discuss the updating of work issues.
attribute Company conducts meetings, seminars, workshops to discuss the updating
of work issues.
IV.7.5 Company invites its qualified members

The respondents were asked to rate Company invites its qualified members and
external experts to speak about their beliefs, values and culture, one of the
socialisation attributes (Refer Question number 7 in Appendix 1). The options
Table 4.35
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
8
128
302
571
147
1156
(%)
0.7
11.1
26.1
49.4
12.7
100.0
strongly agree for the socialisation attribute Company invites its qualified members
and external experts to speak about their beliefs, values and culture.
attribute Company invites its qualified members and external experts to speak about
their beliefs, values and culture.
IV.7.6 Company encourages informal meetings

The respondents were asked to rate Company encourages informal meetings for tea,
coffee, having lunch and others, one of the socialisation attributes (Refer Question
Table 4.36
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
8
166
289
498
195
1156
(%)
.7
14.4
25.0
43.1
16.9
100.0
strongly agree for the socialisation attribute Company encourages informal meetings
for tea, coffee, having lunch and others.
attribute Company encourages informal meetings for tea, coffee, having lunch and
others.
IV.7.7 Company encourages social activities

The respondents were asked to rate Company encourages social activities outside the
work place, one of the socialisation attributes (Refer Question number 7 in Appendix
1). The options comprised strongly disagree (lowest rating), disagree, neutral, agree
Figure 4.32.
Table 4.37
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
38
135
257
539
187
1156
(%)
3.3
11.7
22.2
46.6
16.2
100.0
strongly agree for the socialisation attribute Company encourages social activities
outside the work place.
attribute Company encourages social activities outside the work place.
IV.7.8 Mean Ratings for Socialisation

The mean ratings for socialisation attributes are presented in Table 4.38.
Table 4.38
Mean Ratings for Socialisation
Socialisation
Mean
Position
Rating
Involving the company in joint projects supports staffs
3.4965
3.6194
3.6237
3.1055
Company encourages social activities outside the work place
3.6073
Company encourages informal meetings for tea, coffee, having
3.6107
Company conducts meetings, seminars, workshops to discuss the 3.5528
knowledge through face-to-face interactions with others

Detailed face-to-face discussions of work issues are encouraged
in the company
Company invites its qualified members and external experts to
speak about their beliefs, values and culture
Company follows a systematic plan to rotate its staff across
different departments
lunch and others

updating of work issues
Summary: The highest rated socialisation attributes were involving the company in
joint projects supports staffs knowledge through face-to-face interactions with others,
and detailed face-to-face discussions of work issues are encouraged in the company.
The least rated socialisation attributes were company conducts meetings, seminars,
workshops to discuss the updating of work issues, and company encourages informal
meetings for tea, coffee, having lunch and others.
IV.8 Externalisation
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following activities of
Externalisation with regards to Knowledge Creation Process in your company (1 =
Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree and 5 = Strongly Agree).
These activities aim to document the personal (tacit) knowledge:
a) Company documents its staffs point of view regarding relevant topics.
b) Company asks its staff to report results of negotiation with customers.
c) Company documents the findings of conducted meetings, seminars,
workshops, conferences and training programmes.
d) Company issues report of externals (such as suppliers and customers) based on
its cumulated experience.
e) Company establishes the topics of training programmes and seminars based on
its qualified members and external experts.
f) Company documents the useful experiences of its qualified members into
reports.
IV.8.1 Company documents its staffs point of view

The respondents were asked to rate Company documents its staffs point of view
regarding relevant topics, one of the externalisation attributes (Refer Question
Table 4.39
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
24
148
434
452
98
1156
(%)
2.1
12.8
37.5
39.1
8.5
100.0
strongly agree for the externalisation attribute Company documents its staffs point
of view regarding relevant topics.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Agree rating for the externalisation
attribute Company documents its staffs point of view regarding relevant topics.
IV.8.2 Results of negotiation with customers

The respondents were asked to rate Company asks its staff to report results of
negotiation with customers, one of the externalisation attributes (Refer Question
Table 4.40
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
22
187
422
406
119
1156
(%)
1.9
16.2
36.5
35.1
10.3
100.0
strongly agree for the externalisation attribute Company asks its staff to report results
of negotiation with customers.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Neutral rating for the externalisation
attribute Company asks its staff to report results of negotiation with customers.
IV.8.3 Company documents the findings

The respondents were asked to rate Company documents the findings of conducted
meetings, seminars, workshops, conferences and training programmes, one of the
externalisation attributes (Refer Question number 8 in Appendix 1). The options
Table 4.41
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
0
58
399
540
159
1156
(%)
0
5.0
34.5
46.7
13.8
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.41 that 0% of the respondents rated strongly
strongly agree for the externalisation attribute Company documents the findings of
conducted meetings, seminars, workshops, conferences and training programmes.
attribute Company documents the findings of conducted meetings, seminars,
workshops, conferences and training programmes.
IV.8.4 Company issues report of externals

The respondents were asked to rate Company issues report of externals (such as
suppliers and customers) based on its cumulated experience, one of the
externalisation attributes (Refer Question number 8 in Appendix 1). The options
Table 4.42
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
15
74
517
476
74
1156
(%)
1.3
6.4
44.7
41.2
6.4
100.0
strongly agree for the externalisation attribute Company issues report of externals
(such as suppliers and customers) based on its cumulated experience.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Neutral rating for the externalisation
attribute Company issues report of externals (such as suppliers and customers) based
on its cumulated experience.
IV.8.5 Company establishes the topics of training

The respondents were asked to rate Company establishes the topics of training
programmes and seminars based on its qualified members and external experts, one
of the externalisation attributes (Refer Question number 8 in Appendix 1). The
options
comprised
strongly
disagree
(lowest
rating), disagree, neutral, agree
Figure 4.37.
Table 4.43
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
0
38
330
573
215
1156
(%)
0
3.3
28.5
49.6
18.6
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.43 that 3.3% of the respondents rated disagree;
28.5% of the respondents rated neutral; 49.6% of the respondents rated agree; and
18.6% of the respondents rated strongly agree for the externalisation attribute
Company establishes the topics of training programmes and seminars based on its
qualified members and external experts.
attribute Company establishes the topics of training programmes and seminars based
on its qualified members and external experts.
IV.8.6 Company documents the useful experiences

The respondents were asked to rate Company documents the useful experiences of its
qualified members into reports, one of the externalisation attributes (Refer Question
Table 4.44
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
8
90
421
494
143
1156
(%)
0.7
7.8
36.4
42.7
12.4
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.44 that 0.7 % of the respondents rated strongly
strongly agree for the externalisation attribute Company documents the useful
experiences of its qualified members into reports.
attribute Company documents the useful experiences of its qualified members into
reports.
IV.8.7 Mean Ratings for Externalisation

The mean ratings for externalisation attributes are presented in Table 4.45.
Table 4.45
Mean Ratings for Externalisation
Externalisation
Mean
Position
Rating
Company establishes the topics of training programmes and
3.8348
3.6920
3.5830
3.4498
3.3910
3.3573
seminars based on its qualified members and external experts

Company documents the findings of conducted meetings,
seminars, workshops, conferences and training programmes
Company documents the useful experiences of its qualified
members into reports
Company issues report of externals (such as suppliers and
customers) based on its cumulated experience
Company documents its staffs point of view regarding relevant
topics
Company asks its staff to report results of negotiation with
customers
Summary: The highest rated externalisation attributes were company establishes the
topics of training programmes and seminars based on its qualified members and
external experts (3.8348), and company documents the findings of conducted
meetings, seminars, workshops, conferences and training programmes (3.6920). The
least rated externalisation attributes were company asks its staff to report results of
negotiation with customers (3.3573), and company documents its staffs point of view
regarding relevant topics (3.3910).
IV.9 Combination
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following activities of Combination
with regards to Knowledge Creation Process in your company (1 = Strongly Disagree,
2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree and 5 = Strongly Agree). These activities aim to
transfer or reformulate the available documented knowledge into other frames to be
more useful:
a) Company classifies information mentioned in, databases, networks and
reports.
b) Company updates its databases.
c) Company considers information mentioned in databases, networks, and
previous reports to develop its rules and decisions.
d) Company uses documented information as a mean of connection between its
staff, each to other and with external bodies. E.g. customers, competitors, or
partners.
e) Company collects, classifies and informs its staff with reports and decisions
issued by external bodies.
f) Company depends on the relevant published research and reports to develop
its policies and aims.
IV.9.1 Company classifies information

The respondents were asked to rate Company classifies information mentioned in,
databases, networks and reports, one of the combination attributes (Refer Question
Table 4.46
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
0
59
370
510
217
1156
(%)
0
5.1
32.0
44.1
18.8
100.0
32% of the respondents rated neutral; 44.1% of the respondents rated agree; and
18.8% of the respondents rated strongly agree for the combination attribute Company
classifies information mentioned in, databases, networks and reports.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Agree rating for the combination
attribute Company classifies information mentioned in, databases, networks and
reports.
IV.9.2 Company updates its databases

The respondents were asked to rate Company updates its databases, one of the
combination attributes (Refer Question number 9 in Appendix 1). The options
Table 4.47
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
8
22
357
510
259
1156
(%)
0.7
1.9
30.9
44.1
22.4
100.0
strongly agree for the combination attribute Company updates its databases.
attribute Company updates its databases.
IV.9.3 Company considers information

The respondents were asked to rate Company considers information mentioned in
databases, networks, and previous reports to develop its rules and decisions, one of
the combination attributes (Refer Question number 9 in Appendix 1). The options
Table 4.48
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
8
51
339
586
172
1156
(%)
0.7
4.4
29.3
50.7
14.9
100.0
strongly agree for the combination attribute Company considers information
mentioned in databases, networks, and previous reports to develop its rules and
decisions.
attribute Company considers information mentioned in databases, networks, and
previous reports to develop its rules and decisions.
IV.9.4 Company uses documented information

The respondents were asked to rate Company uses documented information as a
mean of connection between its staff, each to other and with external bodies. E.g.
customers, competitors, or partners, one of the combination attributes (Refer
Table 4.49
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
8
83
375
495
195
1156
(%)
0.7
7.2
32.4
42.8
16.9
100.0
strongly agree for the combination attribute Company uses documented information
as a mean of connection between its staff, each to other and with external bodies.
attribute Company uses documented information as a mean of connection between its
staff, each to other and with external bodies.
IV.9.5 Company collects, classifies and informs

The respondents were asked to rate Company collects, classifies and informs its staff
with reports and decisions issued by external bodies,one of the combination attributes
(Refer Question number 9 in Appendix 1). The options comprised strongly disagree
(lowest rating), disagree, neutral, agree and strongly agree (highest rating). Their
responses are presented in Table 4.50 and Figure 4.43.
Table 4.50
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
0
110
394
533
119
1156
(%)
0
9.5
34.1
46.1
10.3
100.0
10.3% of the respondents rated strongly agree for the combination attribute Company
collects, classifies and informs its staff with reports and decisions issued by external
bodies.
attribute Company collects, classifies and informs its staff with reports and decisions
issued by external bodies.
IV.9.6 Company depends on relevant published research

The respondents were asked to rate Company depends on the relevant published
research and reports to develop its policies and aims,one of the combination
attributes (Refer Question number 9 in Appendix 1). The options comprised strongly
disagree (lowest rating), disagree, neutral, agree and strongly agree (highest rating).
Their responses are presented in Table 4.51 and Figure 4.44.
Table 4.51
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
7
106
419
458
166
1156
(%)
0.6
9.2
36.2
39.6
14.4
100.0
strongly agree for the combination attribute Company depends on the relevant
published research and reports to develop its policies and aims.
attribute Company depends on the relevant published research and reports to develop
its policies and aims.
IV.9.7 Mean Ratings for Combination

The mean ratings for combination attributes are presented in Table 4.52.
Table 4.52
Mean Ratings for Combination
Combination
Mean
Position
Rating
Company updates its databases
3.8564
Company classifies information mentioned in, databases,
3.7656
3.7465
3.6799
3.5796
3.5718
networks and reports

Company considers information mentioned in databases,
networks, and previous reports to develop its rules and
decisions
Company uses documented information as a mean of
connection between its staff, each to other and with
external bodies. E.g. customers, competitors, or partners
Company depends on the relevant published research and
reports to develop its policies and aims
Company collects, classifies and informs its staff with
reports and decisions issued by external bodies
Summary: The highest rated combination attributes were company updates its
databases (3.8564), and company classifies information mentioned in, databases,
networks and reports (3.7656). The least rated combination attributes were company
collects, classifies and informs its staff with reports and decisions issued by external
bodies (3.5718), and company depends on the relevant published research and reports
to develop its policies and aims (3.5796).
IV.10 Internalisation
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following activities of
Internalisation with regards to Knowledge Creation Process in your company (1 =
Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree and 5 = Strongly Agree).
These activities aim to gain new or develop current personal knowledge through
available documented knowledge:
a) Company encourages its staff to join higher education.
b) Company facilitates the access to outcomes or recommendations of training
programmes, workshops and seminars.
c) Company facilitates the access to its databases and the internet to get required
information.
d) Company arranges meetings to explain the content of related reports or
documents.
e) Company arranges meetings to explain and analyse the relevant reports issued
by customers, suppliers, competitors or partners.
f) Company believes that the available data and information strongly shape its
point of view and culture.
IV.10.1 Company encourages higher education

The respondents were asked to rate Company encourages its staff to join higher
education, one of the internalisation attributes (Refer Question number 10 in
Appendix
1).
The
options
comprised
strongly
disagree
(lowest
Table 4.53
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
15
106
353
494
188
1156
(%)
1.3
9.2
30.5
42.7
16.3
100.0
strongly agree for the internalisation attribute Company encourages its staff to join
higher education.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Agree rating for the internalisation
attribute Company encourages its staff to join higher education.
IV.10.2 Company facilitates the access to outcomes

The respondents were asked to rate Company facilitates the access to outcomes or
recommendations of training programmes, workshops and seminars, one of the
internalisation attributes (Refer Question number 10 in Appendix 1). The options
Table 4.54
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
16
75
325
553
187
1156
(%)
1.4
6.5
28.1
47.8
16.2
100.0
strongly agree for the internalisation attribute Company facilitates the access to
outcomes or recommendations of training programmes, workshops and seminars.
attribute Company facilitates the access to outcomes or recommendations of training
programmes, workshops and seminars.
IV.10.3 Company facilitates the access to its databases

The respondents were asked to rate Company facilitates the access to its databases
and the internet to get required information,one of the internalisation attributes (Refer
Table 4.55
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
0
62
345
547
202
1156
(%)
0
5.4
29.8
47.3
17.5
100.0
17.5% of the respondents rated strongly agree for the internalisation attribute
Company facilitates the access to its databases and the internet to get required
information.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gaveAgree rating for the internalisation
attribute Company facilitates the access to its databases and the internet to get
required information.
IV.10.4 Company arranges meetings

The respondents were asked to rate Company arranges meetings to explain the
content of related reports or documents, one of the internalisation attributes (Refer
Table 4.56
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
8
158
385
447
158
1156
(%)
0.7
13.7
33.3
38.7
13.7
100.0
strongly agree for the internalisation attribute Company arranges meetings to explain
the content of related reports or documents.
attribute Company arranges meetings to explain the content of related reports or
documents.
IV.10.5 Company arranges meetings to analyse the relevant reports

The respondents were asked to rate Company arranges meetings to explain and
analyse the relevant reports issued by customers, suppliers, competitors or partners,
one of the internalisation attributes (Refer Question number 10 in Appendix 1). The
options
comprised
strongly
disagree
(lowest
rating), disagree, neutral, agree
Figure 4.49.
Table 4.57
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
23
142
370
441
180
1156
(%)
2.0
12.3
32.0
38.1
15.6
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.57 that 2% of the respondents rated strongly
disagree; 12.3% of the respondents rated disagree; 32% of the respondents rated
strongly agree for the internalisation attribute Company arranges meetings to explain
and analyse the relevant reports issued by customers, suppliers, competitors or
partners.
attribute Company arranges meetings to explain and analyse the relevant reports
issued by customers, suppliers, competitors or partners.
IV.10.6 Information strongly shape its point of view

The respondents were asked to rate Company believes that the available data and
information strongly shape its point of view and culture, one of the internalisation
attributes (Refer Question number 10 in Appendix 1). The options comprised strongly
disagree (lowest rating), disagree, neutral, agree and strongly agree (highest rating).
Table 4.58
X
Rating
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
8
76
315
540
217
1156
(%)
0.7
6.6
27.2
46.7
18.8
100.0
strongly agree for the internalisation attribute Company believes that the available
data and information strongly shape its point of view and culture.
attribute Company believes that the available data and information strongly shape its
point of view and culture.
IV.10.7 Mean Ratings for Internalisation

The mean ratings for internalisation attributes is presented in Table 4.59.
Table 4.59
Mean Ratings for Internalisation
Internalisation
Mean
Position
Rating
Company facilitates the access to its databases and the
3.7690
3.7630
3.7093
Company encourages its staff to join higher education
3.6349
Company arranges meetings to explain and analyse the
3.5303
3.5095
internet to get required information

Company believes that the available data and information
strongly shape its point of view and culture
Company facilitates the access to outcomes or
recommendations of training programmes, workshops and
seminars
relevant reports issued by customers, suppliers, competitors

or partners
Company arranges meetings to explain the content of related
reports or documents
Summary: The highest rated internalisation attributes were company facilitates the
access to its databases and the internet to get required information (3.7690), and
company believes that the available data and information strongly shape its point of
view and culture (3.7630). The least rated internalisation attributes were company
arranges meetings to explain the content of related reports or documents (3.5095), and
company arranges meetings to explain and analyse the relevant reports issued by
customers, suppliers, competitors or partners.(3.5303)
IV.11 Individual Performance
Please indicate the occurrence of the following attributes of Individual Performance

in your company (1 = Never, 2 = Rarely, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Often and 5 = Always):
a) Task Performance of individuals (Work quality and efficiency).
b) Contextual Performance of individuals (Initiative, learning and cooperation).
c) Adaptive Performance of individuals (Resiliency, skills and adjusting work
goals and plans to situation).
d) Productive work behaviour of individuals (Less negativity, tardiness and
mistakes).
IV.11.1 Task Performance

The respondents were asked to rate Task Performance of individuals (Work quality
and efficiency),one of the individual performance attributes (Refer Question number
11
in
Appendix
1).
The
options
comprised
never
(lowest
rating), rarely, sometimes, often and always (highest rating). Their responses are
Table 4.60
X
Rating
Never
Rarely
Sometimes
Often
Always
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
8
39
344
488
277
1156
(%)
0.7
3.4
29.8
42.2
24.0
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.60 that 0.7% of the respondents rated never;
3.4% of the respondents rated rarely; 29.8% of the respondents rated sometimes;
42.2% of the respondents rated often; and 24% of the respondents rated always for the
individual performance Task Performance of individuals.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Often rating for the individual
performance on attribute Task Performance of individuals.
IV.11.2 Contextual Performance

The
respondents
were
asked
to
rate
Contextual
Performance
of
individuals (Initiative, learning and cooperation),one of the individual performance

attributes (Refer Question number 11 in Appendix 1). The options comprised never
(lowest rating), rarely, sometimes, often and always (highest rating). Their responses
Table 4.61
X
Rating
Never
Rarely
Sometimes
Often
Always
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
0
46
397
477
236
1156
(%)
0
4.0
34.3
41.3
20.4
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.61 that 4% of the respondents rated rarely;
34.3% of the respondents rated sometimes; 41.3% of the respondents rated often; and
20.4% of the respondents rated always for the individual performance attribute
Contextual Performance of individuals.
performance on attribute Contextual Performance of individuals.
IV.11.3 Adaptive Performance

The respondents were asked to rateAdaptive Performance of individuals (Resiliency,
skills and adjusting work goals and plans to situation),one of the individual
performance attributes (Refer Question number 11 in Appendix 1). The options
comprised never (lowest rating), rarely, sometimes, often and always (highest rating).
Table 4.62
X
Rating
Never
Rarely
Sometimes
Often
Always
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
0
104
387
455
210
1156
(%)
0
9.0
33.5
39.4
18.2
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.62 that 9 % of the respondents rated rarely;
33.5% of the respondents rated sometimes; 39.4% of the respondents rated often; and
18.2% of the respondents rated always for the individual performance attribute
Adaptive Performance of individuals.
performance on attribute Adaptive Performance of individuals.
IV.11.4Productive work behaviour

The respondents were asked to rate Productive work behaviour of individuals (Less
negativity, tardiness and mistakes),one of the individual performance attributes
(Refer Question number 11 in Appendix 1). The options comprised never (lowest
rating), rarely, sometimes, often and always (highest rating).Their responses are
Table 4.63
X
Rating
Never
Rarely
Sometimes
Often
Always
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
16
85
520
454
81
1156
(%)
1.4
7.4
45.0
39.3
7.0
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.63 that 1.4% of the respondents rated never;
7.4% of the respondents rated rarely; 45% of the respondents rated sometimes; 39.3%
of the respondents rated often; and 7% of the respondents rated always for the
individual performance attribute Productive work behaviour of individuals.
Discussion: The majority of respondents gave Sometimes rating for the individual
performance on attribute Productive work behaviour of individuals.
IV.11.5 Mean Ratings for Individual Performance

The mean ratings for individual performance attributes is presented in Table 4.64.
Table 4.64
Mean Ratings for Individual Performance
Individual Performance
Mean
Rating
Task Performance of individuals (Work quality and

efficiency)
3.8538
Contextual Performance of individuals (Initiative,

learning and cooperation)
3.7811
Adaptive Performance of individuals (Resiliency,

skills and adjusting work goals and plans to
situation)
Productive work behaviour of individuals (Less
negativity, tardiness and mistakes)
Position
1
2
3
3.6670
3.4317
Summary: The highest rated individual performance attribute was task performance
of individuals (3.8538). The least rated individual performance attribute was
productive work behaviour of individuals. (3.4317)
IV.12 Gender
The respondents were asked to indicate their gender (Refer question number 12 in
Appendix 1). The options comprised male and female. Their responses are presented
in Table 4.65.
Table 4.65
Gender
Gender
Male
Female
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
863
293
1156
(%)
74.7
25.3
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.65 that 74.7% of the respondents were Male;
while 25.3% of the respondents were Female.
IV.13Age group (Years)

The respondents were asked to indicate their age group (Refer question number 13 in
Appendix 1). The options comprised up to 25 years, 26 to 35 years, and above 35
years. Their responses are presented in Table 4.66.
Table 4.66
Age group
Age group
(Years)
<= 25
26-35
> 35
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
85
421
650
1156
(%)
7.4
36.4
56.2
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.66 that 7.4% of the respondents belong to the
age group of below 25 years; 36.4% of the respondents between 26 and 35 years; and
56.2% of the respondents were above 35 years.
IV.14 Years of service in current company

The respondents were asked to indicate their years of service in current
company(Refer question number 14 in Appendix 1). The options comprised up to 3
years, 3 to 6 years, and above 6 years. Their responses are presented in Table 4.67.
Table 4.67
Years of service in current company
Years of service in
current company
<=3
3-6
>6
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
297
250
609
1156
(%)
25.7
21.6
52.7
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.67 that 25.7% of the respondents serve for less
than 3 years with the current company; while 21.6% of the respondents serve between
3 and 6 years; and 52.7% of the respondents were serving more than 6 years.
IV.15 Total years of service in IT

The respondents were asked to indicate their total years of service in ITcompanies
(Refer question number 15 in Appendix 1). The options comprised up to 5 years, 6 to
10 years, and above 10 years. Their responses are presented in Table 4.68.
Table 4.68
Total years of service in IT
Total years of
service in IT
<=5
6-10
>10
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
177
248
731
1156
(%)
15.3
21.5
63.2
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.68 that 15.3% of the respondents served less
than 5 years in IT companies; 21.5% of the respondents served between 6 and 10
years; and 63.2% of the respondents were serving more than 10 years.
IV.16 Education Level

The respondents were asked to indicate their education level (Refer question number
16 in Appendix 1). The options comprised diploma / certificate, Bachelors degree,
and Masters degree and above. Their responses are presented in Table 4.69.
Table 4.69
Education Level
Education Level
Diploma / Certificate
Bachelors Degree
Masters Degree & Above
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
8
490
658
1156
(%)
.7
42.4
56.9
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.69 that .7% of the respondents were Diploma /
Certificate holders; 42.4% of the respondents own Bachelors Degree; 56.9% of the
respondents own Masters Degree & Above
IV.17 Monthly Income (INR)

The respondents were asked to indicate their monthly income (Refer question number
17 in Appendix 1). The options comprised up to INR 40,000, INR 40,000 to INR
80,000, and above INR 80,000. Their responses are presented in Table 4.70.
Table 4.70
Monthly Income
Monthly Income
(INR)
<= 40,000
40,000 80,000
> 80,000
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
182
252
722
1156
(%)
15.7
21.8
62.5
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.70 that 15.7% of the respondents earn less than
40,000 per month; 21.8% of the respondents earn between 40,000 and 80,000 and
62.5% of the respondents earn above 80,000 per month.
IV.18 Cadre
The respondents were asked to indicate their cadre (Refer question number 18 in
Appendix 1). The options comprised junior, middle, and senior. Their responses are
presented in Table 4.71.
Table 4.71
Cadre
Cadre
Junior
Middle
Senior
Total
Number of
Percentage
Respondents
31
585
540
1156
(%)
2.7
50.6
46.7
100.0
Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.71 that 2.7% of the respondents were among
Junior cadre; 50.6% of the respondents among Middle cadre; 46.7% of the
respondents were Senior cadre.

Know 4 Updated-II.0

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Know 4 Updated-II.0

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

CHAPTER IV

IV.1Main Business Focus

Analysis: It can be seen from Table 4.1 that

IV.2Knowledge Sharing Challenges

IV.2.1 Challenge 1: Routines and procedures

IV.2.2 Challenge 2: Content barriers

IV.2.3 Challenge 3:Lack of willingness to share

IV.2.4 Challenge 4:Lack of an identity

IV.2.5 Challenge 5:No knowledge about Sharing

IV.2.6 Challenge 6:Personal barriers

IV.2.7 Challenge 7:Technology barriers

IV.2.8 Challenge 8:Weak culture

IV.2.9 Challenge 9:Weak relationship

IV.2.11 Mean Rankings for Knowledge Sharing Challenges

organisation pertaining to knowledge

Summary:The highest ranked knowledge sharing challenges were technology

IV.3 Social Media Environment

Social interaction within company.

IV.3.1Social interaction within company

IV.3.2Experience sharing across company

IV.3.3 Observation and listening to shared content

IV.3.4 Networking / informal relationships

IV.3.5 Mutual trust among associates

IV.3.6 Mean Ratings for Social Media Environment

Social Media Environment

Mutual trust among associates on social media

Networking / informal relationships

Observation and listening to the shared multi-

IV.4.1 Individuals share information

IV.4.2 Individuals share their skills

IV.4.3 Job rotation

IV.4.4 Mean Ratings for Individual Behaviour

IV.5.1 Information Technologies are used

IV5.2 Individuals use social media

IV.5.3 Individuals use intranet network

IV.5.4 Systems and software

IV.5.5 Mean Ratings for Technology

review data; and facilitate communication with

IV.6 Knowledge Sharing through Social Media

IV.6.1 Knowledge Sharing Readiness

IV.6.2 Richness in exchanging Knowledge

IV.6.3 Continuous Knowledge Integration

IV.6.4 Mean Ratings for Knowledge Sharing through Social Media

Knowledge Sharing through Social Media

Richness in exchanging Knowledge

Continuous Knowledge Integration

IV.7.1 Company follows a systematic plan

IV.7.2 Detailed face-to-face discussions

IV.7.3 Involving the company in joint projects

IV.7.4 Company conducts meetings

IV.7.5 Company invites its qualified members

IV.7.6 Company encourages informal meetings

IV.7.7 Company encourages social activities

IV.7.8 Mean Ratings for Socialisation

Company encourages social activities outside the work place

Company encourages informal meetings for tea, coffee, having

Company conducts meetings, seminars, workshops to discuss the 3.5528

knowledge through face-to-face interactions with others

lunch and others

IV.8.1 Company documents its staffs point of view

IV.8.2 Results of negotiation with customers

IV.8.3 Company documents the findings

IV.8.4 Company issues report of externals