The Factors That Influence Academics ' Behavior Toward Knowledge Sharing

According to Davenport et al (1998), Knowledge Management is concerned with exploitation and development of knowledge asset of the organization with a view of the objective of the organization. Knowledge can be managed by explicit, documented knowledge, tacit and subjective knowledge. It also associated with knowledge creation as well as knowledge sharing. Thus, requires systems for creation and maintenance of knowledge repositories to cultivate and to aid knowledge sharing. Organizations that succeed in knowledge management are likely to view knowledge as an asset and to develop organization culture which support knowledge creation and knowledge sharing. Jennifer Rowley (1999) describes the implementation of knowledge management has the importance consequences for structure and culture of the organization, and the roles of managers as well as workers. We can say that knowledge management implementation is crucial as it will lead an organization to be at competitive advantages. There are two types of knowledge mainly explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge. Different people convey their knowledge differently. The philosopher Polanyi (1967) described tacit knowledge as knowing more than we can tell, or knowing how to do something without thinking about it, like ride a bicycle. Tacit knowledge is automatic, requires little or no time or thought and helps to determine how organizations make decision and influence the behavior of their member (Liebowitz and Beckman, 1998). Sternberg (1997) states that tacit knowledge is technical or cognitive as it made up of mental models, values, beliefs, perceptions, insights and assumptions. Technical tacit knowledge demonstrated when people master particular knowledge or skills whereas cognitive tacit knowledge include implicit mental models and perceptions that are ingrained they are taken for granted. Tacit knowledge basically is the “know-how” based on practice, experience and seldom expressed

Hislop, D. (2013). Knowledge management in organizations: A critical introduction (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

The superior capabilities of knowledge management systems provide an opportunity for the business to engage the most effective components and recognize the importance of communication to make informed, accurate decisions (McGrath, 2001). This system can organize the company’s knowledge resources, knowledge obtaining, organizing, and applying to make a sound routine the will enforce effectiveness (Niu, 2008). The dynamic function of knowledge management to create, capture, and apply knowledge to achieve an organization’s objective will allow them to be more profitable and successful (Zucker, 1986). In addition to increasing profits, the system can be also used to reduce costs and enhance research and development (DeTienne & Jackson, 2001). With all of these advantages, it would be wasteful for a company to not employ knowledge management. As seen in the Discovery Communications, Inc. example, the company can attribute their new productivity levels and increase in ease of securing documents to the knowledge management system that put into place by Carefree Technology. Like Discovery Communications, Inc., knowledge management is so popular today because companies can collect, process and share knowledge to ignite employees ' creativity which in turn will make the business grow. Wenhong and Jianhua (2009) explained the core of knowledge management is to convert company’s knowledge resources into an increased company

This knowledge management strategy was developed to identify and address communications issues within the WOTB in order to improve the knowledge sharing, not only within the organization, but the classroom and the BN as a whole. Additionally, once the information capturing and sharing is at an efficient level, KMO will work on developing an information sharing asset to maximize the student feedback and ensure curriculum meets doctrinal

Knowledge is defined as “an understanding and one that gains knowledge through experience, reasoning, intuition and learning” (Cong, & Pandya, 2003, p. 2). Individuals can inflate their knowledge when they share their knowledge with others, and when knowledge is combined with other people’s knowledge they will begin to build new knowledge. It is also considered as a mixture of values, experience, background information, grounded intuition and authority insight that offers a framework and environment for integrating and gauging new information and experiences. It “is applied in the minds of knowers and in organizations, where it is often embedded not only in documents or repositories but also in organizational routines, processes, practices and norms” (Cong, & Pandya, 2003, p. 2).

After having determined that “much of the ministries’ knowledge was tacit, documented knowledge was difficult to locate and share, there were significant cultural issues that inhibited knowledge sharing, EDU has a week knowledge-sharing infrastructure, and managers could not readily identify experts in relevant fields”, three viable options were found. Everest however must decide which option, or combination of options, is best suited for the Ministry of Education and present it to top-level management in order to “secure support for an early-stage knowledge management program.”

Knowledge can refer to a theoretical or practical understanding of a subject. It can be tacit (as with practical skill or expertise) or explicit (as with the theoretical understanding of a subject); it can be more or less formal or systematic. Botha et al (2008) pointed out that tacit and explicit knowledge should be seen as a spectrum rather than as definitive points. Therefore, in practice, all knowledge is a mixture of tacit and explicit elements rather than being one or the other. The most important distinction within KM is between explicit and tacit knowledge. The overload of data is making knowledge management increasingly more important as it facilitates decision-making capabilities; builds learning organizations by making learning routine, and stimulates cultural change and innovation.

However, the much of the ministries’ knowledge was tacit due to employees referred to others for information sourcing. The documented knowledge was difficult to locate and share because employees were not confident in documented knowledge and key personnel contacts. There were also significant cultural issues that inhibited knowledge sharing and EDU has a weak knowledge-sharing infrastructure. Managers could not readily identify experts in relevant fields and loss of knowledge happened due to turnover.

There are two dominant streams of research on knowledge management in modern academic literature: the resource-based and the process-based. The first stream focuses mainly on the increase of knowledge stock and there use of knowledge repositories (Barney, 1991; Kamara et al., 2002). Knowledge management is viewed as a developing system of techniques and values by the means of which organization effectively acquires and uses its intellectual assets (Snowden, 1999).

One of the primary reasons for the heightened interest in knowledge management is owing to the advances in information and communication technologies. But why have these technologies created such interest in how people can manage knowledge? Grover and Davenport (2001) highlight that the computing technology evolves in business to the point where it generates interest in managing knowledge. It starts by enabling processes at the level of transactions at the point of work. These systems were collecting amount of data which need to be processed to make sense out of it, and hence, the advent of data processing systems. Such a vast amount of information needs to be interpreted and applied by the management for effective action and even

The concepts of knowledge and management have been around for a while. However, the combination of “knowledge management” is quite contemporary (Alvesson, 2001). It is widely accepted that knowledge is the most valuable resources in the modern organizations. Therefore, the sharing of knowledge in organizations is regarded as a significant way of making knowledge play a greater role in organizations. As a result, the capabilities to capture knowledge and manage knowledge have gained a great amount of attention gradually (Geiger, 2012). Accordingly, the occurrence of modern communication technologies, such as internet, intranet, e-mail and the world-wide web, allows for real-time interaction despite the physical distance, laying the foundation for the rapid development of KM (Hanson, 1999).

The findings of this study should be treated with caution due to some limitations. First, this study focuses on four universities. This choice enables to examine the research questions with considerable richness, thereby enhancing the study’s validity and reliability. It also helps to examine knowledge management in academic institutions where knowledge seems to be of dominant importance. However, the generalisability of the findings is potentially limited by the fact that all the respondents belong to the same type of organisations, and also that there are several from each of all level. Like other organisations, Thai Universities have its unique strategic, structural, and cultural attributes, and it remains to be seen whether these results can be generalized to other kind of organisations.

This critical analysis will discuss a quantitative study regarding the knowledge process and management’s role. This investigation views knowledge sharing as related to its application. The authors are interested in determining if and how management’s influence effects the knowledge sharing process. This paper will examine the study, providing criticism on the problem statement, academic justification, literature review, research questions, methodological choice, and the findings.

KS amongst employees in organizations are widely recognized as an important aspect for its potential towards developing the performance of the organizations and its competitive advantages . Therefore, the study of KS is dominated by those focusing on KS activity within the business organizations. Obviously, the ultimate goal of organizational knowledge sharing in these institutions is profit-motivated. However, the issue of KS is equally important for a knowledge -based institution, such as a university, where knowledge production, distribution and

“Knowledge sharing means transfer, dissemination, and exchange of knowledge, experience, skills, and valuable information from one individual to other members within an organization”.