DECLARATION

I, --------- student of Masters of Business Administration from SMU. Hereby declare that I have completed Dissertation on Knowledge management in learning organization as part of the course requirement. I further declare that the information presented in this project is true and original to the best of my knowledge.

Date: 24-5-11

Name:-----------Roll No.:------------

1|Page

CERTIFICATE
This to certify that Ms_______, a student of Masters of Business Administration, MBA HR has undertaken a dissertation as a part of her academic curriculum. The project named Knowledge Management in Learning Organization has been diligently done under my guidance and supervision. The project is prepared in partial fulfillment of MBA (HR). To the best of my knowledge, this piece of work is original and no part of this report has been submitted by the student to any other Institute/University earlier.

Date: 25-5-11

2|Page

Executive Summary
Knowledge Management is about a systematic approach to managing intellectual assets and other information in a way that provides the company with a competitive advantage. Knowledge Management is a business optimization strategy, and not limited to a particular technology or information. A wide variety of information technologies play a key role in a KM initiative, simply because of the savings in time and effort they provide over manual operations. If a company takes the digitized data and indexes it with a software program that allows someone to search for specific content instead of manually paging through hundreds of screens, it is practicing Knowledge Management. Organizational learning could be defined as a process of 'coordinated systems change, with mechanisms built in for individuals and groups to access, build and use organizational memory, structure and culture to develop long term organizational capacity'. The research checks into Knowledge Management system and Learning Organizations. The effects of KM and what organizations do as a learning organization is studied through this research. Under the project title Knowledge Management and Learning Organizations following objectives have been served: Identifying the effects of KM and important criterias for measuring KM success. Association between Knowledge Management and Learning Organization.

At end, the research differentiates between the factors which are more important and less important. It tells how organizations are doing as learning organization. The important factors have been elaborated and suggestions for further research are given. It concludes with differentiation among significant and insignificant variables and what factors are interrelated in Knowledge Management and Learning Organizations. A few are:

3|Page

Most useful criteria Decision Making Sharing best practices Enhanced Collaboration Improved Communication

Least useful criteria Increased market share Better staff attraction/retention Delegation of authority Return on investment of KM effort

At last suggestions for further research and references have been provided.

4|Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The dissertation project titled Knowledge Management in Learning Organization has been conducted by the under signed as an academic part of the 2 year MBA HR program to be completed in 2010. The project has been completed based on primary research under the guidance of Professor Mr.Sanjay Kaul (HR), Sikkim Manipal University. I am obliged and owe enormous intellectual debt to Mr. Sanjay Kaul for her guidance and enriched thoughts from different perspectives. My increased spectrum of knowledge in this field is a constant direction that has helped me to absorb relevant and high quality information. I am thankful to the employees who have taken out time from their busy schedule to fill up the questionnaire, both in person and through mail.

Date:

25-5-11

Nisha Mishra Roll No.: 511042381

5|Page

Contents
Page No.
Declaration Certification from Faculty Guide.. Executive Summary Acknowledgement .. List of Tables and Figures 1 2 3 5 7

Chapter 1- Introduction to the present study Chapter 2- Research Methodology Chapter 3- Review of literature Chapter 4- Research Analysis & Findings Chapter 5- Suggestion for further research Chapter 6- Conclusion

10 21 24 28 64 65

References. Annexure...

66 68

6|Page

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

S.NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 FIGURES AND TABLES Figure 1: The KM/OM/OL model (Jennex & Olfman, 2002) Figure 2 : Triple Loop Learning (Argyris & Schon, 1978) TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.1- KM system helps in fast and better decision making TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.2- KM helps in enhancing the productivity TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.3- Implementing KM results in sharing best PAGE NO. 15 18 30 31 32

practices TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.4- KM makes it easy to enter different market 33 types TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.5- KM helps in increased innovation TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.6 - KM system results in increased market share TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.7- KM increases the learning/adaptation capability of employees TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.8- KM helps in better staff attraction/retention TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.9- KM results in enhanced collaboration within 34 35 36 37 38

the organization TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.10- KM helps to address the communication 39 gap in the organization TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.11- KM helps in constant and continuous transformation of individual learning to organizational Learning and vice versa TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.12- KM results in increased delegation of authority and accountability to individuals TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.13- KM helps to achieve better ROI TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.14- Information is readily available on required topics TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.15- Information can be uploaded in organizations database TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.16- Personal best practices can be shared with other employees TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.17- Availability of hardware and software 40

14

41 42 43 44 45 46

7|Page

technologies TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.18- Processes for creation, capture, and acquisition of knowledge TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.19- Knowledge can be easily shared and acted upon TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.20- A cohering and powerful vision of the organization is shared TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.21- Enabling structures in terms of hierarchy and communication flows exists TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.22- There are cohesive teams in organization which facilitates learning TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.23- Organization provides incentives to use KM 47 48 49 50 51 52

system TABLE & EXHIBIT 4.24- Organization strives for learning, unlearning 53 and re-learning for its employees Table 1: Representing eigenvalues, variance explained, and cumulative variance Table 2: Representing Extracted Factors with Eigenvalues >1; (F = Factor) Table 3: Representing Variables that are interrelated to each other Table 4: Representing Survey Results of KM Criteria Table 5: Representing Survey results of Organizational Learning Graph 1 - Scree Plot for Unrotated Factor Loadings Graph 2: Line shape chart representing mean score and distinguishing highest & least variables (KM) 54 56 57 58 59 57 59

Graph 3: Line shape chart representing mean score and distinguishing 60 highest & least variables (LO) Figure 4.1 Significant Knowledge Management Outcome 63

8|Page

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
Todays business environment is characterized by continuous, often radical change. Such a volatile climate demands a new attitude and approach within organizationsactions must be anticipatory, adaptive, and based on a faster cycle of knowledge creation. Hendricks and Vrien, 1999, suggest that the knowledge assets possessed by a company create the possibility for a sustainable competitive advantage. This being the case, a company that manages knowledge effectively will have a better chance of long-term survival than those which lack in the same area (Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995). Davenport and Prusak (1998) view knowledge as an evolving mix of framed experience, values, contextual information and expert insight that provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new experiences and information. They found that in organizations, knowledge often becomes embedded in documents or repositories and in organizational routines, processes, practices and norms. They add that for knowledge to have value it must include the elements of human context, experience and interpretation. Nonaka (1994) expands this view by stating that knowledge is about meaning in the sense that it is context specific. This implies that users of knowledge must understand and have experience with the context (surrounding conditions and influences) in which the knowledge is generated and used for it to be meaningful. As to compete effectively modern business organizations need skilled managers and employees and further require methods for managing knowledge for its people as it creates big impact on overall performance. Knowledge Management (KM) attempts to secure and replenish the learning experiences, as well as the work products, of the individuals who comprise an organization. KM is the ability to selectively capture, archive, and access the best practices of work-related knowledge and decision making from employees and managers for both individual and group behaviors. It is a systematic business 9|Page

enhancing strategy that selects, stores, organizes, packages, and communicates information essential to the business in a manner that improves employee performance and corporate competitiveness. A wide variety of information technologies play a key role in a KM initiative, simply because of the savings in time and effort they provide over manual operations. If a company takes the digitized data and indexes it with a software program that allows someone to search for specific content instead of manually paging through hundreds of screens, it is practicing Knowledge Management. Some of the organizations in India that have adopted Knowledge Management are: Wipro Infosys Compaq Sapient TCS WockHardt, L&T Infotech Hewlett Packard etc.

Several professional services firms already have knowledge management roles in place. McKinsey, Andersen Consulting, Ernst & Young, Price Waterhouse, and A.T. Kearney all have "Chief Knowledge Officers" in place. Buckman Laboratories reoriented its Information Systems organization to become managers of knowledge, and now calls the group the Knowledge Transfer department. Hewlett-Packard created one knowledge management group within its corporate Product Processes Organization, and another within its Computer Systems marketing group.

10 | P a g e

Elements in creating KM system are: The elements that create a KM system are as follows: Data They are numbers. They are numerical values or other attributes derived from observation, experiment, or calculation. Information It is data in context. Information is a collection of data and associated explanations, interpretations, concerning a particular object, event, or process. Metadata Its the data about information. Metadata includes descriptive summaries and categorization of data and information. That is, metadata is information about the context in which information is used. Knowledge It is information that is organized or summarized to enhance comprehension, awareness, or understanding. That is, knowledge is a combination of metadata and an awareness of the context in which the metadata can be applied successfully. Instrumental understanding It is the clear and complete idea of the nature, significance, and explanation of something. It is about relating specific knowledge to various concepts.

Types of Knowledge: Knowledge can be of three kinds: Tacit knowledge It is the knowledge that is acquired at a subconscious level and therefore difficult to explain to others. For example, an expert machinist may be extremely skilled at operating a particular

11 | P a g e

machine, but he might be unable to instruct a new joiner on how to duplicate his expertise. Most knowledge involving pattern recognition skills fall under his category. Implicit knowledge This type of knowledge is controlled by experts. Implicit knowledge can be extracted from the expertthrough a process termed knowledge engineering. For example, a sales executive can train a new joiner about the basic procedure and rules to follow while making sales. The new joiner can gain same effectiveness as his trainer over the period of time. Thus knowledge which can be imparted through instructions and procedures is Implicit Knowledge. Explicit knowledge It can be easily conveyed from someone proficient at a task to someone else through written or verbal communications. For example, the recipe for a cake; the steps involved in bolting a car door, list of ingredients required for a chemical process are all explicit knowledge. Unlike tacit and implicit knowledge, explicit knowledge often can be found in a book or operating manual. The importance of KM becomes transparent when considering the different forms which knowledge can take. Just as learning can be divided into the two distinct categories of single- and double-loop learning, knowledge can be classified as either tacit or explicit. Explicit knowledge is just what it claims to be knowledge that has been explicitly explained, recorded, or documented (McInerney 2002). As explicit knowledge has, in some form, been communicated and can be formally documented, it can be shared relatively easily among individuals throughout an organization. The more difficult task of knowledge management then becomes that of managing tacit knowledge. Tacit knowledge may be considered intuitive knowledge guided by experience. This type of knowledge is based on experience, mental models, and perspectives that are so deeply embedded in a person that the knowledge

12 | P a g e

becomes second nature to an individual and, as such, is difficult to communicate. Central to the concept of knowledge management is either: 1) putting individuals in touch with one another to share their tacit knowledge; and/or 2) transforming individuals tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge, which can be used by the entire organization. Failing to either share tacit knowledge or create explicit knowledge from tacit knowledge can result not only in losses to an organization but can also help to accelerate a competitors advantage. In other words, by sharing and extracting an employees tacit knowledge a company multiplies the value which that employee adds to the company. If one company is able to share and/or extract tacit knowledge in this manner, it will excel above competitors who may have the same knowledge within their grasp but fail to share it on a company-wide basis.

The Learning Organization The concept of a learning organization, which is often associated with that of organizational learning, is defined as reframing and learning from ones own experiences in an effective manner. Organizational learning is concerned with the development of new knowledge or insights that have the potential to influence behavior. It takes place within organizational context and 'refers to an organization's acquisition of understanding, know how, techniques and practices of any kind and by any means. Organizational learning examines how individual and team learning can be translated into an organizational resource and is therefore linked to processes of knowledge management. Organizational learning could be defined as a process of 'coordinated systems change, with mechanisms built in for individuals and groups to access, build and use organizational memory, structure and culture to develop long term organizational capacity'. Organizational learning can be characterized as an intricate three stage process consisting of

13 | P a g e

knowledge acquisition, dissemination and shared implementation. Knowledge may be acquired from direct experience, the experience of others or organizational memory.

Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning

Figure 1.1:

The KM/OM/OL model (Jennex & Olfman, 2002) Knowledge Management in Modern Organizations

A better understanding of KM is obtained by understanding the concepts of organizational memory (OM) and organizational learning (OL). The three areas are related and have an impact on organizational effectiveness. Organizational effectiveness is how well the organization does those activities which are critical to its survival. OL is the process which organization uses to learn how to do these activities better. OL results when users utilize knowledge. Effectiveness can improve, worse, or remain the same. Effectiveness influences the feedback provided to the organization using the knowledge. KM and OM are the processes used to identify and capture critical knowledge. Knowledge workers and their organizations do KM. Above figure illustrate these relationships.

14 | P a g e

Relationship between Knowledge management and Learning Organization

The greatest challenge organizations face today is how to manage their intellectual capital. The business environment has now entered a knowledge era, where knowledge has become power, and learning rapidly and building competency and capability in an organization has become a preeminent strategy for success. Thus managing knowledge is rapidly becoming more important to organizations than financial resources, market positions, technology and other tangible assets. Various organizations are talking about this concept in terms of intellectual capital, intellectual property, knowledge assets, and business intelligence. Corporate knowledge is being viewed as one of the most important sustainable untapped source of competitive advantage in business. There is always a new idea waiting to be discovered, new ways of doing things, new products, new strategies, and new markets. (McElroy W. Mark, 2000) According to Peter Drucker, the collective knowledge residing in the minds of its employees, customers, suppliers etc., is the most vital resource of an organization growth, even more than the traditional factors of production (land, labour and capital). (Grossman Martin, 2006) However, Knowledge Management does not happen by chance. A culture that promotes knowledge creation and provides for appropriate support processes is necessary. Therefore, if organizations are to fully benefit from the principles of Knowledge Management, they must focus on how the cognitive capacity of their employees and support processes are aligned to provide timely information for improvement. The cognitive (in the form of heuristics and intuitions) and the support processes (such as culture, products and services) are the two most important constructs with Knowledge Management. The level of Knowledge Management in an organization whose employees perform organizational tasks routinely can be determined from whether they are able or unable to contribute for any improvements in their organizational business processes. Equally, the support from the organization in providing the facilities that support and optimize knowledge management is an important issue. Based on the level of cognitive capacities of employees and support services existing in the organization, the condition can be classified as Integrated Knowledge Management, Partial Knowledge Management and Absence of Knowledge Management in an organization. Effective Knowledge management requires not only addressing the mindset of the employees but also putting in place the necessary support 15 | P a g e

services that facilitate an environment for knowledge creation and learning. An organization should always seek employees who demonstrate stimulating behavior, acquire knowledge and know how to adapt to change. Knowledge and learning are fundamental factors that needs to be addressed if business excellence is to be achieved for competitive advantage (Jha, Joshi, etal, 2006) Knowledge acquisition process is twofold, inward and outward. Internal knowledge acquisition owes much to Total Quality Management (TQM) idea of internal benchmarking and learning from experience. External knowledge is acquired to bring in innovative ideas and develop effective operating systems. The ability to learn from the internal and external business environment has become one of the principle value adding resources for learning organizations. Peter Senge defines Learning Organization as "a group of people continuously enhancing their capacity to create what they want to create". For organizations to anticipate and respond to complexities and uncertainties, have to consciously and comprehensively gather, organize, share, and analyze its knowledge in terms of resources, documents, and people skills. The rate at which organizations learn and adapt to the changing environment may become the sustainable source of competitive advantage. A Learning Organization is one that, according to Senge, has acquired "systems thinking" by mastering the disciplines of 'shared values', 'personal mastery', 'mental models' and 'team learning' (Senge, 1992) 'system thinking' has therefore become known as the fifth discipline and is closely related to Deming's concept of 'knowledge system'. This system talks about profound knowledge, which is knowledge universal to all businesses, large or small. Once the individual understands the system of profound knowledge, he will apply its principles in every kind of relationship with other people. This will enable him make better decisions for organizational transformation. A Learning Organization and its people make use of their experience and others to improve their performance. Individuals learn to improve their performance through challenging their assumptions; which in turn provides new insights and perspectives about organizational improvement. Continuous learning is built into the system and the value of continuous learning is espoused, driven and role-modeled by the top management leadership within the organization. Further, communication within all the levels of management is open and 16 | P a g e

widespread. People at all levels are included for decision-making process and are recognized for their contribution towards learning and disseminating the knowledge acquired to other employees. Some of the success stories that have shown the characteristics of a Learning Organizations are GE, Johnson & Johnson, Toyota Motors, Southwest Airlines, Intel, Cisco Systems, Tata Steel, Tata Motors, Infosys Technologies and many such organizations. What are common to these companies are their founding values, and their desire to create new products and markets, new approaches and greater customer value. Since organizations learn only through individuals who learn (Senge 1992), it is necessary to look closer at how individuals learn. In this respect, it is worth noting that individual learning is a necessary but not sufficient condition for organizational learning. Hence, there is a need for having "shared rules". Argyris and Schon distinguish between three different types of learning: single-loop and double-loop as well as deutro-loop learning (Argyris & Schon, 1978)--or called triple-loop learning. This is shown below in Figure 2 .

Figure 1.2 : Triple Loop Learning (Argyris & Schon, 1978) 17 | P a g e

Practitioners of Organizational Learning, known as "organ learners," therefore, see a difference between what individuals know and knowledge held collectively by groups of individuals. Individual learning leads to individual knowledge; Organizational Learning leads to collective knowledge. Conflict between them is bound to occur and can be seen as a stimulant for innovation and creativity. Older ideas give way to newer, more effective ones as people in business, for e.g., attempt to resolve their individual and group differences. There are several themes, which emerged from various perspectives on Learning Organization In order to grow, organizations need to continuously learn Both individuals and organizations learn, using different methods, producing different outcomes Information storage, processing and sharing are important. Context i.e. (structure and culture) contributes to organizational learning

These themes integrating knowledge and learning are a starting point for linking Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning Practices. It has been established that a Learning Organization generates new knowledge. Knowledge Management System (KMS) at SAPIENT TECHNOLOGIES The knowledge management system or process at Sapient is called as People Portal. It is administered or managed by an internal team of experts. This team has different sub teams which are managing various aspects of KM. Knowledge is managed and shared through following at Sapient: Individual Blogs Interest Groups Community Forums

Although no online library or data bank exist at Sapient. The other features of the system are as follows: 18 | P a g e

Every piece of information is indexed and is easy to search. Required information on processes, domains, sectors is available. All documents relating to work are available on intranet. Users can share their experiences and practices through blogs.

The information outside the company i.e. external information about competitors, new products, markets is not available on the system. Apart from this employees can put their requirements like grant for leave, complaints, and other requirements on the local network system. It also displays the achievements, birthday, and anniversaries, of employees. It is used as a recognition system in the company.

19 | P a g e

CHAPTER2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Objectives
Under the project title Knowledge Management and Learning Organizations following objectives have been served: To identify the effects of KM and important criterias for measuring KM success. This objective identifies which factors Knowledge Management is affecting most and what is important for measuring success of Knowledge Management system To examine the association between Knowledge Management and Learning Organization. This objective examines how Knowledge Management and Learning Organizations are interrelated and what factors associate them.

Rationale of the study

KM is a relatively new field of study and much of research has not been done on it. Only in mid 90s researchers have considered as a research topic. The theory and previous literature on knowledge management tells about the factors that create KM system and which all performance measures are affected by it. Also the model of Information Systems success given by DeLone and McLean tells what creates KM system. Thus, the rationale is to study these factors and identify which factors have maximum importance.

Research Design: Exploratory research design has been followed in this study. It was
conducted with a considerable understanding of the situation being studied. The objective of the exploratory research is to explore or search through problem or situation to provide insights and understanding. 20 | P a g e

Sample Size: Population- Population consists of employees exposed to Knowledge

Management Systems and has relevant experience in it. In this study responses of 60 respondents is collected and surveyed.

Selection of Sample: The respondents selected from the population constitute what is
technically called a sample. Technique used Random Sampling

The Survey
The final survey was designed with the following features: There are 24 questions, which are divided into 2 parts i.e. knowledge management and learning organization. A brief note about the purpose of the questionnaire is provided in the cover letter. Definitions are provided for important terms used in the questionnaire.

Sources of data 1. Secondary data communication medium like books, journals, magazines, internet. 2. Primary data.. Questionnaire Questionnaire: A questionnaire is a structured set of definite questions, with each question provided with options, about which the respondents are required to present their views. Advantages of questionnaire over other methods of data collection are as follow. There is low cost even when the universe is large and widely spread geographically. It is free from the bias of the interviewer: answers are the respondents own choice. Respondents have adequate time to give well thought out answers.

Scaling technique
Likert Scale is used in the questionnaire administered for the study. Developed by Rensis Likert, a Likert Scale is widely used rating scale that requires respondents to indicate a degree of agreement or disagreement with each of a series of statements about the factors undertaken. The scale has five response categories viz,

21 | P a g e

1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree 5. Dont know/ Cant say Thus, an employee will have the most favorable opinion towards the Knowledge Management System with his response towards one end i.e. strongly agree and most unfavorable opinion towards other end i.e. strongly disagree of the scale.

Action Plan and Data Collection

Study is undertaken according to following action plan: Step 1. Developing an approach to the problem, it involved formulation of objective, making rough information needs, what all data was required, analyzing secondary data and discussions with staff that helped in giving inputs as and when required. Step 2. Review of books, journal helped in the formation of objectives. It helped in better defining the problem, what factors should be considered, helped in formulating research design and also formed the basis of collecting Primary Data Step 3. Conducting survey of respondents in various companies Step 4. After collection of questionnaire Data analysis was done which is discussed in detail later. Step 5. Suggestion & recommendation are given at last.

Data Analyses
The questionnaire was designed for the employees and it was made very simple with all the factors divided into simple components that they can understand it easily. There were a total of 24 questions. Each questionnaire form was inspected and analyzed carefully. The data collected from the questionnaire was expressed in concise and logical form with the help of pie charts and tables. The responses of 60 respondents over 24 questions are shown in the pie charts. Different color schemes show different options in the pie charts. 22 | P a g e

CHAPTER 3 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The initial Research defines knowledge and knowledge management (KM) and establishes its roots. KM is not a brand new topic, while organizational learning and organizational memory are related topics that have been fields of research for many years. The chapter shows how research has been done in field of Knowledge Management. Additionally, this chapter explains that KM has become a research area due to a many trends that have made KM necessary and technically useful. (Murray E. Jennex, 1999) The next in line ate the arguments that show knowledge management (KM) is a discipline. Kuhns (1996) criteria for being a discipline are used as a framework for providing information showing KM to be a discipline. It was found that KM has interesting research questions, journals specific to KM, a body of accepted knowledge, professional societies, its own jargon and ontology, and its own degree programs. It also is concluded that KM is a young and growing discipline. (David Croasdell, 1994) Although knowledge management (KM) is maturing as a research topic, there is no agreement on what constructs create its foundation. The topic has received increasing attention in academic journals, it is important for researchers to be aware of the research streams associated with KM. Accordingly, this chapter reviews the knowledge management literature published in top-tier journals from 2000 to 2005. These articles then are classified by knowledge management construct and by research methodology. The results indicate that the majority of knowledge management research has examined the construct of knowledge transfer. Trends of published KM research, gaps, and inconsistencies in the examined literature and applied research methodologies are discussed. Knowledge management is a complex field, divided into necessity or design. In this research, data that maps out a number of the characteristics of the field is presented. (Todd Peachey, Dianne Hall, Casey Cegielski, 2000) After that trends that indicate how knowledge management is evolving into a discipline in its own right and present some thoughts on what the dominant characteristics of that discipline need to be. Knowledge management (KM) initiatives are undertaken in order to improve organizational performance. The goal of such improvement is to make an organization more competitive in delivering value to its customers, employers, and stakeholders. However, without a plan that links KM activities to organizational performance, 23 | P a g e

the time, effort, and money devoted to a KM initiative may yield little benefit. Thus, understanding this linkage is crucial to competitiveness of knowledge-based organizations. This research uses the knowledge chain model as the theoretical base for an empirical study of the linkage between KM activities and approaches to competitiveness. It finds that every one of the nine knowledge chain activities can be performed in ways that improve organizational competitiveness in any of four ways: enhanced productivity, agility, innovation, and reputation. Apart from offering empirical support for the knowledge chain model, the primary finding of this research is that each knowledge chain activity deserves to be considered as a possible means for implementing each of these four approaches to improving organization performance. Another issue was capturing of tacit knowledge within organizations has risen in recent years. However, the capture of explicit knowledge is relatively straightforward; methods for eliciting tacit knowledge are less developed. (David G. Schwartz, 2001) This research briefly overviews a number of strategies for eliciting tacit knowledge and then provides a detailed examination of one of these strategies. The critical decision interview method can assist expert respondents to articulate tacit knowledge by probing beyond their usual theories about their actions to reveal their practice. Tacit knowledge then can be identified by contrasting respondents practices with theoretical prescriptions for best practice in the field. Knowledge management (KM) has gained increasing attention since the mid-1990s. A KM strategy involves helping people share and put knowledge into action. However, before an organization can realize the benefits of KM, a fundamental question needs to be asked: What performance goals is the organization trying to achieve? In this research, a multi-level framework that gives a view of the performance environment surrounding organizational knowledge work. It explains the KM framework using two organizational case studies. Then, based on the KM framework and further insights drawn from our case studies, it offer a series of steps that may guide and assist organizations and practitioners as they undertake KM initiatives. Research further demonstrates the applicability of these steps by examining KM initiatives within a global software development company.

While the discipline of knowledge management (KM) is no longer emerging, some organizations are still finding it difficult to fully take advantage of their intellectual assets. Having proper organizational culture is an important barrier to knowledge management 24 | P a g e

success. This empirical research project, conducted with data from 97 organizations involved in KM, explores relationships between the level of organizational trust and the use of KM methodologies, in particular the use of codification KM methodologies and personalization KM methodologies. The presence of trust can be used as an indicator of KM initiative success. The contribution of this research will help organizations seeking to launch a KM initiative to choose which KM tools and technologies to use in order to maximize their chances of success. (Vincent Ribire, 1994) A community of practice (CoP) is an organizational form that promotes sense making, knowledge management, and learning. It is important to understand how and why these communities form and grow over time. These questions are explored in a qualitative analysis of a knowledge management (KM) community of practice. This case study includes a description of how the organization formed, survived, grew, and matured over a five-year period (1999-2004). Several practices and structures related to CoP development are identified: operations, roles and responsibilities, communications, subgroup structures, use of information technologies, and other aspects of organizing. Using data from several sources (e.g., membership surveys, interviews with key informants, document analysis), four sets of critical success factors are identified: Individual factors, content factors, meeting factors, and organizational factors. These factors are arranged into a descriptive model of the function and structure of CoPs over the life cycle. This work also sheds light on how to set up and successfully grow a community of practice. (Eric W. Ste n, 2003) Further research surveys knowledge management (KM) and knowledge management system (KMS) success factors and models. It also provides a framework for assessing KM and KMS success models. The framework uses three criteria: how well the model fits actual KMS success factors, the degree to which the model has a theoretical foundation, and if the model can be used for both types of KMS. The framework then is applied to four KMS success models found in the literature and is determined to be a useful framework for assessing KMS success models. For a company to be focused consistently toward its customers and their processes, it needs to customize its processes and systems. The solution is process-oriented portals that integrate companies systems and provide transparent access to information stored in these systems. A key problem is finding relevant information objects in systems and whether knowledge is available at right time and at the right place. A companys competitive advantage is based on this knowledge advantage as well as in the capability to transform this superior knowledge into market-driven business processes. The questions addressed in this research are how the value of information objects is affected by the context in which it is considered and how associated contexts can be 25 | P a g e

uncovered for given situations. (Massey, Ramesh, & Montoya-Weiss, 2006) Research introduces a continuum of context comprised of the relationships among data, information objects, knowledge, and their contexts according to their degree and ease of availability. In addition, research evaluate the full-text search, attribute-based search, and topic maps as approaches for knowledge discovery through customer process-oriented portals and providing patterns that indicate when to apply which approach. Two small case studies are presented of knowledge discovery through such portals.

26 | P a g e

CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

This part contains the data collected from the respondents. This chapter is divided into three parts i.e. Sample Description, Mean Scores and Factor Analysis. There are different charts representing the employee opinion about a particular factor. The introduction to all tables is given in order to represent the necessity of including the questions and providing the basis of understanding the results. Measure of central tendency (Mean) has been used extensively to analyze the collected data. Tables have been used to represent the analyzed data. Factor Analysis has been done with the help of SPSS software. Responses have been analyzed to arrive at the effectiveness of the factors.

Part 1: Sample Description The sample size is of 60 respondents who are exposed to Knowledge Management system in different organizations. They are either administering the KM system or are users of the system. Companies with which respondents belong to are: Wipro Sapient Technologies Infosys

16 respondents have filled the questionnaire from Wipro, 26 from Sapient Technologies and 18 from Infosys The respondents belong to various positions such as: Associate Technology Developer Quality Analyst Lead Technology & Associates

All of them belong to Software Development and IT department in their respective companies.

27 | P a g e

Part 2: Mean Scores

This section represents the analysis of different variables along with pie charts. The mean score is calculated for each variable and analysis for that variable is done.

28 | P a g e

Decision Making
Fast and better decision making has been critical in businesses these days. Changing conditions and increasing competition demands real time decision making. Knowledge Management assists this decision making and makes information readily available. Table and Exhibit 4.1 Decision Making KM system helps in fast and better decision making Responses Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Dn/Cs Total Responses Percentage of Response 14 28 10 04 04 60

The above chart represents that about 70% of employees agree that KM system helps in fast and better decision making. About 23% disagree with the statement and rest didnt reply. Not significant but many respondents agreed with the statement. For this variable, mean value is 2.733. Thus, decision making is an important criteria of judging KM success and it effects the decision making of employees to some extent.

29 | P a g e

Enhanced productivity or Service quality

Organizations continuously strive for increased productivity or improved service quality. KM effects the working of employees and hence productivity also.

Table and Exhibit 4.2 Enhanced Productivity or Service quality KM helps in enhancing the productivity Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 12 Agree 20 Disagree 12 Strongly Disagree 08 Dn/Cs 08 Total Responses 60

The above chart represents that 53% of employees agree that KM system helps in increasing productivity. About 34% disagree with the statement and rest didnt reply. For this factor, respondents consider it insignificant as mean value for this variable is 2.333. Productivity or service quality is not the most important criteria and KM does not affect it significantly.

30 | P a g e

Sharing Best Practices

KM helps in sharing experiences, knowledge, ideas and expertise. The best and successful practices can be easily shared among the employees. Table and Exhibit 4.3- Sharing best Practices Implementing KM results in sharing best practices Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 28 Agree 18 Disagree 10 Strongly Disagree 04 Dn/Cs 00 Total Responses 60

The above chart represents that about 77% of employees agree that KM system assists in sharing best practices. About 23% of respondents disagree to the situation. Most respondents are of the opinion that KM helps in sharing best practices. Mean value for this variable is 3.166. Most respondents agree to the statement. It is one of the important criteria affected by KM system.

31 | P a g e

Entering new Markets

Expanding continuously is important for businesses in order to maintain its existence. For this they enter new markets. KM provides instant information and makes changes easy in such scenarios. Table and Exhibit 4.4 Entering New Markets KM makes it easy to enter different market types Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 08 Agree 14 Disagree 18 Strongly Disagree 12 Dn/Cs 08 Total Responses 60

The above chart represents only about 37% of employees agree that KM system helps in entering to new markets and expansion. About 50% disagree to the statement and rest is unsure of their opinion. Entering new markets is one of the least important criteria affected by KM system. Mean value for this variable is 2.033. Thus effect of KM on this factor is insignificant.

32 | P a g e

Innovation
Innovation is important to maintain the competitive advantage in market. Knowledge is the backbone of innovation and therefore KM is important. Table and Exhibit 4.5 - Innovation KM helps in increased innovation Responses Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Dn/Cs Total Responses

Frequency of Response 08 18 16 14 04 60

The chart represent about 43% employees agree that KM system results in increased innovation. About 50% disagree to the statement and rest didnt reply. The mean value for this variable is 2.20. Thus, KM does not effect innovation significantly but it may be of some use in measuring KM success.

33 | P a g e

Market Share
Table and Exhibit 4.6 - Market Share KM system results in increased market share Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 04 Agree 08 Disagree 16 Strongly Disagree 26 Dn/Cs 06 Total Responses 60

The chart represents that about 20% employees believe that KM system helps in increasing the market share. About 70% of employees disagree to the statement and rest didnt reply. The mean score for this variable is 1.633. Thus, Market share of a company is least effected by the KM system and it is not an important measure for judging KM success.

34 | P a g e

Learning and adaptation capability

Table and Exhibit 4.7 Learning and adaption capability KM increases the learning/adaptation capability of employees Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 06 Agree 22 Disagree 20 Strongly Disagree 12 Dn/Cs 00 Total Responses 60

The chart represents about 47% employees agree that KM system helps in increased learning and adapting to new situations. About 53% disagree to the statement. KM supports learning and adaptation of employees to some extent. The mean score for this variable is 2.366. Thus KM does not effect employee learning and adaptation in a significant manner and it is of little importance in measuring KM success.

35 | P a g e

Staff Attraction/Retention
Table and Exhibit 4.8 Staff Attraction/ Retention KM helps in better staff attraction/retention Responses Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Dn/Cs Total Responses Frequency of Response 06 08 16 24 06 60

The chart represents about 23% employees believe that KM systems result in attracting and retaining staff. About 67% are disagreeing to the statement and rest didnt reply. Most respondents are of the opinion that KM does not help in attracting or retaining employees the mean score for this variable is 1.733. Thus KM has insignificant effect on staff attraction and retention.

36 | P a g e

Enhanced Collaboration
Table and Exhibit 4.9 Enhanced Collaboration KM results in enhanced collaboration within the organization Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 24 Agree 14 Disagree 16 Strongly Disagree 06 Dn/Cs 00 Total Responses 60

The chart represents about 63% employees agree that KM system results in enhanced collaboration i.e. improved coordination and teamwork. KM makes employees better connected to each other. About 37% employees disagree to the situation. Most respondents agree that KM system helps in better collaboration among employees and departments. The mean score for this variable is 2.933. Thus it is one of the important criteria in measuring KM success and KM improves employee collaboration significantly.

37 | P a g e

Communication among employees

Table and Exhibit 4.10 Communication among employees KM helps to address the communication gap in the organization Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 28 Agree 12 Disagree 14 Strongly Disagree 06 Dn/Cs 00 Total Responses 60

The chart represent about 66% employees agree that KM system improves lines of communication and makes other employees easily approachable. About 34% of employees disagree to the situation. KM helps in filling communication gaps and improves communication among employees. Respondents feel that KM improves communication among employees in a significant manner.

38 | P a g e

Creation of Intellectual assets

Table and Exhibit 4.11 Creation of Intellectual assets KM helps in constant and continuous transformation of individual learning to organizational Learning and vice versa Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 08 Agree 18 Disagree 16 Strongly Disagree 08 Dn/Cs 10 Total Responses 60

The chart represents about 44% of employees agree that KM helps in creating knowledge banks and also synchronize between employees and organization. About 40% of employees disagree to the statement and rest didnt reply. Respondents disagree that KM builds information pool and knowledge banks. The mean score for this variable is 2.1. Thus, KM builds the intellectual capital of an organization to very small extent but it is not a significant criterion in measuring KM success.

39 | P a g e

Delegation of authority
Table and Exhibit 4.12 Delegation of authority KM results in increased delegation of authority and accountability to individuals Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 04 Agree 12 Disagree 12 Strongly Disagree 28 Dn/Cs 04 Total Responses 60

The chart represents about 27% of employees agree that KM system results in increased delegation of authority and responsibility. About 66% of employees disagree to this statement and rest 7% didnt reply. Most Respondents feel that KM does not effect delegation of authority. The mean value for this variable is 1.733. Thus, delegation is an insignificant criteria for measuring KM success and its effects.

40 | P a g e

Return on Investment
Table and Exhibit 4.13 Return on Investment KM helps to achieve better ROI Responses Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Dn/Cs Total Responses Frequency of Response 06 08 16 24 06 60

The chart represents about 24% of employees agree that applying KM system results in increased Return on Investment for the company. About 66% of employees disagree to this and rest didnt reply. Most respondents are of the opinion that ROI is not the important criteria in measuring KM success. The mean value for this variable is 1.733. Thus, contribution of KM system in increasing the ROI is insignificant.

41 | P a g e

Availability of Information
Table and Exhibit 4.14 Availability of Information Information is readily available on required topics Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 08 Agree 12 Disagree 10 Strongly Disagree 30 Dn/Cs Total Responses 00 60

Availabilityof Information
0 20 40 Strongly Agree/Agree (34%) Disagree/ Strongly Disagree (66%) Don't know/ Can't say

The chart represents 34% of employees agree that information regarding specific processes and publications are available for reference. About 66% of employees disagree to the statement.

42 | P a g e

The mean value for this variable is 1.966. Thus we can say that most employees disagree to the statement and KM system is not an important source of information. It is not an important variable in making an organization a learning organization.

Uploading Information
Table and Exhibit 4.15 Uploading Information Information can be uploaded in organizations database Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 10 Agree 24 Disagree 14 Strongly Disagree 08 Dn/Cs 04 Total Responses 60

The chart represents about 57% employees agree that they can upload the information regarding the process on which they work. About 36% disagree to the statement and rest didnt reply..

43 | P a g e

The mean value for this variable is 2.466. Thus most employees are disagreeing that they can upload information but some are satisfied with it.

44 | P a g e

Sharing personal practices

Table and Exhibit 4.16 Sharing personal practices Personal best practices can be shared with other employees Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 14 Agree 24 Disagree 12 Strongly Disagree 10 Dn/Cs 00 Total Responses 60

The chart represents that 64% of employees agree that they can share their personal practices on KM system. About 36% employees disagree to this. The mean value for this variable is 2.7. Thus, respondents somewhat agree that they can share their practices with others. Sharing personal practices is somewhat important in making an organization a learning organization.

45 | P a g e

Availability of Technology
Table and Exhibit 4.17 Availability of Technology Availability of hardware and software technologies Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 12 Agree 28 Disagree 16 Strongly Disagree 04 Dn/Cs 00 Total Responses 60

The chart represents that 66% of employees agree that required hardware and software technology is available to support learning. About 34% of employees disagree with this aspect. The mean value for this variable is 2.8. Thus, we can say that most respondents are satisfied with technology available and this is a important factor in building a learning organization.

46 | P a g e

Knowledge Acquisition
Table and Exhibit 4.18 Knowledge Acquisition Processes for creation, capture, and acquisition of knowledge Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 10 Agree 14 Disagree 20 Strongly Disagree 08 Dn/Cs 08 Total Responses 60

The chart represents that 40% of employees agree that there are well defined processes for creation, capture, and acquisition of knowledge. About 46% employees disagree with the statement and rest didnt reply. The mean value for this variable is 2.166. Thus, most respondents disagree that proper process for knowledge acquisition exists.

47 | P a g e

Knowledge Transfer
Table and Exhibit 4.19 : Knowledge Transfer Knowledge can be easily shared and acted upon Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 06 Agree 24 Disagree 16 Strongly Disagree 14 Dn/Cs 00 Total Responses 60

The chart represents that 50% of employees agree that knowledge can be easily shared and acted upon. About 50% employees disagree with the statement. The mean value for this variable is 2.366. Thus, on average respondents disagree that knowledge can be easily shared. It is not a prime factor in a learning organization.

48 | P a g e

Common Vision
Table and Exhibit 4.20 Common Vision A cohering and powerful vision of the organization is shared Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 16 Agree 24 Disagree 14 Strongly Disagree 06 Dn/Cs 00 Total Responses 60

The chart represents that 66% of employees agree that cohering and powerful vision of the organization is shared across the workforce. About 34% employees disagree with the statement. The mean value for this variable is 2.833. Thus, on average respondents agree that a common vision exists in the organization and employees agree with it. It is also an important factor in making organization a learning organization.

49 | P a g e

Organization Structure
Table and Exhibit 4.21 Organization Structure Enabling structures in terms of hierarchy and communication flows exists Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 08 Agree 28 Disagree 12 Strongly Disagree 06 Dn/Cs 06 Total Responses 60

The chart represents that 60% of employees agree that enabling structures in terms of hierarchy and communication flows exists. About 30% employees disagree with the statement and rest didnt reply. The mean value for this variable is 2.433. Thus, on average respondents disagree that enabling organization structure exists in the organization but it is somewhat important for learning organization.

50 | P a g e

Teamwork
Table and Exhibit 4.22- Teamwork There are cohesive teams in organization which facilitates learning Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 14 Agree 32 Disagree 08 Strongly Disagree 06 Dn/Cs 00 Total Responses 60

The chart represents 76% of employees agree that there are cohesive teams in organization which facilitates sharing of experiences. About 24% employees disagree with the statement and rest didnt reply. The mean value for this variable is 2.9 Thus, on average respondents agree that working in teams result in better learning for employees and organization. It is an important measure for a learning organization.

51 | P a g e

Incentives to use KM
Table and Exhibit 4.23 : incentives to use KM Organization provides incentives to use KM system Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 04 Agree 10 Disagree 26 Strongly Disagree 16 Dn/Cs 04 Total Responses 60

The chart represents 24% of respondents agree that organization provides incentives to motivate users to use KM system. About 70% employees disagree with the statement and rest didnt reply. The mean value for this variable is 1.9 Thus, on average respondents disagree that there is any incentive to use KM. It is not an important measure for a learning organization.

52 | P a g e

Learning and Re-learning of employees

Table and Exhibit 4.24 Learning and Re-learning of employees Organization strives for learning, unlearning and re-learning for its employees Responses Frequency of Response Strongly Agree 10 Agree 16 Disagree 22 Strongly Disagree 12 Dn/Cs 00 Total Responses 60

The chart represents 43% of respondents agree that organization continuously strives for learning, unlearning and re-learning for its employees. About 57% employees disagree with the statement. The mean value for this variable is 2.4. Thus, on average respondents disagree that organization provides opportunity for continuous learning.

53 | P a g e

Part 3: Factor Analysis

This part deals with the factor analysis among variables. Factor Analysis is a statistical tool which is used as a method for data reduction or structure detection. The term factor analysis was first introduced by Thurstone in 1931. The main purpose or function of factor analysis technique is as follows: (1) to diminish/moderate the number of variables and (2) to detect structure in the relationship between variables , that is to classify variables The Factor Analysis technique has been applied to analyse the 24 variables contained in the questionnaire. This technique has been applied on these variables with the purpose to (a) (b) Reduce the number of variables and To detect a structure in the relationship between variables

The Factor Analysis technique has been applied to analyze the 24 variables contained in the questionnaire.

Factor Analysis
Factor Analysis results for data collected from respondents. It is done for all 24 variables and 60 respondents. Factors were extracted by Principal Component Method from the correlation matrix. All factors with eigen values greater than 1 are extracted.

Table 1: Table gives eigenvalues, variance explained, and cumulative variance Explained Variance (Eigenvalues) Value Eigenvalue % of Var. Cum. % Value Eigenvalue % of Var. Cum. % Value Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5 Factor 6 Factor 7 Factor 8 4.849 20.203 20.203 Factor 9 0.863 3.596 89.453 Factor 17 3.878 16.156 36.360 Factor 10 0.752 3.135 92.588 Factor 18 2.911 12.128 48.488 Factor 11 0.681 2.837 95.425 Factor 19 2.741 11.423 59.911 Factor 12 0.506 2.106 97.531 Factor 20 2.356 9.817 69.727 Factor 13 0.357 1.487 99.018 Factor 21 1.450 6.040 75.767 Factor 14 0.236 0.982 100.000 Factor 22 1.376 5.732 81.499 Factor 15 0.000 0.000 100.000 Factor 23 1.046 4.358 85.857 Factor 16 0.000 0.000 100.000 Factor 24

54 | P a g e

Eigenvalue % of Var. Cum. %

0.000 0.000 100.000

0.000 0.000 100.000

0.000 0.000 100.000

0.000 0.000 100.000

0.000 0.000 100.000

0.000 0.000 100.000

0.000 0.000 100.000

0.000 0.000 100.000

The above table gives eigenvalues, variance explained, and cumulative variance explained for the concerned factor solution. The first panel gives values based on initial eigenvalues. The variances extracted by the factors are called the Eigenvalues. The sum of Eigenvalues is equal to the number of variables. The sum of Eigen values is equal to the number of variables. For the initial solution, there are as many components or factors as there are variables, i.e. there are 24 variables and thus 24 components also. The "Total" column gives the amount of variance in the observed variables accounted for by each component or factor. The "% of Variance" column gives the percent of variance accounted for by each specific factor or component, relative to the total variance in all the variables. The "Cumulative %" column gives the percent of variance accounted for by all factors or components up to and including the current one. In a good factor analysis, there are a few factors that explain a lot of the variance and the rest of the factors explain relatively small amounts of variance. Now that we have a measure of how much variance each successive factor extracts, next we have to decide on how many factors to retain. By its nature this is an arbitrary decision. However, there are some guidelines that are commonly used, which, in practice, will yield the best results. The Kaiser criterion is one of the guidelines which we use as a guideline to decide how many factors we would ultimately retain. This criterion was proposed by Kaiser in 1960 and hence the name.

55 | P a g e

The Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings group gives information regarding the extracted factors or components. For principal components extraction, these values will be the same as those reported under Initial Eigenvalues. According to this criterion we will ultimately retain only those factors which have eigenvalues greater than 1. Thus according to the Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings we will ultimately retain the first 8 factors as the Principal Components because only the first 8 factors have their eigenvalues as more than 1. The Eigen values of the first 8 factors are 4.849, 3.878, 2.911, 2.741, 2.356, 1.450, 1.376 and 1.046 respectively Table 2: Extracted Factors with Eigenvalues >1; (F = Factor) Variable Decision Making Enhanced Productivity Sharing best practices Entering new markets Innovation Market share Learning/adaptation Staff attraction/retention Collaboration Communication gap Intellectual asset Increased Delegation ROI Availability of Information Uploading data Sharing of practices Enabling technologies Knowledge acquisition Knowledge transfer Common vision Enabling structures Teamwork Incentives Employee re-learning F1 0.170 0.152 0.190 0.816 -0.210 -0.045 0.341 -0.153 0.318 0.465 0.835 0.671 -0.105 0.816 -0.210 -0.045 0.341 -0.153 0.318 0.465 0.835 0.671 -0.105 0.324 F2 -0.111 -0.341 0.093 -0.084 0.652 -0.217 -0.252 0.463 -0.365 0.297 0.302 0.286 0.848 -0.084 0.652 -0.217 -0.252 0.463 -0.365 0.297 0.302 0.286 0.848 0.011 F3 0.081 0.073 -0.245 0.136 0.452 0.636 -0.096 -0.693 -0.389 0.161 0.228 -0.266 -0.004 0.136 0.452 0.636 -0.096 -0.693 -0.389 0.161 0.228 -0.266 -0.004 -0.076 F4 0.353 -0.454 -0.383 -0.074 -0.079 -0.005 -0.412 -0.024 0.537 0.674 -0.114 -0.338 0.044 -0.074 -0.079 -0.005 -0.412 -0.024 0.537 0.674 -0.114 -0.338 0.044 0.397 F5 0.360 0.276 0.126 -0.266 0.307 0.499 0.594 0.351 0.370 0.015 -0.002 -0.082 0.103 -0.266 0.307 0.499 0.594 0.351 0.370 0.015 -0.002 -0.082 0.103 0.215 F6 -0.091 -0.309 -0.576 -0.073 0.120 -0.270 0.473 0.017 -0.256 0.247 -0.062 -0.015 -0.244 -0.073 0.120 -0.270 0.473 0.017 -0.256 0.247 -0.062 -0.015 -0.244 0.015 F7 -0.050 -0.122 -0.145 -0.165 -0.318 0.412 -0.086 0.105 -0.264 0.145 -0.192 0.433 -0.013 -0.165 -0.318 0.412 -0.086 0.105 -0.264 0.145 -0.192 0.433 -0.013 0.272 F8 0.446 -0.325 0.298 -0.172 0.094 -0.140 -0.011 -0.163 -0.099 -0.202 0.082 0.063 -0.118 -0.172 0.094 -0.140 -0.011 -0.163 -0.099 -0.202 0.082 0.063 -0.118 0.577

56 | P a g e

Table 3: Variables that are interrelated to each other Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5 Learning/ adaptation Enabling Technologies Factor 8 Decision Making Employee Re learning

Entering New Innovation Market Share Enhanced Markets Productivity Intellectual ROI Staff Collaboration Asset attraction/ retention of Improved Increased Uploading Sharing Delegation Data Practices Communication Availability of Incentive to Knowledge Knowledge Information use KM Acquisition Transfer Enabling Common Structure Vision Teamwork Maximum number of variables lays in factor 1 i.e. six. It means

that these six variables have

common attributes and are interrelated to each other. Similarly for other variables which fall under different factors, they are interrelated to each other. Rest Factor 6 has one variable falling under it and Factor 7 has none of the variable falling under it.

Graph 1 - Scree Plot for Unrotated Factor Loadings

KM Score Analysis
Its been assumed that respondents have KM experience, consider them fairly knowledgeable about KM, and are involved in KM initiative decision making. 57 | P a g e

Since all the respondents indicated that they have KM experience and that they have answered KM-related questions, we can assume that these organizations are involved in implementing KM.

Table 4: Survey Results of KM Criteria S Knowledge Management Mean Agree No. score (%) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Decision Making Enhanced Productivity Sharing best practices Entering new markets Innovation Market Share Learning/adaptation Staff Attraction/Retention Collaboration Communication Gap Intellectual asset Increased Delegation ROI 2.733 2.333 3.166 2.033 2.2 1.633 2.366 1.733 2.933 3.033 2.1 1.733 1.733 70 53 77 37 43 20 47 23 63 66 44 27 24 Remarks Less significant but many responses agreed with it. It shows decision making is an important criteria of judging KM success quality is not the Productivity or service most important criteria and KM does not affect it significantly It helps in sharing best practices It is one of the important criteria affected by KM system of the least important criteria It is one affected by KM system KM does not effect innovation significantly but it may be of some use in measuring KM company is least Market share of a success effected by the KM system KM does not effect employee learning and adaptation in a significant manner and it is of little importance in measuring KM success KM has insignificant effect on staff attraction and retention KM system helps in better collaboration among employees and departments it is one of the important criteria in measuring KM success improves Respondents feel that KM communication among employees in a significant manner KM builds the intellectual capital of an organization to very small extent but it is not a significant criterion in measuring KM success Delegation is an insignificant criteria for measuring KM success and its effects Contribution of KM system in increasing the ROI is insignificant

58 | P a g e

Graph 2: Line shape chart representing mean score and distinguishing highest & least variables

The results shown above tells that there are variables 1, 2, 9 and 10 (shown as a black rhombus) that are most effected by knowledge management system, they are important factors in judging KM success. The research result also shows that there are variables that are least effected by knowledge management system and they are least important criterias in judging KM success. These variables are 6, 8, 12, and 13 (shown as a black triangle). Table 5: Survey results of Organizational Learning S Learning No. Organization 14 Availability of Information Uploading data Sharing of practices Enabling technologies Knowledge acquisition Knowledge transfer Mean Agree Score (%) 1.966 34 Remarks Most employees disagree to the statement not an important variable in making an organization a learning organization Most employees are disagreeing that they can upload information but some are satisfied personal practices is somewhat Sharing with it important in making an organization a learning organization satisfied with Most respondents are technology available and this is a important factor in building a learning organization Most respondents disagree that proper process for knowledge acquisition exists On average respondents disagree that knowledge can be easily shared. It is not a prime factor in a learning organization

15 16 17 18 19

2.466 2.7 2.8 2.166 2.366

57 64 66 44 50

59 | P a g e

20 21 22 23 24

Common vision Enabling structures Teamwork Incentives Employee re-learning

2.833 2.433 2.9 1.9 2.4

66 60 76 24 43

It is an important factor in making a learning organization Its mean score shows that it is somewhat important for learning organization Teams result in better learning for employees and organization. It is an important measure for a learning organization It is not an important measure for a learning organization On average respondents disagree that organization provides opportunity for continuous learning

Graph 3: Line shape chart representing mean score and distinguishing highest & least variables

The result shown above tells that there are certain variables 16, 17, 20 and 22 (shown as a black rhombus) which help in making an organization a learning one. Their activities contribute in building learning organization. The research result also shows that there are variables that are least contributing factors and the organization is not influenced by them. These variables are 14 and 23 (shown as a black triangle).

60 | P a g e

Most useful criteria The research results show that there are variables that are most effected by knowledge management system and they are important criterias in judging KM success. These variables are given below. Decision Making Sharing best practices Enhanced Collaboration Improved Communication

Least useful criteria The research results show that there are variables that are least effected by knowledge management system and they are not important criterias in judging KM success. These variables are given below. Increased market share Better staff attraction/retention Delegation of authority Return on investment of KM effort

Some variables are not very significant to check effects of KM system but on the other hand they cannot be totally ignored. These are: Enhanced Productivity Innovation Learning/adaptation Building Intellectual assets

61 | P a g e

Research findings also show that what activities organizations are doing well that contributes in building learning organization and what else they can focus on for organizations learning. The factors on which organizations are doing well are: Sharing of best practices Availability of required technologies Common vision of the organization among the workforce Working in teams

Factors on which organizations are not working well are: Availability of information regarding processes and knowledge banks Providing incentives to take active interest in KM system

Other factors which need to be improved are: Build processes that enable knowledge acquisition/capture and transfer Enable employees to upload information in KM database Build learning culture and focus on continuous learning

62 | P a g e

Significant KM outcomes
Improved Communication Among people Within/across processes Within/across functions Within/across units Enhanced Collaboration

Improved Employee Skills

At At At At

task level process level function level organization level

Improved Productivity

Better Decision Making

Figure 4.1 Significant Knowledge Management Outcome Through this research, both the most useful and the least useful criteria are established for outcomes of KM initiatives. While the most useful outcomes are difficult to measure, the least useful outcomes can be quantified and are easily measurable. The research identified enhanced collaboration within organization, improved communication, and sharing best practices as the top three outcomes, followed by improved productivity and better decision making. All of them contribute to organizational performance.

63 | P a g e

CHAPTER 5 SUGGESTION FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

Statistical analysis and research findings helped to identify the criteria for measuring KM efforts, which can be described as desired outcomes. The research study also helped to identify new areas of interest for further research. Some of these areas are as follows:

The important criterias and insignificant criterias can be checked through a quantitative analysis that how they are impacting the performance of individuals and organization as a whole. The performance of organization before and after applying KM system can be checked. The interrelated factors between KM and Learning Organization are to be checked for different industries and sectors. This will tell applicability of KM in Different companies. The most useful criteria identified through this research can be developed further into detailed measures of KM success. The research questions like what are the detailed measures for enhanced collaboration within an organization? What are they for: improved communication and improved employee skills?are required to be answered. The research effort will establish detailed measures for each useful criterion, validating their relation to each other and validating their effectiveness. Based on geographical location as well as industry type, the differences in KM criteria can be analyzed using multiple factors. The research questions like what are the differences in KM criteria based on geographical location? Are they industry specific can be addressed in a follow-up research.

64 | P a g e

CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION
Through this research, both the most useful and the least useful criteria are established for outcomes of KM initiatives. While the most useful outcomes are difficult to measure, the least useful outcomes can be quantified and are easily measurable. The research identified enhanced collaboration within organization, improved communication, and sharing best practices as the top three outcomes, followed by improved productivity and better decision making. All of them contribute to organizational performance.

65 | P a g e

REFERENCES
Vincent Ribire, New York Institute of Technology, USA, Francis Tuggle, Chapman University, USA, (1994). The Influence of Organizational Trust on the Use of KM Systems, NJ: Prentice-Hall. David Croasdell, (1994). Knowledge Management as a discipline, Organization Science, 5(1), p14-37. Stefan Kremer, The Information Management Group (IMG AG), Switzerland. The Role of Context and Its Explication for Fostering Knowledge Transparency, International Journal of Knowledge Management, 1(1), p i-v. Hazel Taylor, (1995). Eliciting Tacit Knowledge Using the Critical Decision Interview Method, Information Systems Research, 6(2), p85-117. Murray E. Jennex, (1999, March-April) Knowledge Management, Harvard Business Review, p106-116 Todd Peachey, Dianne Hall, Casey Cegielski, (2000). KM Systems - Are We Seeing the Whole Picture? Harvard Business School Press. David G. Schwartz, (2001). Creating a Disciplined Whole from Many interdisciplinary Parts, Organization Science, 2(1), p88-115. Clyde Holsapple, Meenu Singh,(2003). Knowledge Chain Evidence and Extensions, Cambridge University Press.
Ji Hoon Song. International Journal of Training & Development, Dec2008, Vol. 12 Issue 4, p265-281

Essentials of Knowledge Management by Bryan Bergeron Chang, S. C. and Lee, M. S. (2007) A study on relationship among leadership, organizational culture, the operation of learning organization and employees job satisfaction. The Learning Organization. 14 (2), 155-185.

Christensen, P. H. (2007) Knowledge sharing: moving away from the obsession with best practices. Journal of Knowledge Management. 11 (1), 36-47. Garvin, D A (1993) Building a Learning Organization. Harvard Business Review. July-August 1993, 78-91. Hansen, M., Nohria, N. and Tierney, T. (1999) Whats your strategy for managing knowledge? Harvard Business Review. 77 (2), 106.

66 | P a g e

Kumar, N & Idris, K (2006) An Examination of Educational Institutions Knowledge Performance: Analysis, implications and outlines for future research. The Learning Organization. 13 (1), 96-116.

McDermott, R. and ODell, C. (2001) Overcoming cultural barriers to knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management. 5 (1). 76-85. Morris, T. (2001) Asserting property rights: knowledge codification in the professional service firm. Human Relations. 54 (7), 819-38. Ortenbald, A. (2004) The learning organization: towards an integrated model. The Learning Organization. 11 (2/3), 129. Park, H., Ribeire, V. and Schulte, W. (2004) Critical attributes of organizational culture that promote knowledge management implementation success. Journal of Knowledge Management. 7(5), 55-66.

Patterson, G. (1999) The learning university. The Learning Organization. 6(1), 9. Senge, P.M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline. New York: Doubleday. Stata, R. (1989) Organizational learning-the key to management innovation. Sloan Management Review. 30(3), 63-74. Swan, J., Newell, S., Scarbrough, H. and Hislop, D. (1999) Knowledge Management and innovation: networks and networking. Journal of Knowledge Management. 3(4), 262-75.

Watskins, K. and Marsick, V.(Eds) (1996) Creating the Learning Organization. American Society for Training and Development, VA: Alexandria.

Books: Essentials of Knowledge Management by Bryan Bergeron Knowledge Management Systems - Value Shop Creation by Gottschalk P. Websites: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizational_learning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_management http://www.citehr.com/1434-learning-organizations.html http://www.about-goal-setting.com/KM-Library/knowledge-management-whyhttp://www.itmweb.com/essay538.htm

important.html

67 | P a g e

68 | P a g e

ANNEXURE QUESTIONNAIRE
The major objective of this survey is to find out the effects of Knowledge Management System in an organization and its contribution to a Learning Organization. The information collected is only for research purpose and will be kept confidential.

Description of Rating Scales

Value
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Dont know/Cant say(Dn/Cs)

Meaning Assigned
You are in agreement with the statement to a very high extent You believe that statement is true to some extent You believe that statement is not true to some extent You totally disagree with the statement You do not know about it or can not say PART 1

Following are the statements that reflect the effects of Knowledge Management system in an organization. According to your opinion please PUT (O) symbol in front of the suitable option. 1. The KM system helps in fast and better decision making. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree 2. KM helps in enhanced productivity or service quality. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree 3. Implementing KM results in sharing best practices. Strongly Agree Disagree Agree 4. KM makes it easy to enter different market types. Strongly Agree Disagree Agree 5. Strongly Disagree Strongly Disagree Dn/Cs

Dn/Cs

Dn/Cs

Dn/Cs

KM helps in increased innovation by the employees. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree

Dn/Cs

69 | P a g e

6.

Application of KM system results in increased market share. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree

Dn/Cs

7. KM increases the learning/adaptation capability of employees. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree 8. KM helps in better staff attraction/retention. Strongly Agree Disagree Agree Strongly Disagree

Dn/Cs

Dn/Cs

9. KM results in enhanced collaboration within the organization. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree 10. KM helps to address the communication gap in the organization. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree

Dn/Cs

Dn/Cs

11. KM helps in constant and continuous transformation of individual learning to organizational Learning and vice versa. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Dn/Cs Agree Disagree 12. KM results in increased delegation of authority and accountability to individuals. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Dn/Cs Agree Disagree 13. KM helps to achieve better ROI. Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Dn/Cs

70 | P a g e

PART 2 Following are the statements that reflect characteristics of any Learning Organization. According to your opinion please TICK in front of the option that best suit your organization. 1. Information is readily available on required topics from current publications to industry specific processes. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Dn/Cs Agree Disagree 2. Information regarding process description can be uploaded in organizations database. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Dn/Cs Agree Disagree 3. Personal best practices can be shared with other employees. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree Dn/Cs

4. Enabling hardware and software technologies are available to support learning rather than control it. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Dn/Cs Agree Disagree 5. There are well defined processes for creation, capture, and acquisition of knowledge. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Dn/Cs Agree Disagree 6. Useful knowledge can be easily shared and acted upon. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Agree Disagree Dn/Cs

7. A cohering and powerful vision of the organization is shared across the workforce to promote need for strategic thinking at all levels. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Dn/Cs Agree Disagree 8. There are enabling structures in terms of hierarchy and communication flows that facilitates learning. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Dn/Cs Agree Disagree 9. There are cohesive teams in organization which facilitates sharing of experiences and Information among employees. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Dn/Cs Agree Disagree 10. The organization provides incentives to motivate users to learn from experiences and 71 | P a g e

use KM system. Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Dn/Cs

11. The organization continuously strives for learning, unlearning and re-learning for its employees. Strongly Agree Disagree Strongly Dn/Cs Agree Disagree

Thank You for your time and thoughtful responses

72 | P a g e