A knowledge management system should encourage open communication and the exchange of ideas

Technology embedded

A knowledge management system is based on user-driven technologies. By the early 1990s information systems did not capture the knowledge that existed in the organisation. Information systems captured only codified knowledge. To facilitate the implementation of the management of knowledge, a well-designed and operational knowledge management system should be in place. Of course, information and communication technologies (ICT) have the potential to support communication and information flows. Consequently, they can hold up knowledge management centres, too. It is true that new technologies offer unprecedented possibilities for human creativity, global communication and access to information. Notwithstanding we should never forget that technologies are the enabling and supporting tools for the knowledge management system. A knowledge management centre is a people-centred and not a technology-centred application. The distinguishing factor between knowledge management and information technology is that the latter can provide communication media and assist in codifying knowledge but it fails to enable knowledge workers to truly exchange knowledge, although knowledge acquisition across organisational boundaries can easily gain support (Lin and Chiou, 2010: 6).

Web-based tools, expertise access tools, e-learning applications, synchronous interaction tools, discussion technologies and intranet systems are some of the tools that support knowledge management systems. In the last decade of the twentieth century, Sandpoint Systems (a unit of Dun & Bradstreet) and GrapeVINE from Grapevine Technologies were structured technologies for bringing external knowledge into an organisation (Davenport and Prusak, 1998: 132–3). Besides, a complex suite of tools is necessary to capture, store and allow broad access to information. The technological infrastructure for knowledge management projects requires, inter alia, tools such as HTML/XML publishing tools for producing web documents, a relational database system for storing web documents, search engines for search and retrieval, a web browser and server and a database management tool. A good thesaurus is essential to most online knowledge repositories. It facilitates the searcher of the knowledge content to combine the terms of the thesaurus with the terms that are potentially used by the searchers of the knowledge management system. Other recent knowledge management tools are Livelink, SharePoint, Documentum, FileNet, HyperWare and Lotus Notes. This book does not intend to present the software programs available and make benchmarking of their advantages and disadvantages. As an example, a directory of knowledge management systems is found on http://www.doconsite.co.uk/DirectoryPages/Systems/kmsbysupp.cfm.

To prevent waste of resources, it is wise to build the knowledge management system on existing computer and information technology infrastructure. Upgraded intranet and available software programs to facilitate capture, analysis, organisation, storage and sharing of internal information resources for effective knowledge exchange are useful to be exploited before deciding to install a new software application. In most cases, people are surprised when they discover that there is a variety of similar applications running in the company. Multiple software applications result in waste of financial and human resources to support and maintain them. In some cases, there are overlapping systems or in-house systems with limited usability. Consequently, the apt management of existing software and hardware applications becomes cost-effective and saves money and labour. The small applications can be integrated or even substituted by the calibre of the knowledge management system.

It is a false decision though to rely only on technology. In conclusion, knowledge management is not a technology-centred project, but the technological infrastructure is a necessary ingredient for its success. It is usually easier to implement a technology-driven system, but it is harder to get organisational consensus for behaviour change (Davenport and Prusak, 1998: 166). Technology and knowledge management coexist and work in parallel for the implementation of the project. The experience of the UK Defence Evaluation and Research Agency we referred to in Chapter 3 summarises the lessons learned about using technologies: technology has a supportive role but not a predominant one. On the contrary, the team of librarians and IT specialists played the predominant role in the knowledge management strategy of the agency. ICT cannot include tacit experiential human knowledge but only codified knowledge. ICT should be focused on communication systems that link humans together. Thus, they should focus on connectivity (OECD, 2003: 38).

Allow push and search

One of the biggest hurdles in any knowledge management system is getting people to look for knowledge, advice and lessons. No matter how well structured and searchable the lessons learned database may be, this will not help if people don’t go to the database in the first place. However it may be possible to set up a ‘push database’, which will forward lessons to interested parties, rather than requiring them to go and search. SharePoint, for example, allows individuals to subscribe to be notified of new items, and this functionality allows lessons to be forwarded to people with an interest in a particular topic. Case Study 10.1, reprinted from Gorelick, Milton and April (2004), shows the power of this notification.

Case Study 10.1

The BP Valhall platform in the Norwegian North Sea

On the BP Valhall platform in the Norwegian North Sea, the wells team had developed an innovative method of widening the wellbore on extended reach wells by running a tool called a Near Bit Reamer behind the rotary steerable drilling assembly. Where previously they would have pulled out the drillstring, put on a new bottom hole assembly, and drilled a ‘hole opening run’ to widen the hole, they were now able to do this in one operation, so saving between three and five days of rig time. At the end-of-well retrospect this was identified as new knowledge, and Marton Haga, the drilling engineer, was tasked with entering details into the LINK lessons database. LINK automatically forwarded the lesson to other teams working on extended reach wells, one of which was the team working in Trinidad. This team was intrigued by the approach, and contacted Marton for more information. He was more than happy to help, and sent details of procedures and reference runs. The Trinidad team assessed the possibilities, decided this was a valuable approach, and invited Marton to a peer assist to share his operational knowledge. The technique was applied during the 2000 drilling season in Trinidad resulting in a $900,000 cost saving. The Trinidad team refined the process slightly, and has shared its new knowledge with the rest of the community through articles in the newsletter ‘Well Connected’ (and lessons in LINK).

The most important person to push the lesson to is whoever is accountable for taking action as a result, whether this is a process owner accountable for updating of process, or somebody accountable for fixing a problem. It should be relatively straightforward to set up the database so that it sends a notification to this accountable person, by email or via an RSS feed. The process owner should certainly be notified about any lessons related to his or her specific process, whether they have any actions to take or not.

In addition, the database should be searchable. Searches should be possible on many fields, as well as through free text. Ideally the free text search should be semi-intelligent, and should compensate for different spellings and descriptions of the same thing. For example, in a global organisation a search for ‘vapour detection systems’ should also return items about ‘vapor detection systems’. Also people can search for pending lessons for which they are accountable, to remind themselves of actions they need to take. Or the lesson learning coordinator can search to find out how many lessons are pending, how many are completed, and how many are awaiting validation. The lessons database then becomes a source of tracking metrics, to track the usage of the learning system.

Question Point

QP is a virtual reference service with a KB that is used as a KM system in libraries. The QP has many features, including chat reference, issue tracking mechanism, reporting capability and a KB built from a database of completed questions and answers. The libraries of the Mount Sinai School of Medicine and the Medical Science Library at New York Medical College are using QP in reference services. These libraries were both attracted to QP, particularly the knowledge bank. However, a paramilitary study by Markgren et al. (2004) found that the KB was not heavily used. Neither library searched the KB prior to answering any reference questions, although librarians at both libraries believe that the concept of collaborating with other libraries could be of potential merit. Another study on the use of QP in the academic libraries of the United States by Ralph and Ellis (2009) reported similar findings, as the reference librarians did not generally use the KB and there was duplication of effort and no reduction in response time.

IT Competencies

Table 7.7 shows the competencies needed for the use and application of IT in the implementation of KM systems in academic libraries in India. Competencies which received high mean scores were design and development of web-based content for online use, development of web-based portals or subject gateways, and use of digital library software to create institutional or knowledge repositories, with mean scores of 4.19, 4.12, and 3.98 respectively. Competencies that were given comparatively less importance were the design and maintenance of in-house databases and expertise to evaluate the performance of information systems, with mean scores of 3.95 and 3.58 respectively.

3.5 Conclusion

Mention of information management systems is based on the fact that they are the foundation for efficient knowledge management systems, but they in turn rely on strong data management functionality. The harnessing of knowledge about citations can be through data mining techniques. The area of citation mining is central to the discussion at hand because each of the techniques in use does not individually discover all relevant citations in their entirety, and yet they are crucial to accurate tracking. In the process, the role of librarians cannot be ignored as they become part of the support group for researchers. They therefore need to be involved with research in order to understand what is going on, and be widely read so as to be able to anticipate a wide variety of scenarios in scholarly publishing.

Components of a knowledge management system

We don’t set out to bore readers, but we wish to make it clear again that knowledge management is not the action of publishing a document within an organisation or providing access to a book or replying to a simple reference question within a library. By contrast, knowledge management is how the individual receives, uses, enhances and shares knowledge to reuse it and create new knowledge on a continuous cyclical basis.

The knowledge management system comprises vetted information and knowledge that is monitored for veracity by the creating organisation. It is also made up of the wisdom of the community, which is expressed in various social media and in communities of practice within the company. It is created by individuals who share their knowledge and opinions about the scrutinised information. In other words, the knowledge management centre contains the knowledge repository of the organisation, which is created by the tacit, explicit and structured knowledge in document form. It also contains the expertise of the knowledge contributors and the vetted information of the organisation, under the surveillance and monitoring of the knowledge manager.

The challenge for special librarians and information professionals is to integrate all knowledge emanated from the various resources of the organisation to generate the knowledge management system. A knowledge management system within an enterprise includes:

internal and external information produced by the organisation;

presentations and ‘white papers’ that the company has kept; and

training procedures of staff in the use of databases.

The purpose of the knowledge management system is to aggregate all structured and unstructured knowledge that is scattered throughout the organisation and to make it accessible and reusable to all stakeholders. Structured knowledge encompasses the knowledge captured in published documents, project reports, organisational archives, presentations and external resources. By contrast, unstructured knowledge comprises informal documents, digitised internal files, correspondence and internal memos but also the memories and expertise of people who worked on projects or left the company or retired. These are important organisational assets that should be recorded to ensure their availability for future purposes.

As drawn from the above description, a practical paradigm of what a knowledge management system exhaustively includes is the combined efforts of the library’s expertise with both external information and customer approach. Those two ingredients are put together with the organisation’s knowledge-sharing expertise to establish a pool of information and knowledge. Then, the integrated knowledge base is matched with the business processes and policies. Their amalgamation results in recommendations for changes in the actual workflow of employees. Finally, the knowledge created from the above combinations is used to make decisions on topics in discussion. The last process may lead to the creation of new knowledge and to define new objectives and strategies. Hence, the knowledge cycle starts again.

The special library may commence with collecting the content for the knowledge management system from its own resources. The library has plenty of resources in the course of its daily work: the library’s online public access catalogue (OPAC), the back files of frequently asked questions, the archive of Ask a Librarian service, the selective dissemination of information (SDI) or current awareness services catalogues, listings of favoured expert resources, the online resources that can be integrated in the knowledge management system within the organisation, the electronic journals and the Library 2.0 tools established in the library. Therefore, the library expands the content and context of the knowledge management system and includes organisation-wide resources, such as records management files, departmental and disciplinary documents, experts’ resources, human resource management documents and files.

In the pages that follow, we describe the basic components that comprise a knowledge management centre. Certainly it is not an obligatory list for an organisation that plans to establish a knowledge management centre. The enumeration of components is apt to be comprehensive, but it is still indicative, not exclusive. The parent organisation decides which ingredients to include in the knowledge management centre according to its specific needs.

Knowledge Management within Organizations

Around 2000 managers and scholars began to pay much more attention to methods for managing organizational knowledge. Organizations have been trying to create knowledge management systems in order to store, create, transfer, and apply knowledge. Academic research in operations, information technology, economics, marketing, and management has proposed and analyzed ways to support the creation of new knowledge and to store and codify knowledge. Many firms have appointed learning officers who try to identify useful knowledge and to disseminate it to personnel who can use it. The University of Pennsylvania is offering a masters degree for people who aspire to become learning officers. Krogh et al. (2012) inferred that knowledge creation requires leadership that is distributed throughout an organization and that provides appropriate resources and structures.

Studies have suggested that three knowledge-management methods may be yielding benefits. All three methods focus on communication. First, some organizations are attempting to foster the conversion of tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge by organizing employees into on line communities that identify and discuss shared issues. Second, some organizations are attempting to disseminate knowledge by creating multiple channels for knowledge transfer and creating organizational cultures that advocate sharing. Third, some organizations are attempting to overcome the reluctance to share knowledge by adopting incentive pay systems that take account of overall organizational performance.

However, other knowledge-management methods face serious challenges that have caused them to disappoint their users (Calhoun et al., 2011). Several studies have documented knowledge-management efforts that proved unsuccessful. One central problem is the ambiguity surrounding knowledge and its value. What knowledge deserves keeping? Databases can easily grow so large that searching through them becomes very difficult. Indexing terms that appear useful today may make knowledge inaccessible tomorrow (Schultze and Leidner, 2002). A second central problem is that knowledge management techniques build on existing knowledge, so they are useful only as long as technological and social changes follow continuous, mainly linear trajectories. When technologies and societies make abrupt, nonlinear changes, knowledge-management methods are likely to impede organizations’ efforts to adapt. A third central problem, related to the second, is that organizations, especially large ones, change slowly, so they need time to exploit new knowledge. To try to take advantage of the knowledge that is benefiting other organizations today is likely to yield disappointment because competitors are already exploiting that knowledge, so latecomers can hope only to catch up. Although current trends generally persist for a few periods, short-term benefits are likely to be small benefits. To extract large benefits from knowledge, organizations need to predict what knowledge will turn out to be beneficial a few years in the future.

Powerful organizations that collaborate with each other have advantages in predicting the medium-term future. Barnett et al. (2003) evaluated the accuracy of 3142 forecasts about US manufacturing industries that forecasters made during the 1970s. The studied forecasts concerned events that would not occur for at least 8 years into the future. The analysis found that forecasts about highly concentrated industries proved to be more accurate, especially forecasts about variables over which companies could exert stronger unilateral control. However, differences in the accuracy of forecasts were small in comparison with the wide ranges of errors that are typical of longer-range forecasts.

Technology

Technology is another component of knowledge management. It plays an important role in the advance of knowledge management and in knowledge-sharing. It is obvious that knowledge management systems heavily rely on technological tools. Infrastructure technologies ranging from the telephone to teleconference facilitate knowledge management because they enable people to express and transfer tacit knowledge. Technological tools capture the knowledge that exists not only in human heads but also in written documents and make it available throughout the organisation. Thus, technology facilitates capturing, storing and distributing structured knowledge for use by people (Davenport and Prusak, 1998: 128–9). Most frequently used knowledge technologies deal with text in relatively unstructured forms rather than with numbers and data. They encompass interaction among users. From the users’ point of view, technology assists them to classify ideas, information, documents, e-mails and the like in order to be easily located (Agnihotri and Troutt, 2009: 332).

In addition to systems embedded in knowledge management programmes, technology offers tools such as the Internet, intranet and extranet within the organisation. Knowledge management systems entail information technology systems and, consequently, user training, organisation-wide structures and ongoing support and maintenance. The utilisation of appropriate technology tools is essential for effective knowledge management and personal knowledge management (PKM). In some instances, the wide availability of a variety of technological tools that enable the creation of knowledge and dissemination of information confuses the individual. However, it is inevitable to live in parallel with technologies. People and technology are the main actors of the knowledge management scene to set up a hybrid knowledge management system.

Among the various technological equipment available, the technology used for a knowledge management system includes meta-search tools (for finding explicit knowledge on the web and on local hard disks), capture tools (digitising information for future preservation and access), communication and collaboration tools (for sharing knowledge) (Agnihotri and Troutt, 2009: 335). The goal is that the appropriate tools and techniques are selected to facilitate the process of managing organisational knowledge. Technological tools that encourage data and information to flow more quickly to knowledge creation are metadata tools, search engines, filtering tools, communication tools and, not surprisingly, the library’s online catalogue.

We will never forget, though, that technology is just a tool, an enabler to the creation of knowledge. The driving forces of any change are people who adopt the underlying technologies and use them for knowledge creation.

Technological tools enable humans to easily interact (Abram, 1997: 191). If knowledge management systems are exclusively technology-oriented and neglect the human factor, they show the way to failure. Technology is an important, but auxiliary and supportive component of knowledge management. The salient factor is people with the contribution of their knowledge in the system.

KM Education Within LIS Educational Programs

Since the 1990s, India has witnessed an economic as well as cultural awakening through its liberalization, globalization, and market-centered progression. Today, India is becoming the knowledge capital of the world, as more than 300 multinational corporations have already set up R&D facilities, while many more are expected to do likewise. This is mainly because of the availability of world-class skilled workers at comparatively low salaries (Malhan, 2006). Such developments have made a tremendous impact on LIS job opportunities in India and abroad. Consequently, academics in LIS are moving to the corporate sector as knowledge managers, while library professionals from the private sector are taking up government jobs.

Some libraries of corporate sector organizations and research laboratories operated by the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, the Indian Council of Medical Research, and the Indian Council of Agricultural Research have adopted KM systems. But the libraries of public sector organizations and academic institutions have lagged far behind in the use of KM systems, as reflected in the LIS literature. Some studies (Nazim and Mukherjee, 2013a; Raja et al., 2009) identified the following major barriers to incorporating KM into Indian academic library practice:

lack of understanding of KM concepts;

lack of a knowledge-sharing attitude due to insecurity and fear of losing their importance by passing their tacit knowledge to colleagues;

library professionals' reluctance to set their minds to cooperate or share resources;

lack of technical skills in ICT;

lack of appropriate tools and technologies;

lack of sufficient funds;

lack of collaboration and team spirit;

lack of a centralized policy for KM; and

lack of top management interest in KM activities.

The current LIS education model in India mainly focuses on the functionality of procurement, organization and supply of documents, database development, and Internet search assistance. LIS schools in India are not responding adequately to the emerging information scenario created by electronic publishing and the dynamics of the knowledge society. Olszak and Ziemba (2010) explained that, in the age of knowledge, LIS graduates are expected to know and use different types of skills to:

manage an organization's information resources;

supervise an information policy and manage information in an organization;

design and carry out reengineering of an organization's information infrastructure;

design and carry out reengineering of business processes;

control and carry out audits of various areas of an organization's activities;

supervise information projects within an organization; and

plan, implement, and use e-business solutions.

LIS educational courses in India are designed to prepare human resources, mainly for libraries and information centers, whereas demand for the management of knowledge is surfacing from different sectors. To fulfill the demands of different sectors for managing knowledge, LIS schools should carry out a periodic assessment of their courses and modify them accordingly (Chakraborty and Sarkhel, 2009). This would certainly help LIS graduates to get jobs, not only with libraries and information institutions but also enterprises, consulting firms, research agencies, business intelligence agencies, banks and financial institutions, and public administration offices (Malhan, 2011).

Role of OC in KM

OC, according to Schein (2010), is a pattern of common assumptions, values, beliefs, and attitudes that influence organizational behavior. Thus a knowledge- and learning-oriented culture can facilitate the implementation and development of KM systems, which are extremely important in organizations such as academic libraries. Highlighting knowledge sharing as an important feature of a KM system, Ackerman et al. (2003) stated that the reuse of knowledge created by knowledge workers is a common reason for initiating KM practices. Parirokh et al. (2008) reported how sharing of knowledge among librarians can improve organizational learning in academic libraries. Organizations and management should provide a natural and friendly environment that enables employees to share their ideas and knowledge. According to Wen (2005), an OC for sharing knowledge and expertise should be established with appropriate rewards and incentives. Those staff members who share their personal knowledge and experiences through writing, publishing, lecturing, tutoring, or mentoring should be appropriately recognized and rewarded. An empirical study by Babalhavaeji and Kermani (2011) on the knowledge-sharing behavior of library and information science (LIS) professionals in Iran suggested that intention and intrinsic motivation influence the knowledge-sharing behavior of library professionals. These studies also support the view of Barquin (2001), who believes in giving incentives to employees to encourage their participation in KM activities.

OC is one of the most cited factors in the literature which contributes to the success of KM irrespective of the type and nature of organizations. Many researchers believe that a rich OC contributes to the effective and successful application of KM practices in academic libraries (Davenport and Prusak, 1998; Carter, 2004; Chong and Choi, 2005). According to Davenport and Prusak (1993), for KM to succeed it is essential to have a knowledge-oriented culture; that is, a culture that encourages and rewards knowledge sharing. Alavi and Leidner (2001) also believe that an effective KM application needs a culture that supports the sharing of knowledge and skills. Researchers who have carried out empirical studies on the role of OC in KM presented similar opinions. Porumbeanu (2010) analyzed the elements that characterize the OC in Romanian academic libraries to investigate whether the OC supported the implementation of KM. Based on a survey of library professionals from five university libraries, she reviewed some of the elements such as the OC in the institution, the values promoted by this culture, the policies concerning staff and organizational development, the managerial style, and the provision of incentives for knowledge sharing. The findings of the study show fairly favorable conditions for future implementation of KM practices in Romanian academic libraries. Based on the findings of this research, she proposed a model of successful implementation of KM in academic libraries. This model, in addition to the requirement of a favorable OC, focuses on systematic management and deployment of knowledge and expertise, human resources management, technology infrastructure, networking and partnership with other organizations, and creation of a position of Chief Knowledge Officer (CKO).

Sheng and Sun (2007) also emphasized the need to create a knowledge innovation culture (KIC) in libraries for the success of KM. They defined KIC as a value, behavioral, and institutional system, which leads to competitive advantages and sustainable development for libraries through knowledge creation. According to them, this kind of culture is different from traditional library culture and has several specific functions. Some factors, like environment, resources, and business, may affect the development of KIC in libraries. Therefore it is necessary for libraries to establish an environment beneficial to knowledge innovation, to enhance trust and cooperation within staff, to create a learning culture, shape knowledge-based team organization, enhance human resource development, and cultivate knowledge innovation talents in order to build up KIC in libraries. Further, they discussed the development of KIC in the Library of the Chinese Academy of Sciences as a case study. The library initiated KIC as a project to (i) create a change of service idea and modes in the institutes, (ii) enhance institute leaders' cognition and assistance in documentation and information services, (iii) further the understanding of institutes' information demands and library services, (iv) shape the trademarks and characteristics of services, and (v) improve the staff's professional competencies.

McManus and Loughridge (2002) have also highlighted the requirement of a corporate information culture for the effectiveness of KM in university libraries in the United Kingdom. Based on the results of a small-scale pilot interview-based survey of senior library professionals working in university libraries, they reviewed some of the reasons why KM was apparently so unpopular in university libraries, where the culture and OS were found to be the major factors affecting the perception of the relevance of KM programs in university libraries.

As Jantz (2001) pointed out, a change in culture requires active involvement of management. Agreeing with this view, Graham et al. (2005), on the basis of a case study at the Alabama library, stressed the need for liaison in order to create interest among the rest of the community of colleges or universities and to encourage their involvement. This is a point also raised by Skyrme (2004) on the need for information professionals to stay connected to organizational decision-making. Similar issues have been raised by Nelke (2010), with special emphasis on the importance of leadership. According to him, as knowledge managers, librarians must be able to persuade people to contribute and share their knowledge for the benefit of not only themselves and their department, but for the whole organization. Further, he stressed the need for strong support from top management and the role of librarians as consultants working in close connection with their colleagues. Addressing the participants of an International Conference on Academic Libraries held at New Delhi in 2009, Singh (2009) suggested that academic librarians should develop leadership competencies for leading and managing change in the present competitive and challenging environment where libraries are facing fierce competition from other information providers and companies like Google, and ever-increasing and diversified demand from users.