Research Paper

Knowledge management (KM) as a business model is rapidly growing. Many businesses are adopting knowledge management processes within their organizations. A basic KM model involves merging together people, technology, and organizational processes. While this is the most simplistic form, those are the underlying elements of each model.

In order for businesses to be successful while implementing knowledge management, there needs to be a clear vision and strategic process in place. Most businesses have defined and structured decision-making strategies; a knowledge management process needs to evolve simultaneously along with those organization-unique strategies to be successful. Two other important elements that are essential for successful knowledge management are leadership and organizational culture. These two elements coincide in order to facilitate effective strategy and enable an efficient work force.

The purpose of this research is to outline different knowledge management strategies and explore which options are the most successful in the integration of Knowledge Management Systems (KMS) within the decision-making process. The research goes on to define both leadership and organization culture, and their role in knowledge management. This next section defines knowledge and knowledge management. Then decision-making strategies and knowledge management strategies are explored. Finally, organizational culture and leadership are discussed. Lastly, implications and conclusions are presented.

Knowledge Management

Picture this situation. You’re working with a strict deadline and you need to quickly access specific information in order to meet requirements. However, you’re unsure of where to find the information. Who would you ask? Where would you look first?

The situation described above is a recipe for disaster. Knowledge management will help to avert those scenarios. Effective knowledge management will help to ensure that your organization is making the most of the skills, expertise and relationships at its disposal (Anonymous, 2004).

Knowledge Management Defined. Knowledge management has many definitions. Microsoft defines KM simply:

…managing information flow, getting the right information to the right people so they can act it quickly (Gates, 1999).

Other definitions include more complex descriptions including, leveraging information, content and expertise to produce results, which include innovation and efficiency (Anonymous, Knowledge Management: Much more than a technology exercise, 2006). Most people don’t think of knowledge as something that can be managed, rather something that is intangible and that individuals’ hold personally. However, businesses that have been able to capture, organize, refine, and distribute knowledge through their organizations, possess knowledge management skills. To demonstrate, Figure 1, illustrates a generalized knowledge creation cycle.

Figure 1: Knowledge Creation Cycle

Why Knowledge Management. In the Knowledge Management text, the book refers to today’s consumers as “prosumers.” Prosumers are defined as educated customers, who demand more, and provide feedback to manufacturers regarding design and services from the customer perspective (Awad & Ghaziri). Hence, businesses today need to be smarter, faster, and extremely proactive to keep up with demands of the “prosumer.” Organizations need to use their human resources (employees) to learn, improve, anticipate, interact, remember, customize, and most importantly share information. Creating and sustaining a competitive advantage depends on all of these attributes.

View of Knowledge. To understand the importance of managing knowledge it seems relevant to discuss the essence of knowledge itself. According to Pun and Nathai-Balkissoon, “Knowledge is complex, multidimensional and imparted in different ways to different people. Some theorists view it as an “object” for capture and transfer, and other think it should be managed as a process, as it is impacted by people and systems within organizations”(Pun & Nathai-Balkissoon, 2011).

Another way to look at knowledge is relative to the words data and information. The words knowledge, information and data are generally used interchangeably. However, there is distinction between the three (See Figure 2 in Appendix). Data is specific observations and is easily captured. Alternative definitions of data include unsorted bits of facts, measurements, and statements about reality (Awad & Ghaziri). Information is data with a purpose, generally used for analysis. Alternative definitions of information include organized, systematized data, a statement of fact about measurements, and data that make a difference (Awad & Ghaziri). Knowledge is information with value; it is reflective and contextual. Alternative definitions of knowledge include the ability to turn information and data into effective action, information whose validity as been establish through tests of proof, and a whole set of insights, experiences, and procedures (Awad & Ghaziri). While all three elements have a complicated interrelationship between them, knowledge has the leverage to gain a competitive advantage. According to Green and Liu, knowledge arises in the heads of individuals, which creates significant management problems (Green, Liu, & Qi, 2009).

Knowledge Capture. The main limitation with knowledge management is initially capturing the knowledge. There are two types of knowledge, tacit and explicit. Explicit knowledge is objective, data found in documents, and other digital means. It is easily transferable. Tacit knowledge is subjective, found in people’s heads, and consists of personal experiences, beliefs and values (Awad & Ghaziri). Tacit knowledge is more difficult to capture. When Knowledge Management Systems are in place, one of their key functions is to identify the tacit knowledge, document it, and merge is with the explicit knowledge, in order to gain more knowledge leverage (Green, Liu, & Qi, 2009).

Although it is more difficult, there are multiple techniques to capture tacit knowledge. A few different techniques include interviewing experts, observation techniques, brainstorming, protocol analysis, and concept maps. Most of these techniques involve the use knowledge developers to capture the knowledge of an expert. Experts are individuals that are experienced and well educated on a specific subject. They are regarded as being credible, creative, confident, and generally possess good communication skills (Awad & Ghaziri). Knowledge developers then take the captured knowledge and document it for others to use and learn. Examples of what to look for in an expert include stream lined procedures and different problem solving techniques. These techniques are all involved in the knowledge management strategies that will be discussed in more detail below.

Knowledge Management Systems. Going back to the initial situation presented in the beginning of this section, to answer the question, “Where would you look first?” The answer is a Knowledge Management System (KMS). A knowledge management system is a system that includes all the methods, tools, and techniques that are used to manage knowledge (Green, Liu, & Qi, 2009). It acts as the tool that makes all the captured knowledge accessible to the organization. Knowledge management systems can come in multiple forums, and either highly structured or unstructured. They can be complex systems that are integrated with Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems and Management Information Systems (MIS). Yet knowledge management systems can also be as simple as a blog or a document management program. The intent is information flow; sharing information, open communication, and a common hub for organizations.

Strategy

In order to gain a better understanding of the importance of knowledge management and decision making strategies, it’s relevant to discuss the term strategy. According to Quinn, author of “Formulating Strategy One Step at a Time”:

“A strategy is the pattern or plan that integrates an organization’s major goal, policies, and action sequences into a cohesive whole. A well-formulated strategy helps marshal and allocate an organization’s resources into a unique and viable posture based upon its relative internal competencies and shortcomings, anticipated changes in the environment, and contingent moves by intelligent opponents” (Quinn, 1981).

Strategy is important as it allows business to prioritize goals, implement actions plans and achieve success. Strategic plans have vision, which can advance businesses in their short-term and long-term goals. It would be a larger risk not to strategize. Embedded in strategy should be a clear vision, an effective use of resources, and a supportive culture. This research discusses how knowledge management has been elevated to a higher level in business strategy.

Knowledge Management Strategies

A knowledge management strategy is how businesses implement and employ knowledge management. It describes their motivations and practices. This portion of research intends to demonstrate how knowledge management strategies, when implemented in the decision-making process, can help businesses make successful strategic decisions. Depending on the type of business, firms may choose different strategies, and they may also choose different knowledge management systems.

There are three different modes of knowledge management strategies, the third being a combination of the first two. They are listed below:

(1) Codification: This strategy (also called technological strategy (Nicolas, 2004)) is supported by technology, systems, and databases. The knowledge is independent of the person who initially created it (Anonymous, Towards Effective Knowledge Management, 2004). Its main focus is on explicit knowledge.

(2) Personalization: This strategy is supported by human interaction, which is facilitated by learning through shared experiences (Nicolas, 2004). Its main focus is on tacit knowledge, which is much more difficult to codify and capture.

(3) Socialization: This strategy is a combination of codification and personalization. Nicolas states, socialization is represented by knowledge communities, which he describes as, groups of people inhabiting the same knowledge space and interacting with each other through relationships. It is designed to exchange and pool knowledge (Nicolas, 2004).

Choosing a Strategy. Choosing a knowledge management strategy is largely determined by what a business provides. For example, businesses that provide a specific product, one that is regular, would most likely find the codification strategy appropriate. Reason being, the product is straightforward, and sales numbers and data may be the determining factors in their decision-making process. While businesses that provide services that are highly customizable, may find personalization more appropriate, as it mainly reflects individual requirements. However, in today’s highly competitive market even generic goods are faced with the challenges of creating niche markets and a competitive edge.

In a study done by Rolland Nicolas, Professor in Management, demonstrates the evolution of Knowledge Management Strategies in firms over a period of five years. He took data from 92 companies, that his research team interviewed, with the purpose of understanding how companies develop knowledge management. Table 1, demonstrates the trend of knowledge management strategies from 1998-2002.

Table 1: Evolution of KMS (Nicolas, 2004)

Table 1, clearly demonstrates the trend towards Socialization. While there is no significant trend towards the personalization strategy alone, the socialization strategy ties in the need for human tacit knowledge sharing.

Many businesses have learned that a technological approach alone will not build learning communities. The trend towards socialization represents the importance of relationships for knowledge creation and sharing. Knowledge management systems can provide the means for individuals and groups to interact frequently around work-related issues. Another benefit of the socialization trend is its facilitation of building trust and mutual commitment to the knowledge sharing process(Nicolas, 2004).

The Decision-Making Process. Businesses will either fail or be successful based on the decisions they make. In order for businesses to make decisions and take action, they need to strategize. They make decisions based on the information and knowledge they possess. Therefore, businesses need to use all of their resources effectively, as they require constant and relevant knowledge. This section describes the decision-making process and where knowledge management fits in.

Two supporting articles that describe the decision-making process as consisting of three phases. Nicolas describes the phases as: intelligence, conception, and selection (Nicolas, 2004). Whereas, James Courtney, another Professor of Management describes the phases as: intelligence, design, and choice (Courtney, 2001). Both series of phases are similar to each other. The phases are described below:

(1) Intelligence: The problem definition phase. According to Nicolas, in this phase, “explicit knowledge helps to argue the definition and to nurture the problem, but tacit knowledge is essentially mobilized to understand the interactions between the elements that define the complex situation.”

(2) Design or Conception: Described by both Courtney and Nicolas, as the phase to develop alternative ways of solving a problem or detailing multiple solutions to complex situations. An analytical phase.

(3) Choice or Selection: This phase consists of evaluating the alternatives and choosing one for implementation.

In all three phases, knowledge, information and data are all used to come to a conclusive decision. However, I would like to point out how knowledge effects stage two, the design and conception stage. Knowledge capture techniques, which were described above, when implemented into knowledge management systems could be especially effective in stage two of the decision-making process. Knowledge management systems contain and enable the distribution of tacit knowledge, past experiences, and successful procedures. Below is an example of how tacit knowledge can be created and used effectively in the decision-making process.

Example: Decision Support Systems. Courtney, in his journal article, “Decision Making and Knowledge Management in Inquiring Organizations: toward a new decision-making paradigm for DSS,” outlines and defines a conventional Decision Support System decision-making process (Shown in Figure 3 of the Appendix (Courtney, 2001)). A Decision Support System (DSS) is defined as a computer system that deals with a problem at some stage, including examples such as budgeting, grievances, forecasting, e-commerce, and assignments. The conventional paradigm illustrated in Figure 3, aligns with the three phases of the decision making process described above. However, the new paradigm Courtney discusses in the article incorporates more human intelligence, such as incorporating different human perspectives.

In summary, Courtney suggests that during the design and analytical phase of the decision-making process, a multiple perspective approach should be taken. Again, moving away from a strictly technological strategy (depending on databases and systems), businesses should also focus on operational, personal, ethical, and anesthetic perspectives. Courtney believes different perspectives will help gain insight and therefore, tacit knowledge will be created. Courtney suggests the use of concept maps or cognitive maps. He states, “It has been shown that having groups draw cognitive maps leads to surfacing of differences in assumptions about variables and relationships in a problem and more effective communication during the decision-making process” (Courtney, 2001).

This article supports this research that the integration of knowledge management strategies and decision-making processes create knowledge that can be used as a competitive edge. While all decision-making strategies are not generated by computer systems, such as DSS, the concept of implementing knowledge management systems into a decision-making paradigm is relative to this research.

Impact of Knowledge Management on the Decision-Making Process. In the example above, knowledge management had the biggest impact on the design phase of the decision-making process. However, knowledge management impacts each phase of the decision-making process. Table 2, below is a summarized demonstration of the Impacts of KMS on the decision-making process.

Table 2: Impact of KMS on decision-making process (Nicolas, 2004)

Organizational Impacts

Knowledge Management can have a significant impact on an organization. KM impacts an organizations people, processes, products, and overall performance. It can facilitate and enhance employee learning and flexibility, improve effectiveness, efficiency, and innovation, and introduce value added and knowledge based products (Awad & Ghaziri).

However, the implementation of knowledge management does not come without difficulty. First, the purpose of the knowledge management system has to be defined. Then the tools have to be established and put into place. Third, the content has to be added and organized, allowing procedures to be set. Finally, the next issue is getting the users to play an active role. The users, or employees of an organization, need to participate in the knowledge sharing process. It takes the participation of an entire organization to bring a knowledge management system to its full potential. Huge drivers of participation and knowledge sharing are organizational culture and leadership.

Two pre-conditions for the effective and successful knowledge management are organizational culture and leadership. These elements can have significant positive impacts on an organization. However, they can also hinder and place a huge barrier on knowledge leverage. If the culture of an organization is unstable it may hinder the performance of the employees and the knowledge management system, while weighing on the success of the organization. Bad culture and leadership can destroy good workmanship, create frustration, decrease trust and security, and inhibit growth.

The next two sections define organizational culture and leadership. Each section has an example from an article of how organizational culture or leadership can impact an organization.

Organizational Culture. Organizational culture is a key element in managing organizational change and renewal. In the article, “Knowledge Management Practices,” the authors, Saeed, Tayaab, M, Ahmad, and Chaudhry state, “many believe that an organizational culture that is supportive and or adaptive can enable the successful implementation of knowledge management technologies as well as practices”(Saeed, Tayyab, M, Ahmad, & Chaudhry, 2010). Organizational Culture consists of behaviors, actions, and values that people in an organization are expected to share and follow (Saeed, Tayyab, M, Ahmad, & Chaudhry, 2010). The article also lists four main attributes of organizational culture, which include trust, learning, collaboration and formalization, in regard to knowledge creation. The four main attributes are defined below:

(1) Formalization: Formalization refers to rules, procedure, regulations, and policy. It can have both a positive and negative effect relative on knowledge creation and dissemination. It can positively effect knowledge creation through rules and directives to help problem solve, and through structured processes. However, the article states it has also been proven to inhibit innovation and creativity.

(2) Trust: The article defines trust as, “an expectation that arises within a community of regular, honest and cooperative behaviors, based on commonly shared norms, on the part of the other members of that community.” Trust is essential to organizational culture, as it facilitates an atmosphere of security. Security enables individuals to feel free of risk, encouraging innovation and knowledge sharing.

(3) Learning: Learning broadens the entire knowledge base. The article defines learning as, “the degree of opportunity, variety, satisfaction and encouragement for development in an organization.” Learning can be linked positively to knowledge creation, acquisition, and open communication.

(4) Collaboration: The article defines collaboration as, “the degree of active support and help in the organization.” Collaboration is knowledge sharing. It is working with others to achieve a mutual goal.

In the research performed by Saeed, Tayyab, M, Ahmad, and Chaudhry, their hypothesis was; Formalization, Trust, Learning and Collaboration would have a positive predicting impact on Knowledge Creation. Their method required sampling 1,500 managers in different organizations and sections, with questionnaires. The results mainly proved their hypothesis to be true. Collaborative, learning, and trusting cultures increased knowledge exchange, and facilitated increased open participation. Their research also states that formalization is needed to a degree, in order to enhance the effectiveness of organizational communication, but organizations should allow some flexibility to enable creativity.

Leadership. Leaders play multiple roles in an organization; therefore they have a huge impact on the knowledge management practices and culture of their organization. Hai Nguyen and Sherif Mohamed, in their journal article, “Leadership Behaviors, Organizational Culture and Knowledge Management Practices,” define leaders as individuals that create the conditions that allow (or otherwise) participants to exercise and cultivate their knowledge manipulation skills, to contribute their own individual knowledge resources to the organization’s pool of knowledge, and to have easy access to relevant knowledge (Nguyen & Mohamed, 2011). Leaders are the individuals of the organization that need to facilitate the four attributes of organizational culture we discussed above, formalization, trust, learning and collaboration. Leaders need to empower their employees, help build trust, and facilitate learning through experimentation, questions, and experiences.

In the article, Nguyen and Mohamed described two different components to leadership approaches, transactional and transformational. Transactional leadership is defined as a process that builds upon exchange. Leaders offer rewards or punishments based on performance of expected behaviors. “Transactional leaders also provide organizational members with formal systems and training programs that disseminate existing learning to guide future actions and decisions” (Nguyen & Mohamed, 2011). On the contrary, transformational leadership is defined as, “the leaders ability to inspire trust, loyalty, and admiration in followers, who then subordinate their individual interest to the interests of the group” (Nguyen & Mohamed, 2011). It differs from transactional leadership as if focuses more intangible qualities, like visions, ideas, and relationships.

I found this example to be similar to the article “Knowledge Management Practices” in regard to the need for balance of formality. Nguyen and Mohamed discuss the balance of transactional and transformational leadership styles relative to organizational culture and their effect on knowledge management practices. The article goes on to state that both forms of leadership, transactional and transformational, have positive effects on organizations. However, transformational leadership has a more positive effect on the encouragement and emphasis of teamwork and collaboration.

Their research required mailing surveys and questionnaires to 1,000 middle managers to assess how frequently knowledge management processes and tools are used within their respective organizations, and describe the indentifying leadership behaviors. To analyze the data they used the multiple regression analysis.

The results of the study suggested their initial beliefs; that both transformational and transactional leadership approaches are positively related to knowledge management practices. The results further revealed that transformational leadership has a greater influence on all the dimensions of knowledge management practices. Nguyen and Mohamed stated, “These studies generally suggest that charismatic leadership and contingent reward behaviors contribute to the creation of organizational knowledge and a managerial mindset that promote the flow of knowledge through organization.”

The results also suggest that knowledge management may be hindered by organizational culture that is highly formalized and heavily dependent on standard operating procedures, rules and regulations (Nguyen & Mohamed, 2011). Which is similar to the research performed by Saeed, Tayyab, M, Ahmad, and Chaudhry. However, transformational leadership effectiveness is also dependent on overall organizational structure formal arrangement of works and the degree of power sharing (Nguyen & Mohamed, 2011). Therefore, Nguyen and Mohamed came to the conclusion that the effectiveness of leadership behaviors was contingent upon the type of organizational culture.

Personal Experience

This section outlines my own personal experience with the implementation of a knowledge management system, relative to the organizational culture and leadership within my organization.

The Air Force mission includes Information Superiority. A few years ago, the Air Force implemented Microsoft SharePoint as a document management tool and central hub for different organizations throughout the all the bases. Hanscom Air Force Base in particular is an Electronic Systems Center, under the Air Force Material Command. Their specific mission is to “Deliver technology, acquisition, test, sustainment, expeditionary capabilities to the war fighter.” Due to their mission SharePoint was viewed as a great tool to share knowledge and gain accessibility to different organizations throughout the Air Force.

SharePoint is a Microsoft software knowledge management system, which helps people work and collaborate together. Organizations and users can set up Web sites, for both public and private use. The sites allow users to share information with others, manage documents, create versions of documents, and publish reports. There are multiple benefits to SharePoint, which include cuts to training and maintenance costs, custom built applications, knowledge sharing and expertise, collaboration with team members on document versioning, blogging, discussion boards, and permission capabilities.

I met with the Enterprise Information Management (EIM) Chief on Hanscom AFB to discuss issues of organizational culture and leadership during the SharePoint implementation. Mr. Murphy, EIM Chief, is considered an expert within the Information Management field. He gave me some great examples of specific challenges and opportunities at Hanscom.

Challenges. Currently, all employees at Hanscom AFB have access to SharePoint. However, according to Mr. Murphy, it is underutilized. Air Force management or the decision-makers that initially chose SharePoint did so because it came on contract with a negotiation to procure Windows 7. The underutilization of SharePoint could be due to the fact that the system was never defined specifically for users at Hanscom. Users did not initially know the purpose of SharePoint and management never defined it. The first issue Mr. Murphy and I discussed was the lack of commitment by senior leadership. He stated the initial implementation needed to be a top-down approach in order for the end users to realize the importance of the technology. Leadership at Hanscom needed to facilitate learning and training on SharePoint.

The second issue discussed was organizational culture. The lack of commitment by senior leadership could be a direct result of the structure of organizational culture throughout areas at Hanscom. This is similar to the leadership article by Nguyen and Mohamed, discussed in the last section. According to Mr. Murphy, through the past few decades, the Air Force has seen multiple software systems come and go. He believes the lack of commitment by the end users could also be due to a feeling of resentment and lack of consistency. Generational differences could also play a role. People generally do no want to move from old to new once they are familiar and comfortable with a technology. Switching could create feelings of fear and uncertainty. The lack of commitment by the end user could also be due to the fact that they do not see the advantages of the new system, which could ultimately be tied back to leadership not taking a larger role in encouraging and supporting use of the system.

Another element to organizational culture could be the degree of power. Some users view knowledge sharing as a loss of power. They view it as a possible risk or loss of job security. Mr. Murphy stated that, culturally this is not always easy to overcome. However, leadership could play a strong role in encouraging and facilitating knowledge sharing to overcome those situations. As discussed in the leadership article by Nguyen and Mohamed, transformational leadership could lead to knowledge sharing.

Opportunities. If the utilization of SharePoint increases there are many opportunities for success in knowledge management, such as knowledge capture. Mr. Murphy stated that SharePoint could be a great tool for Hanscom to document lessons learned, share ideas, discuss issues, and increased communication flow.

Mr. Murphy used military culture, as a specific example on why knowledge capture is important. He used the example of permanent change of station (PCS) and deployment. The military are continually permanently changing one’s stations every couple years or deploying. Those vacant positions are also continually filled with new, promoted, or other “PCSed” employees, both military and civilian. However, because of the nature of their military position and urgent needs of the Air Force, transition periods are rare. Since there is rarely a transition period, knowledge capture is essential to the Air Force. Employees could use SharePoint to leave lessons learned. This would mean less playing catch up and more learning from experience in a new position. SharePoint allows users to keep records, document experiences, and leave lessons learned. It is a centralized location with readily available resources.

Overall, my experience at Hanscom AFB has assisted my understanding of knowledge management practices, organizational culture and leadership, as it is relevant to my research. This in itself has been a learning experience for me. Now, if I take my newfound knowledge of knowledge management and the benefits of SharePoint in particular, and I share it with my peers, I will be demonstrating knowledge sharing. I could do this by engaging as an active user on SharePoint and posting my experience for others to see and learn.

Conclusion

There are several implications from this research on knowledge management. In the section on knowledge management and the decision-making process, we learned that knowledge management has evolved over the years. Organizations are making the move from solely technological strategies to more socialization strategy. The need for human resources to be the drivers of technology is being sought at a higher level. This research also demonstrated that knowledge management has a substantial role in the decision-making process. However, we also learned that each strategy is impacted differently by knowledge management practices. Overall, incorporating knowledge management into decision-making strategies leads to decisions being made more efficiently and effectively.

The implications we can take from the sections on organizational culture and leadership are that each element is contingent upon each other. The results of the research demonstrated, “The creation of a successful knowledge management system, depends on how well leaders can balance transaction and transformational behaviors, authoritarian and participative systems, and task and relationship orientations” (Nguyen & Mohamed, 2011). Effective leaders need to take into account the culture of the entire organization, and establish forms of thinking and levels of motivations and behaviors that are relative and important for that specific organization. Overall, organizational culture and effective leadership are pre-conditions for the successful implementation of knowledge management practices.

REFERENCES Anonymous. (2006). Knowledge Management: Much more than a technology exercise. Strategic Direction , 22 (1), 16-18. Anonymous. (2004). Towards Effective Knowledge Management. Strategic Direction , 20 (11), 14-16. Awad, E. M., & Ghaziri, H. M. Knowledge Management. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education. Courtney, J. F. (2001). Decision Making and Knowledge Management in Inquiring Organizations: Toward a New Decision-Making Paradigm for DSS. Decision Support System , 31, 17-38. Gates, B. (1999). Business @ The Speed of Thought. Kirtland, WA: Grand Central Publishing. Green, G., Liu, L., & Qi, B. (2009). Knowledge-Based Management Information Systems for Effective Business Performance of SMEs. Journal of International Technology and Information Management , 18 (2), 201-222. Nguyen, H. N., & Mohamed, S. (2011). Leadership Behaviors, Organizational Culture and Knowledge Management practices. Journal of Management Development , 30 (2), 206-221. Nicolas, R. (2004). Knowledge Management Impacts on Decision Making Process. Journal of Knowledge Management , 8 (1), 20-31. Pearlson, K. E., & Saunders, C. S. (2010). Managing and Using Information Systems (Fourth Edition ed.). Danvers: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Pun, K. F., & Nathai-Balkissoon, M. (2011). Integrating Knowledge Management into Organizational Learning. The Learning Organization , 18 (3), 203-223. Quinn, J. B. (1981). Formulating Strategy One Step At A Time. Journal of Business Strategy , 1, 42-62. Saeed, T., Tayyab, B., M, A.-U.-H., Ahmad, M. H., & Chaudhry, A. U. (2010). Knowledge Management Practices: Role of Organizational Culture. American Society of Business and Behavioral Sciences , 17 (1), 1027-1036.

APPENDIX

Figure 2: The relationship between data, information, and knowledge (Pearlson & Saunders, 2010)

More human contribution