Are Faculty Members Ready? Individual Factors Affecting Knowledge Management Readiness in Universities

Abstract

Knowledge Management (KM) provides a systematic process to help in the creation, transfer and use of knowledge across the university, leading to increased productivity. While KM has been successfully used elsewhere, universities have been late in adopting it. Before a university can initiate KM, it needs to determine if it is ready for KM or not. Through a web-based survey sent to 1263 faculty members from 59 accredited Library and Information Science programs in universities across North America, this study investigated the e®ect of individual factors of trust, knowledge self-e±cacy, collegiality, openness to change and reciprocity on individual readiness to participate in a KM initiative, and the degree to which this a®ects perceived organisational readiness to adopt KM. 157 valid responses were received. Using structural equation modeling, the study found that apart from trust, all other factors positively a®ected individual readiness, which was found to a®ect organisational readiness. Findings should help universities identify opportunities and barriers before they can adopt KM. It should be a useful contribution to the KM literature, especially in the university context.

Knowledge Management in Nigerian Universities: A Conceptual Model

“…This is also in line with a study in Malaysian universities that discovered that leadership, culture, information technology, and performance measurement are important enablers of knowledge management implementation (Ramachandran, Chong, & Wong, 2013). Marouf and Agarwal (2016) suggest that universities should conduct a readiness assessment before embarking on implementing knowledge management initiatives.…”

“…While the corporate business sector has widely explored knowledge management, higher educational institutions have yet to follow suit. In fact, studies have noted that universities are lagging behind in implementing knowledge management strategies, perhaps because of an academic culture of knowledge hoarding (Brewer & Brewer, 2010;Marouf & Agarwal, 2016). Also, the bureaucratic system inherent in academic settings, and sometimes the lack of social interaction which limits social networks, as well as an individualistic knowledge sharing culture, could be responsible for the slow uptake of knowledge management initiatives in universities (Fullwood, Rowley, & Delbridge, 2013;Omerzel, Biloslavo, & Trnavčevič, 2011).…”

“…According to Yeh (2011), educational administration can support knowledge management, which in turn supports teaching and learning. Also, knowledge management may help improve organizational processes and strategies, enhance institutional reputation, and promote collaborations and innovations (Marouf & Agarwal, 2016).…”

“…Also, encouraging academic members to contribute to the university knowledge base with the personal expectation of receiving useful knowledge in return, encouraged staff to share their knowledge (Cheng, Ho, & Lau, 2011). In addition, a knowledge-sharing culture makes it easy for people to ask what they do not know, thereby boosting faculty morale and contributing to the attainment of institutional goals and objectives (Marouf & Agarwal, 2016).…”

Gestión del conocimiento en Instituciones de Educación Superior: Caracterización desde una reflexión teórica

“…Por lo anterior, la gestión del conocimiento adquiere importancia en las IES en la medida que contribuye a mejorar la gestión interna, promueve la innovación mediante la transferencia de conocimiento, fortalece la cultura de experiencias entre profesores, investigadores y estudiantes, promueve la actualización continua y el desarrollo de habilidades y competencias, e influye significativamente en la toma de decisiones por parte del equipo directivo; permitiendo alcanzar un nivel superior de calidad que genera mayor valor organizacional (Butnariu y Milosan, 2012;Marouf y Agarwal, 2016;Rodríguez-Ponce y Pedraja-Rejas, 2016).…”