Reconsidering the Knowledge Audit Process: Methodological Revisions in Practice

Abstract

Over the last 20 years, the knowledge audit and map have been acknowledged as important tools in helping to identify and visually represent the knowledge present in organizational contexts. Despite this recognition and the availability of theoretical material, there has been a dearth of literature relating to the application of these tools. Consequently, a number of methodologies based on KM practice and research emerged in the early 2000s; several of which still inform the knowledge audit and map processes today. This paper revisits and extends research carried out by the authors in 2004 to present how this work has been expanded further through the incorporation of ensuing developments in the field with a view of continuing the development of knowledge auditing and mapping approaches. As such, a detailed methodology based on a recent case study is presented, including comparisons between the two methodological approaches, a rationale for the consequent modifications to the original case methodology and concomitant benefits for the amended approach.

Knowledge Audit Approach for a Large-Scale Government KM Strategy

“…Although the previous steps are quite similar to those proposed by some previous authors of KA methods, there still remains few guidelines on how to link the analysis to a KM strategy that an organization can adopt to align its knowledge resources' to the business requirements (Burnett et al, 2013). In order for the previous analysis to fruitful for KM improvements, this step can detect problems and propose solutions.…”

“…We found that it was useful, even necessary, to add on an additional step to classify the di®erent solutions into various KM projects. As previously noted, the experts involved in the analysis are better placed to produce a more e®ective and successful KM strategy (Burnett et al, 2013). This strategy can then be presented to top management for approval and¯nancing.…”

“…Burnett et al (2013), for instance, have sta® identify the knowledge they require to perform their roles. To help simplify the analysis and apply priorities, they ask individuals to identify their top¯ve.…”

Knowledge audit as an important tool in organizational management: A review of literature

“…Cheung et al (2007) carried out KA of a railway company which eight phases were used; the researchers recommended to the management the creation of organizational culture where employees could share idea, experience and expertise; establish incentive programs to motivate them to add to KM activities, top management support for adoption of KM. Levantakis et al (2008) proposed a reference method of KA, which was applied to engineering department; which identified four procedures in KA which are defining the outline of the new reference method; activities divided into sub-activities, compare the reference method with existing audit methods, they compared it with Orna (1999), Henczel (2013), Burnett et al (2013), Perez-Soltero et al, (2006) methods to see similarities and differences; selection of method fragments and assembly of the new reference method and the final stage was validation of the KA methods. Also Roberts (2008) carried a KA of a Dutch ICT company, where 58 consultants working on clientele site were located in Netherland which was carried out for two months with the use of questionnaire and interviews.…”