Development of attitudes of Czech companies on the knowledge management in the past eight years

Transcription

1 Development of attitudes of Czech companies on the knowledge management in the past eight years PETRA MAREŠOVÁ Faculty of Informatics and Management University of Hradec Králové Rokitanského 62, Hradec Králové CZECH REPUBLIC Abstract- Most companies in relation to increasing the competitiveness are focused on producing a product or service for customers. However, one of the most significant keys to value-creation comes from placing emphasis on producing knowledge. The production of knowledge needs to be a major part of the overall production strategy. The aim of this paper is to familiarize with the development of knowledge management in the Czech Republic for the last eight years. The results define development in longer run. This trend is compared with the situation abroad. Keywords - Knowledge, knowledge management, enterprise, research 1 Introduction Knowledge management is becoming an increasingly important topic in management philosophy and as a management tool as reflected in the growing number of articles and books on the issue. This fact is proved by publications on this topic, which are listed in the database of Thomson Reuters (table no. 1). The reason of this decrease in is that not all publications have been inserted into the database. Table 1 The number of citations the phrase knowledge management in the database Thomson Reuters Year Published Items in Each Year Citations in Each Year Source: own processing based on ISI Web of Knowledge During this same period the number of organizations venturing into the knowledge management area has grown as well. While some industries have been highly proactive in this area particularly consulting, information technology and related advisory-based industries where knowledge is the key resource knowledge management initiatives are becoming increasingly prominent throughout the corporate landscape. Today, the view of knowledge management has shifted toward broader social and cultural factors, with technology now seen as an enabling factor. The knowledge management can be viewed from many different perspectives. One aspect of knowledge management that has been well accounted for is the concept of knowledge itself. It has been outlined in a number of different ways, from the classical philosophical perspective as justified true belief to a more pragmatic view as for action [11]. At the same time, knowledge has become an umbrella for many different words including data, information, wisdom, codified, personal, proprietary, common, organizational, diffused, migratory, embedded, embodied, uncultured, tacit, explicit, sticky, and so forth [2, 15]. The main tensions surrounding the technological aspects of knowledge management (KM) focus on the issue of tacit knowledge and how to capture it in knowledge management systems, as well as the challenge of motivating employees to contribute to these systems. Quality control and updating are issues often raised. Globalization, in contrast, often emphasizes the human dimension, especially in ISBN:

2 terms of lags in time and space, and the challenges involved in creating a culture of knowledge sharing as opposed to one of knowledge hoarding. Studies show e.g. [7, 8] that knowledge management projects often fail because of a lack of a knowledge strategy, a weak relation to the business strategy of the company, and/or a weak anchor and link to the rest of the organization[16]. Other studies show that knowledge management works better in firms with an explicit knowledge strategy, appropriately supported by structure, culture, technology and management (see [1, 9, 12]). In the field of knowledge management, there are a number of ongoing researches, with various concentrations ( [4], [6], [10], [17], [19], [20]). For example, research work of Directions and Trends in knowledge management research, conducted by George M. Giaglis from Aegean University in Greece, and examined over two hundred projects in the area of knowledge management, which were carried out within the European Union [8]. The researchers showed that it is a very perspective area, but now with some reserves [13]. The aim of this paper is to familiarize with the development of knowledge management in the Czech Republic for the last eight years. The results define development in t longer run. Then will be possible to compare this trend with the situation abroad. This situation is characterized by case studies above. percentages mentioned in individual answers may surpass hundred percent. The purpose of the questions formulated in such way was to find out whether companies would like to deal with the given issue even in the future, respectively with greater or lower intensity. 2.1 Focus of survey Most questions from the following survey corresponded with the initial questionnaire survey. Some new options were added to the offered answers to reflect the current changes in knowledge management. Questions following the first survey were divided into two major areas. The goal of the first part was to find what leads companies to focus on knowledge management and in what stage of its using are they now. The answers (to those questions) are summarized in the following graphs. Due to the quantity of contributions there are selected only some of them. There was addressed small (under 50 employees) and medium (up to 250 employees) enterprises across all industries: by CZ NACE every time. 3 Development of attitudes of Czech companies on the knowledge management 2 Methodologies In 2002 and, a questionnaire survey dealing with the topic Research of knowledge management state in Czech companies was realized. This survey aimed to chart the current companies attitudes to knowledge management. The survey was conducted in cooperation with the University of Hradec Králové, consulting company Per Partes Constulting, Ltd. and under the patronage of the European Union. In total, thousand organizations operating in the Czech Republic were addressed across all industries (economic activities status ranking of industries) with the focus on medium and large enterprise. In total one hundred and thirty-two filled-out questionnaires were acquired. The aim was to find out what makes companies be interested in knowledge management and in what phase of its use they are. For each question, respondents could choose from several answers or answer in their own words. They could mark more possibilities, respectively from the point of view of current situation and their future three years plans. For these reasons, the sum of the 3.1 Knowledge acquiring and knowledge sharing Knowledge acquiring and knowledge sharing are one of the pillars of knowledge management. In a questionnaire survey in 2002 was revealed, that the career path of workers based on the acquisition of know-how was supported (e.g. conferences, literature, training) in most cases. This is the support of proactive approach to creating new knowledge and this is the right way to knowledge acquiring. The second most used method of acquiring knowledge is buying them from outside (from specialized companies, experts, etc.). This is an example of passive acquisition of knowledge. Companies did not know how to promote a proactive approach to knowledge acquiring In this case. They oriented to sitting competent individuals (employees) on the labor market. This would increase the difference between companies with established and non-phase knowledge management. ISBN:

3 Fig. 1 Knowledge acquirement and sharing 2002 a) b) c) d) e) f) a) by regular qualification increasing and employees training b) by outer knowledge purchase (methodologies, services based on knowledge) c) by brains purchasing and highly knowledgeable experts recruitment d) by controlled discussion or team brainstorming e) by common informal discussion in work teams f) by knowledge enriched corporate methodology / directives Regular employee trainings are mentioned to be the main way of knowledge acquirement (61%). Knowledge sharing is supported by a controlled discussion or brainstorming (33%) and by sharing documents in the information system (3) (see Figure 1). These tendencies together with the effort of some companies to enrich the corporate methodology by means of knowledge () point to the companies are aware of knowledge and its systematic work significance. On the other hand there is a considerable percentage of the survey answers which do not evidence this fact. This concerns respondents who wrote that knowledge is shared especially by informal team discussion (61%). Further the fact that less new knowledge is acquired by outer purchase indicates a positive tendency in knowledge management [14]. Companies plan on keeping approximately the same structure of knowledge sharing and knowledge acquisition in the future. 3.2 Benefits of Knowledge Management Implementation Fig.2 Important benefits of Knowledge Management Implementation a) b) c) d) e) f) a) the use of knowledge for creating a successful business strategy b) increasing the company value by managing intellectual assets c) improving the business through a systematic knowledge of customer needs and market d) use of knowledge to find new opportunities in business e) decision making in a short time, higher flexibility and adaptability, f) increasing of awareness, positive change in corporate culture 2002 Next important factor is what companies expect from knowledge management, why they should focus on it (Figure 2). The financial benefits were expected due to the systematic knowledge of customer s needs, competitors and market, in These skills are the most important skills in the organization. Almost half of respondents believe that the significant benefit of knowledge management is the ability to create A good business strategy. This benefit is dominant and the respondents believe that knowledge management will bring a new quality to the ability to create business strategies in the growing competitive environment. This benefit is also important for businesses in the present (59%). Companies can see other positives in the improvement of business through a systematic knowledge of customer s needs and market (54%). Other benefits are: increasing the value of the company (31%), an easier searching for new business opportunities and increasing of agility. The structure of the expected benefits did not change radically. ISBN:

4 3.3 Barriers to implementation of knowledge management Fig. 3 Knowledge management barriers a) disagreement in management benefits, need to orientate on more concrete and tangible benefits b) employees unwillingness to share knowledge c) problematic employees' knowledge evaluation d) technical infrastructure extemporaneousness for knowledge storage, sharing and distribution e) unnecessary knowledge flooding 2002 a) b) c) d) e) Czech companies were confronted by many problems in the field of knowledge management (Figure 3) (as is clear from the results of both surveys). Major barrier to implementation of knowledge management is the unwillingness of workers to share knowledge. It was said by almost 62% of survey respondents in research in of respondents state that there is a risk of overloading useless knowledge, so they can see similar the information explosion in the knowledge area. Nearly 35% of respondents now see a disagreement about the benefits of knowledge management in top management as a barrier. This fact means that knowledge management is not accepted as a true management discipline and top management of companies does not yet have enough information about it. The actual situation has changed in this direction (research in ). Overall, companies do not see barriers of implementation of knowledge management as a serious problem and their structure was also changed. The greatest barrier stated by respondents was problematic employees knowledge evaluation (3), further the company's management problem with knowledge management benefits and their tangibility (29%). All these factors indicate that the issue of knowledge management and its benefits measurement should be solved. As it was said, many benefits are of a qualitative character. This does not mean they are less important than quantitative ones but it is far more difficult to find their specific definition. This particular obstacle has a very unfavorable impact on knowledge management focus [14]. Other barriers are from the perspective of their significance, approximately at about the same level. They also include: employees unwillingness to share knowledge, technical infrastructure extemporaneousness for knowledge storage, sharing and distribution, Unnecessary knowledge flooding. In near future term, the worry about potential barriers against knowledge management introduction has been generally decreasing. 3.4 Actual state of implementation of knowledge management in enterprises The answers of respondents (Graph 5) simply that knowledge management as a whole isn t established in most cases in enterprises. Top management of the company leaves this area to individual business units and it s their own responsibility (34%). Knowledge acquiring is usually the task of employees as individuals (62%). It is not possible to say that Czech companies ignore completely this issue. 13% of respondents said that projects to establish enterprise-wide knowledge management strategy are carried out. 13% of companies have such a strategy (Figure 4). Business was based on knowledge management in 14% of respondents. Fig 4 The usage of knowledge in enterprises a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h) i) a) the acquisition of knowledge is a part of the preparation of each worker b) Knowledge management is implemented in research and development of a new product c) Knowledge is managed within the competence of individual departments d) benefits, possibilities and methods of ISBN:

5 implementation of knowledge management are considered for whole company e) The company-wide strategy for the systematic management of knowledge was created in the company f) specific projects to implement enterprise-wide knowledge strategy are implemented g) knowledge workers with the greatest potential and benefit are valued h) knowledge is built into products to increase its artificial intelligence i) Business is based on a company-wide knowledge management and on the sale of skills 4 Summary Regular training of employees is given as the main method of knowledge acquisition in Czech companies. Knowledge sharing is supported by guided discussions or brainstorming. Companies recognize the importance of working with knowledge. Existence of knowledge base and knowledge methodology demonstrate this fact in some companies. Some companies plan on building a knowledge management system and knowledge base and want to significantly limit the sharing of knowledge at the level of informal discussions, prospectively. This corresponds with a foreign research, where the question of forms of knowledge sharing was addressed. As the most important communication was identified the face-to-face communication. An electronic documentation was in last position. Conflict of Czech and foreign companies is located in access to knowledge in databases. Czech companies consider this area for research as important and foreign research shows the disinterest of employees of knowledge sharing in this form. This contradiction can be explained by the unwillingness of workers to share more knowledge than redundancy of databases for knowledge sharing. Companies currently do not find barriers for the implementation of knowledge management as serious as in past years and their structure has also changed. Barrier that was marked by the respondents as the largest: evaluation of knowledge workers and evaluation of the qualitative benefits of knowledge management. Experience abroad shows to that if top management does not fully support a project on knowledge sharing it will not achieve the impact needed in order for it to become successful and thus valuable to the organization ([3, 5, 7]). Knowledge management as a whole is not implemented in Czech companies in most cases currently and senior management leaves the responsibility of this area to individual business units. Knowledge acquisition is usually the task of employees as individuals. This corresponds to the situation in research abroad. There employees expect that management will define the guidelines for how and when knowledge sharing is appropriate in the specific organization. To successfully work with the knowledge it needs to be an integral part of the core business ( what we do ) and integrated into daily routines ( how we do it ). Such change requires the full support of top management. 5 Conclusion This article summarizes the results of repeated surveys in 2002 and. In were solved questions that looked ahead to. The same business structure was approached; the same or similar areas of problems were resolved. The development of knowledge management was described based on these surveys at the time. Results between 2002 and were compared and there was a positive shift. However, many barriers to implementing knowledge management remained unsurpassed. Another follow-up survey is planned among enterprises this year. It will be focused on key aspects of the implementation of knowledge management. These effects will also be studied with regard to the size and sector of business enterprise. Survey results indicate effort and interest in further progress in the systematic work with knowledge. Planned research should be the answer to whether it is true or not. References [1] Apostolou, D. & Mentzas, G.: Managing corporate knowledge: A comparative analysis of experiences in consulting firms Part I. Knowledge and Process Management, 6 (3), 1999, pp [2] Boisot, M.H. (1998). Knowledge assets: Securing Competitive advantage in the information economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press ISBN:

6 [3] Davenport, T., De Long, D. & Beer, M.C. Successful knowledge management projects. Sloan Management Review, 39 (2), 1998, pp [4] Dhillon,G: Organizational competence for harnessing IT: A case study, Information & Management, vol. 45, s , 2008, [5] Earl, M. & Scott, I.A. Opinion: What is a chief knowledge officer? Sloan Management Review, 40 (2), 1999, pp [6] Faniel, M., Majchrzak, A.: Innovating by accessing knowledge across departments, Decision Support Systems, vol. 43, s , 2007, [7] Foote, N.W., Matson, E. & Rudd, N. Managing the knowledge ma nager. The McKinsey Quarterly, (No. 3), 2001, pp [8] Giaglis, G.M.: Directions and trends in knowledge management research: Results from an empirical analysis of european projects. In V. Hlupic, editor, Knowledge and Business Process Management, Idea Group Publishing, 2003, pp [9] Hauschild, S., Licht, T. & Stein, W. Creating a knowledge culture. The McKinsey Quarterly, (No. 1), 2001, pp [10] Hsu, I. CH. Knowledge sharing practices as a facilitating factor for improving organizational performance through human capital: A preliminary test, Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 35, s , 2008, [11] Christensen, P.H.: Videnledelse i perspektiv - om udfordringer ved organisering ogledelse af viden. København: Samfundslitteratur, [12] Kluge, J., Stein, W. & Licht, T. Knowledge unplugged. New York: Palgrave, [13] Marešová, P., Drahokoupil, J.: Decisionmaking in the knowledge processing in enterprises in the Czech Republic. In Applied informatics and computing theory (AICT '11). Athens : World scientific and engineering academy and society, [14] Marešová, P., HedvičákovÁ, M.: The State of Knowledge Management in Czech Companies. In Innovations in computing sciences and software engineering. Heidelberg : Springer, [15] Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. :The knowledgecreating company. Oxford: Oxford University Press Inc., [16] Petersen, N.J., Poulfelt, F.: Knowledge Management in Action: A Study of Knowledge Management in Management Consultancies, Published in:anthony F. Buono (ed.): Developing Knowledge and Value in Management Consulting. Volume 2: Research in Management Consulting. Greenwich: Information Age Publishing, 2002., [online], available from: 20NJP.pdf [17] Průcha,M.: Knowledge management in Czech companies (in Czech), Thesis, Hradec Králové, Universita Hradec Králové, Faculta of informatics and management, pp.74, [18] Storey, J. & Barnett, E.: Knowledge management initiatives: Learning from failure. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4 (2), 2000, pp [19] Wonga, K.Y., Aspinwallb,E.: Development of a knowledge management initiative and system: A case study, Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 30, s , 2006, [20] Wu, J.H., Wang, Y.M.: Measuring KMS success: A specification of the DeLone and McLean s model, Information & Management, vol. 43, s , ISBN: