A Knowledge Management Success Model: Theoretical Development and Empirical Validation

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. Ronald Freeze is a visiting Assistant Professor of Information Systems at the W.P. Carey School of Business, Arizona State University. He received his Ph.D. in Information Systems at Arizona State University. His broad research area is knowledge management. His research has been published in the Journal of Knowledge Management as well as AMCIS, ICIS, and HICSS conference proceedings.Abstract: We examine a knowledge management (KM) success model that incorporates the quality of available knowledge and KM systems built to share and reuse knowledge such as determinants of users' perception of usefulness and user satisfaction with an organization's KM practices. Perceived usefulness and user satisfaction, in turn, affect knowledge use, which in our model is a measure of how well knowledge sharing and reuse activities are internalized by an organization. Our model includes organizational support structure as a contributing factor to the success of KM Journal of Management Information Systems/ Winter 2006-7, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 309-347. © 2007 M.E. Sharpe, Inc. 0742-1222 / 2007.50 + 0.00. DOI 10.2753/MIS0742-122223031 1 3 1 0 KULKARNI, RAVINDRAN, AND FREEZE system implementation. Data collected from 150 knowledge workers from a variety of organizations confirmed 10 of 13 hypothesized relationships. Notably, the organizational support factors of leadership commitment, supervisor and coworker support, as well as incentives, directly or indirectly supported shared knowledge quality and knowledge use. In line with the proposed model, the study lends support to the argument that, in addition to KM systems quality, firms must pay careful attention to championing and goal setting as well as designing adequate reward systems for the ultimate success of these efforts. This is one of the first studies that encompasses both the supply (knowledge contribution) and demand (knowledge reuse) sides of KM in the same model. It provides more than anecdotal evidence of factors that determine successful KM system implementations. Unlike earlier studies that only deal with knowledge-sharing incentives or quality of shared knowledge, we present and empirically validate an integrated model that includes knowledge sharing and knowledge quality and their links to the desired outcome -namely, knowledge reuse.Key words and phrases: information systems success, knowledge management, knowledge management success, knowledge management systems, knowledge quality, knowledge reuse, knowledge sharing, system quality, user satisfaction.Knowledge management (KM) is evolving into a strategically important area for most organizations. Broadly, KM can be viewed as the process by which organizations leverage and extract ...

Automating and informating: roles to examine technology’s impact on performance

“…Moreover, some authors have found a positive relationship between information quality and usefulness (Kositanurit, Ngwenyama, & Osei-Bryson, 2006;Rai et al, 2002), while others have found a non-significant relationship between them. For instance, in the context of a knowledge management system, Kulkarni, Ravindran, and Freeze (2007) attribute that nonsignificance to the fact that those systems are in an incipient stage, and the information stored in them does not yet help individuals to perform specific tasks. Adams, Nelson, and Todd (1992) found a similar problem-i.e., mixed results-when exploring the relationship between ease-of-use and system use.…”

Link between Knowledge Management and Managerial Accounting: Impacts of Environment and Structure

“…This research employed a five-point measurement from 1.dissatisfied to 5.very satisfied with the achievements in knowledge management in the three recent years to evaluate the construct of knowledge management, slightly modified from previous research (Gold et al 2001;Lin and Lee 2005). Usefulness of Knowledge Management (UKM) is measured on a five-point construct ranging 1.not at all useful to 5.very useful (following Kulkarni et al (2007). Firm ISSN 2162-3082 2017 Structure (FS) is evaluated on three items.…”

“…The knowledge management usefulness is suggested as the effectiveness of knowledge management perceived by users on their work performance and efficiency (Kulkarni et al 2007). Those researchers also confirm a very possible link between knowledge management usefulness and its acceptance.…”

Demystifying the Link between Social Media Addiction and Sharing without Verification: The Role of Absentmindedness and Wellbeing

“…In most KMS, however, only a small percentage of users routinely contribute knowledge; for most users, routine KMS use means reusing the knowledge that others have contributed (Ko & Dennis, 2011;Kulkarnin et al, 2006;Marks, Polak, McCoy, & Galletta, 2008).…”

“…Many firms have implemented enterprise-wide KMS in recognition of the strategic importance of organizational knowledge management (Alavi & Leidner, 1999;Hansen, Nohira, & Tierney, 1999). Much research suggests that a KMS can help an organization manage its organizational knowledge processes (Alavi & Leidner 1999 although measuring the success and organizational impact of a KMS can be challenging (Jennex & Olfman, 2006;Jennex et al, 2012;Ko & Dennis, 2011;Kulkarnin, Ravindrin, & Freeze, 2006).…”