To read this content please select one of the options below:

Does knowledge management produce practical outcomes?

Peter Rex Massingham (School of Management, Operations and Marketing, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia)
Rada K Massingham (School of Accounting, University of Western Sydney, Campbelltown, NSW, Australia)

Journal of Knowledge Management

ISSN: 1367-3270

Article publication date: 7 April 2014

7458

Abstract

Purpose

The paper examines ways that Knowledge Management (KM) can demonstrate practical value for organizations. It begins by reviewing the claims made about KM, i.e. the benefits KM can provide to organizations. These claims are compared with traditional firm performance metrics to derive a criterion to measure the value of KM. Seven practical outcomes of KM are then presented as methods to persuade managers to invest in KM. These practical outcomes are then evaluated against the value criterion. The paper is based on empirical evidence from a five year longitudinal study.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper is based on a longitudinal change project for a large Australian Research Council (ARC) Linkage Project grant in the period 2008-2013. The Project was a transformational change program which aimed to help make the partner organisation a learning organisation. The partner organisation was a large Australian Government Department, which faced the threat of knowledge loss caused by its ageing workforce. The sample was 118 respondents, mainly engineering and technical workers. A total of 150 respondents were invited to participate in the study which involved an annual survey and attendance at regular training workshops and related activities, with a participation rate of 79 per cent.

Findings

This paper provides a checklist from which to evaluate KM in terms of financial and non-financial measures and seven practical outcomes from which to identify the organisational problem which may be addressed by KM. Lead and lag indicators – what needs to be done and what will result – are also provided. Managers may use this framework to identify the value proposition in any KM investment.

Research limitations/implications

The research is based on a single case study in a public sector organization. While the longitudinal nature of the study and the rich data collected offsets this issue, it also presents good opportunities for researchers and practitioners to test the ideas presented in this paper in other industry contexts. The seven practical outcomes also vary in the maturity of the empirical evidence supporting KM ' s impact. Strategic alignment, value management, and psychological contract, in particular, are still under-developed and could be areas for specific further research testing the ideas presented here.

Practical implications

This paper argues that investment decisions regarding KM may benefit from focusing on significant and on-going organisational problems, which will connect KM with firm performance and demonstrate financial and non-financial impact. The seven practical outcomes were evaluated against measurement criteria and against KM ' s claims. Overall, common themes were time and cost, as well as capability growth and performance improvements. Financial impact was mainly found in cost savings. Non-financial impact was found across the seven practical outcomes. It provides management with a checklist to make investment decisions regarding KM.

Originality/value

The decision whether to invest in KM begins with methods used to evaluate any organisational project. Managers must determine first whether necessary funds are available; and then whether the project is worthwhile. The standard method for evaluating a project ' s worth is return on investment (ROI). However, calculating ROI for KM investment is problematic. Unless KM can be proven to directly improve performance in financial terms, managers may struggle to see its ROI. The paper begins by reviewing the claims made about KM, i.e. the benefits KM can provide to organizations. These claims are compared with traditional firm performance metrics to derive a criterion to measure the value of KM.

Keywords

Acknowledgements

Received 13 October 2013. Revised 30 December 2013, 7 January 2014. Accepted 8 January 2014. The authors wish to gratefully acknowledge the support of the Australian Research Council and the Australian Department of Defence in providing funding and in-kind support of this research.

Citation

Massingham, P.R. and Massingham, R.K. (2014), "Does knowledge management produce practical outcomes?", Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 221-254. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-10-2013-0390

Publisher

:

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2014, Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Related articles