a case study on knowledge

7/31/2019 A Case Study on Knowledge

1/15

A case study on knowledgemanagement implementation inthe banking sectorAhmed Belaid Kridan and JackSteven GouldingSchool of Construction andProperty Management, Universityof Salford,Salford, UK AbstractPurpose Knowledgemanagement literaturepredominant comes from awestern perspective. Thepurpose of this paper is to reporton an empirical study to find outif the organisations acting in lessbusiness environment such asLibyan organisations (banking inparticular) will be able toimplement a


2/15

knowledge management system(KMS) and how they can benefit

from it.Design/methodology/approach The study is built mainly aroundwhat question related toinformation processes within

organisations within a socialcontext. This study uses a casestudyapproach using an interpretiveperspective (a qualitative

method) to map and describerelationships. This approach enables a greaterdegree of granularity to becaptured.

Findings The benefit of KMS isan essential step in definingcritical areas in implementing aKMS


3/15

and determining strategy in thisresearch. The results show that

KMS could be of mostsignificance forenhancing the organisationsperformance and led them tobetter position in todays

competitiveenvironment. These benefits arefundamental issues related todifferent encouragements in KMSimplementation such as better

decision-making, improving thecustomer relationship andmanagement, create new valuethrough new services(innovations), and creating

additionalbusinesses.Originality/value The bankingand financial sectors are


4/15

fundamental drivers of innovation. In

this context, their contribution toKM concept and applications areof specific value, especiallyconcerning the leverage of intellectual capital. Knowledge

intensive organisations like theseareincreasingly implementing KMSto drive forward their strategiesand improve performance. This

paper therefore, focusesspecially on presenting aframework tailored to meet thebanking andfinancial sectors needs.

Keywords Knowledgemanagement, Knowledgemanagement systems, Libya,


5/15

Organisational performance,Banking, Business performance

Paper type Research paperIntroductionKnowledge is becoming increasingly more useful and important for organisations(Carneiro, 2000), and is now recognised as a resource that is valuable to anorganisationsability to innovate and compete. It exists within the individual employees, and also in acomposite sense within the organisation (Bollinger and Smith, 2001). The importanceof knowledge lies in the creativity value that it adds to the organisations assets, and inits

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available atwww.emeraldinsight.com/0305-5728.htmFirst of all the author would like to thank the British and the Libyan banks which used in the

pilot study, further thanks goes to all Libyan banks for the welcome offered to the researcherforthe interview. Special thanks are given to the IT Department at the Libyan Central Bank thatprovided time and information, and to the Manager for his help in providing details about KMSto the other interviewees.

Knowledgemanagementimplementation211VINE: The journal of information andknowledge management systemsVol. 36 No. 2, 2006pp. 211-222q Emerald Group Publishing Limited0305-5728DOI 10.1108/03055720610683013

ability to improve the effectiveness of an organisations intellectual capital whichdefinedas the sum of a organisations ideas, inventions, technologies, general knowledge,computer programs, designs, data skills, processes, creativity, and publications(Sullivan,1999). Developments in the management of knowledge can help managers improvetheirday-to-day work, decision-making processes, create new responses, and enable a setof competitive reactions to be augmented. The implementation of aknowledgemanagementsystem (KMS) is a systematic, integrated, and planned approach, designed to solveproblems that can adversely affect the operating efficiency at all organisation levels.Management is likely to be successful only if it has a true strategic orientationapproach tomanage its stock of knowledge (Edvinsson, 1997). The use and application of knowledgenow represents a key source for sustained competitive advantage (Drucker, 1993;Quinn,1992b; Reich, 1991). Considering knowledge management (KM) as a concept; KPMGConsulting (1998), noted that:

There is little doubt that we have entered the knowledge economy where what organisations


6/15

know is becoming more important than the traditional sources of economic power. The importance of knowledge has been increasing in the last two decades, especiallyinWestern businesses where it has been a fledgling concept for some time, and wherenowit has become a mainstream business function. Currently, many organisations are nowattempting to provide an internal and external environment for adopting a KMS toensure their existing knowledge is properly managed and capitalised upon. A KMSshould be developed as a response to changes in the internal and externalenvironments,since as Carneiro (2000) observes, such a system should be adapted to solve problemsthat negatively affect operating efficiency. Furthermore, Davenport and Volpel (2001)state that most large organisations in the USA, and many in Europe, including everymajor organisation in the professional services, automobile, pharmaceutical, oilindustries, and even consulting organisations, have a KMS. Furthermore, they note thatchief knowledge officer positions are increasingly being established in manyorganisations, and that this concept has penetrated into many different functions andprocesses of business. The promised benefits from implementing KMS are certainlyattracting an increasing number of organisations, but there are a number of difficultiesthat need to be managed when designing a KMS (or implementing its initiatives), asdocumented by Al-Ghassani et al. (2004). These difficulties, along with someunsuccessful KM initiatives worry many organisations interested in the concept(Al-Ghassani et al., 2004).Because the majority of literature regarding KM comes from a western perspective,it was necessary for this research to discover the relevant and important of KMS withina developing country such as Libya. This paper, therefore illustrates the results of apreliminary case study that provide information relating to the importance of KMS inthe context of the Libyan banking environment.

Theoretical foundationsKM is seen as a significant component of a business strategy that has the ability toprovide an organisation with opportunities to manage new market challenges.Additionally, as Teece (1998) argues, knowledge can form the basis for sustainedcompetitive advantage. The number of organisations claiming to work with KM isgrowing progressively (Grover and Davenport, 2001; Martensson, 2000; Moffett et al.,VINE36,22122002), and it can be seen that this interest in managing knowledge stems from severalreasons. Firstly, KM has proven benefits and has been adopted by 80 per cent of theworlds biggest organisations (KPMG Consulting, 2000). Secondly, core competenciesare ostensibly based on KM, and therefore rely on the skills and experience of thepeople who do the work; but the fact that these may not exist in a physical form inthe future, increases the attractiveness of KMSs (Manville and Foote, 1996). Thirdly,the recent changes in business direction emphasises the importance of greaterunderstanding of knowledge-intensive work, and how people think, learn, and useknowledge (Brown and Duguid, 2000; Damasio, 1994, 1999; Klein, 1998; Nonaka and

Takeuchi, 1995; Wiig, 1994). And fourthly, organisations with greater knowledge cancombine traditional resources and assets in new and distinctive ways, therebyproviding greater value to customers (Teece et al., 1997).Considering the important of KMS to organisations, Davenport and Volpel (2001)state that:We believe that the management of knowledge will continue to grow in its importance tobusiness success. Although the knowledge management movement has aspects of faddishness (many conferences, many books, many articles in the business press), and itmay lose some of its current level of visibility, it must become part of the basic fabric of


7/15

successful businesses. There are too many knowledge workers dealing with too muchknowledge for knowledge management to disappear.KM has emerged to create and leverage intellectual capital into the business equationand into public management (Allee, 1998; Reich, 1991; Wiig, 1994, 1997). KM is avaluable strategic tool, because it can be a key resource for decision-making, mainlyforthe formulation of alternative strategies. It can also improve the conditions forstrategicaction by providing the means by which organisations can come to appreciate andmanage problems and challenges. Strategically, the success of most managementdecisions depends also on competitive effort, which includes a deep knowledge of customers attitudes and analysis of the competition (Curren et al., 1992).

The purpose, goal and expected outcomes of an organisations work with its KMSare many. For instance, KMS can be seen as a way to improve performance (Bassi,1997); productivity and competitiveness (Maglitta, 1995); a way to improve effectiveacquisition, sharing and usage of information within organisations; a tool for improveddecision-making (Cole-Gomolski, 1997) a way to capture best practice (Cole-Gomolski,1998); a way to reduce research costs and delays (Maglitta, 1995); and a way tobecomea more innovative organisation (Hibbard and Carrillo, 1998; Mayo, 1998). Certainly,effective management of knowledge will enable an organisation to provide bettercustomer service, as several scholars and industry analysts have argued (Bohn, 1994;Nonaka, 1991; Quinn, 1992a; Toffler, 1990). Based on the logic of the precedingparagraphs, and as Bollinger and Smith (2001) stated, managing knowledge is astrategic asset and must be implemented effectively.Any organisation should have the capacity to exploit its knowledge and learningcapabilities better than its rivals if it decides to assume a given competitive strategy(Grant and Gnyawali, 1996; Roth, 1996). In this context, the business community hasarticulated the following core KM objectives, through an analysis described by KPMGConsulting (1998) as:Knowledgemanagement

implementation213. supporting innovation, the generation of new ideas and the exploitation of theorganisations thinking power;. capturing insight and experience to make them available and usable when,where, and by whom required;. making it easy to find and reuse sources of know-how and expertise, whetherthey are recorded in a physical form or held in someones mind (tacit knowledge);. fostering collaboration, knowledge sharing, continual learning andimprovement;. improving the quality of decision-making and other intelligent tasks; and. understanding the value and contribution of intellectual assets and increasingtheir worth, effectiveness and exploitation.Further to the points raised by KPMG (1999) and Arora (2002) suggested that:. Organisations should leverage their existing knowledge-based activities in orderto prevent re-inventing the wheel.. Organisations should continually increase their competence and skill levels inorder to improve productivity, innovation, etc. This mandate will also helpminimise making wrong decisions.

Therefore, organisations are focussing on the development of KMS applications in abid to increase the competence and capabilities of their knowledge workers. This isalso referred to as investing in human capital (Edvinsson, 1997). Within the


8/15

organisational context, KMS should be able to combine innovation efforts, update IT,and knowledge development in order to achieve a set of capabilities to increasecompetitiveness. In fact, when this combination is adequately managed theorganisation can formulate competitive strategies, which integrate innovative productsand new technological weapons to face its competitors (Carneiro, 2000). Furthermore,Quinn (1992a) states that KM plays important roles in public and private

organisations, with each role serving specific demands and purposes, and beingimplemented differently. In public organisations, for example, KM areas are consideredto enhance decision-making within public services; aid the public to participateeffectively in public decision-making; build competitive societal informationcommunity capabilities; and develop a knowledge-competitive workforce.Also in this respect, as indicated by Beijerseuit (2000), organisational knowledge isconcerned with things such as management, policy, culture, personnel, careerplanning, internal processes, cut backs, alliances and teamwork. When consideringmarketing knowledge, one should think of phenomena such as competition, suppliers,customers, markets, target groups, consumers, clients, users, interested parties, sales,after sales, trade and distribution and relation management. When consideringtechnological knowledge, one should think of product knowledge, research anddevelopment, core competencies, technological development, information andcommunications technology, product development and assembly.From the KM literature, it can be seen that there are multifarious of guidanceconcerning KM implementation, and explicit guidelines and approaches arewell-developed in this regard. Employee know-how is one component of organisational knowledge and a crucial strategic resource (Wiig, 1997). This meansVINE36,2214that organisations must learn the weaknesses, strengths and movements of theirdirectcompetitors; and how their customers perceive their products; and they mustsimultaneously find a way to tap into this knowledge base in order to conserve andincrease their core competencies.In conclusion, organisations that desire to grow and stay competitive must developmechanismsfor acquiring relevant knowledge, and exchanging it accurately,consistently,concisely and in a timely manner with all who need it. Furthermore, numerous KMapproaches can be adopted to serve these purposes; and it is also important andnecessaryfor organisations to adopt and implement KMS to survive competition and gaincompetitive advantage for themselves in a knowledge economy.Organisations needbettercontrol of the knowledge they already have, and currently, many organisations areunaware ofwhat knowledge they possess that can be gainfully employed.AKMS has thecapacity to make an organisation better and help people do their jobs better.Research approach and methodology

This preliminary research was conducted in Libya, using the banking industry as thecore context, and three banks featured in the study. One bank is the Central Bank,responsible for programs, strategies and policies for all Libyan banks; the second bankis a Specialist Bank in real estate and investment; and the third bank is a CommercialBank. From a research methodology perspective, face-to-face interviews were used asasuitable data collection method. This approach involved over (25) senior executivesfrom information technology (IT), human resources (HR), planning and developments(P&D), and other business areas. This diversity of participants (actors) was necessary


9/15

to gain a holistic appreciation of the totality of their experiences in their functional orprofessional group and helped generate a wide and comprehensive variety of opinions,views and issues. The participants involved in this research (Table I), and the size andannual business (by revenues) of organisations (Table II).

The primary goal of this research was to elicit a variety of opinions and viewpointsfrom IT, HR and P&D professionals from different banking areas the constitution of

which can be seen in Figure 1. The research adopted the face-to-face interview technique, within an overallexploratory case study approach. This is considered to be the most appropriateapproach when the focus is on a contemporary phenomenon within a real-life context(Yin, 1994; Benbasat, 1987; Remenyi et al., 1998; Merriam, 1988). Furthermore, thisPosition in the bank Total number of interviewsSenior manger (head of the bank or deputy) 3Head of IT department 6Head of banking operations 2Head of accountancy and administration 1Head of planning and development 4Head of human resources 6Head of technical projects 3

Technical 5Employee 5

Total 35 Table I.Number of interviews

Knowledgemanagementimplementation215approach was also considered suitable as it is widely acknowledged to be extensivelyused for quantitative data collection in social research.

The data collected were subsequently compiled, extracted and analysed, the resultsof which were then broadly summarised along various themes in relation to KM.Study findings

Because of the ambiguity of KM and its definition it was necessary to find out whatLibyan banks understood by the term knowledge and KM, and to see their interest inthe subject (awareness and importance of knowledge management system at theLibyan Banks), 35 people (Table I) were interviewed initially to answer these questions:Q1. Do you think knowledge is a valuable asset in your bank and should beprocessed and managed by KMS?

The interviewees with percentage of (93 per cent) indicated that knowledge asset isthemost valuable resource for the banks in todays environment, which means a creativeapproach toKMS is urgently required for the banks to improve the banks efficiency, andtomeet international banking standards. Even though it is indicated that some of the KMterms may be foreign to many of the respondents, they believe strongly in the value of knowledge and its benefits. The respondents also indicate that the intangible(i.e. knowledge/intellectual capital assets) in the banks should be processedandmanaged:Q2. Does your bank have a number of experts who may possess a huge amountof knowledge?

The participants responses indicate that the banks under study have aclear understanding of the value of their employees, especially the experts.Bank

Turnover() Total workforce Core business area


10/15

Number of peopleinterviewed1 15,090.34m 330 Central Bank 92 60m 1,133 Real State and Investment Bank 153 25m 3,000 Trade and Investment Bank 11

Table II.Size and annual businessFigure 1.Interview breakdown

VINE36,2216About 78 per cent indicated agreement that the banks should be extremely aware of theimportance of providing their expert bankers with challenging work to retain theirknowledge to the banks database (a KMS is a necessary element):Q3. Is the concept of KM clear to you and at your bank or it shapes with otherconcepts?With respect to the questions dealing with the knowledge perspective it appearedthat some people were not familiar with the term or concept of a knowledge

management. About 16 per cent were familiar with the term, 65 per cent neutral, and19 per cent were unfamiliar.

Therewas someambiguity over the terms knowledgemanagement and informationtechnology some of the interviewees indicate term information technology as amean of KM, whereas others said intellectual capital some others said that KMis a processingof organisational knowledge, HR management, organisation learning, and only few otherssaid they do not know about the concept of KM:Q4. Do you think you are your bank naturally will be transformed to KMS?Itwas also evident that the respondents did not feel that the banks were ready totransformitself into KM-based-banks. Only 12 per cent agreed that the banks were ready to be

transformed into KMS (19 per cent were neutral, 69 per cent disagreed). Most of theinterviewees agreed that their banks have a limited attention to suchKMprograms, andsogenerally little or no KM objectives were formulated. There was no formal KMSimplementation over all banks. One participant from the Central Bank believes that KMobjectives should be set from the start and the banks should know the expectation toachievewithKMS aswell as to improve information-handing capacity before starting anyKMinitiatives.Theses goals had to be understood by the entire bank at the differentlevels:Q5. Select the stage of development of the KM initiative in your unit and in yourbank?About 87 per cent of the interviewers said there is no KM program in place, 7 per centsaid not considering any KM program, 3 per cent said the program is under

consideration, and 3 per cent said they have the KM activities:Q6. Why do you think your bank has not implemented any KM systems?Most of the Libyan public banks are not aware of KMS 38 per cent, inability toimplement KM, 22 per cent, insufficient organisation processes, 11 per cent,insufficientknowledge about KMS, 9 per cent, financial limitation, 5 per cent, and 15 per centothers, such as insufficient technology, insufficient employees skills, lack of guidanceand methodologies, KMS limitation, KMS is not important:Q7. Do you think your bank should have clear strategies for implementing KMS?

This question was meant to see the vision of the KMS strategy, it is important for


11/15

organisations to identify clearly the direction in which the organisation is headed;76 per cent indicated that the banks need to have very clear strategies for acquiring,transferring and using knowledge among their expert employees. This strategy couldalso assist as a checklist to ensure that the knowledge management program coversallkey elements of the banks:

Knowledgemanagementimplementation217Q8. Is KMS important to your bank to be success in todays business environment?

The vast majority of the respondents agreed that, to be truly successful in businesstoday (79 per cent agreed) and in the future (81 per cent agreed), one needs to seetheworld from a knowledge perspective.About 91 per cent said the bank has knowledge lost, 77 per cent said there is lackof knowledge knowledge not available 88 per cent said the bank suffers fromerror duplications, (65 per cent) said data and information are not interpreted well,

(82 per cent) said other issues like lack of:. competitors information;. customers information;. alliances and international organisations information; and. internal and external environments information

That makes it very clear in the group sessions and all interviewees are well aware of the risk of not having an appropriate KMS to manage their daily operations in terms of capturing the large amount of information flows generated by the employees,customers and suppliers of the banks at all levels without exception. The risk can evengrow exponentially as many of the exchanged or shared information is stored in aprimitive way but without being effectively exploited due to the lack of an intelligentand solid KMS provided for this purpose:Q9. What are the benefits of knowledge management system?

The survey interviews showed that many benefits can be obtained by KMS in the allLibyan banks, particularly, when supported by government and senior management(Table III). Although many of the benefits of KMS are some time intangible anddifficult to quantify and obtain there are a sharing view on the fact that the benefits of KMS can be translated by a successful KMS implementation at the LPBs.DiscussionData were elicited from the Libyan public banks; the contributors who have a verywell-established background in the field of senior management, HR, IT and R&D werethe main respondents in this study and the results from the three banks, gainedthrough the interviews were found to be in agreement. This permitted a more validconclusion to be drawn from the study. The preliminary research makes an attempt toimprove our understanding first about the importance of KMS to the Libyan bankingindustry, the benefits that the Libyan public banks can gain from running KM systemsand drivers for effective implementation of KM mechanisms across the Libyan publicbanks. This was undermined by the need to survive in an information-driven economy.For example, the banks will not be able to compete in an open economy unless theyhave invested in such new programmes to get the most value from the banks assets.In this context, an effective KM programme was seen as an appropriate tool to controlbusiness focus helping Libyan public banks to address a clear, concrete andimperative problem through the design of KM activities.In this context, identifying critical knowledge implementation areas (CKIAs) will bean essential step in defining competitive forces and determining strategy in thisresearch. The CKIA will comprise another critical success factor that can be used in


12/15

VINE36,2218conducting situational and competitive analysis, formulating differentiating strategies,making strategic decisions, and aligning the organisation infrastructure for KMSimplementation strategy fulfilment.Also, before formulating any KM mechanisms, it is important to assess theorganisational readiness, especially, for those parts of the organisation, which are tobedirectly affected by the new KM processes. In this understanding, Edvinssonemphasises that an organisation should only measure what is strategically importantfor growth (the things that will guide the organisation into the future) (Edvinsson,1997; Stewart, 1994). In this matter one of the study limitations of a study conductedbyWong and Aspinwall (2005) was that the survey was aimed at exploring the perceptionof the respondents with respect to the importance of the CSFs. The authors in this casesaid that:It would be interesting to expand this study in the future by investigating the practice of these factors. Hence, the emphasis would shift from perceived importance to whatorganisations do in practice in order to make their KM initiative successful.Accordingly, further research is necessary to assess the CKIAs in practice within theLibyan public banks, because the realisation of an effective KMS requires anappropriate level and integration of organisational commitment, change managementNumber Benefit Percentage1 Exploitation of the banks thinking power; 762 Capturing insight and experience to make them available and usable when,where and by whom required 763 Improve the customer relationship and management 674 Enhance employees development and satisfaction 815 Create new value through new services (innovations) 836 Enhance current value of existing services (knowledge about customers) 747 KMS could be a base to many other banking programmes (such as NationalPayment System) 978 Reduce/avoid costs/promote reuse (knowledge about processes) 659 Reduce uncertainty/increase speed of response (knowledge about theenvironment) 8410 Increasing workers productivity and performance 8711 Fostering collaboration, knowledge sharing, continual learning andimprovement 8912 Employees will spend less time looking for information and expertise 6913 Enabling for more intelligent decisions 9514 Help banks to become more competitive 9015 Better customer handling 5616 Faster response to key business 6717 Improved employee skills 8218 Increased profits 6119 Increased innovation 8820 Sharing best practice 8521 New ways of working 55

22 Create additional business 7723 Staff attraction/retention 81 Table III.Benefits of KMS to theLibyan public banks

Knowledgemanagementimplementation219


13/15

practices, IT systems and other KM enablers. The aim of the secondary researchshould be to determine how the effective use of the CKIAs can support or enhance awell-defined KM implementation strategy.It is also important in terms of KM implementation to identify the existing gapswithin the CKIAs and KMS before suggesting any KM framework for implementingKM within the LPBs, and with regard to the areas that can enable KMS across banks, it

is important to assess the banks readiness for these. The main role of environmentalanalysis is to detect, monitor, and analyse those current and potential trends andevents that will create opportunities or threats to KMS implementation. Thispreliminary study provides answers to some fundamental questions related to KM andits implementation. These answers should be used as basis for the secondary research.ConclusionA KMS could allow Libyan banks to meet the national and international requirements,but they also recognised that Libyan banks are still at the beginning of the long

journey towards implementation, and therefore, were some time away from fullybenefiting from a KMS. It can be suggested that implementation of KM mechanismscan result in services and process improvement, and the creation of a centralisedcommunication system for the banking industry. The significant role that a KMSmight play in all Libyan banks was acknowledged by most of the interviewees, it wasalso appreciated that the present environment and circumstances at the LPBs are notready to engage in any KM initiatives since more support is required more supportfrom the banks in terms of their structure, people, technology, goals and objectivesandinternal and external environment.However, it seems that the current situation at the Libyan public banks is that theyare ready to deal separately with each regulatory system that can benefit the banksand they can recognise its strategic importance. Also it is necessary for these systemsto be accompanied with guidelines or a road map that makes their implementationmore effective and less time-consuming.ReferencesAl-Ghassani, A., Kamara, J., Anumba, C. and Carrillo, P. (2004), An innovative approach toidentifying knowledge management problems, Engineering, Construction andArchitectural Management, Vol. 11 No. 5, pp. 349-57.

Allee, V. (1998), The Knowledge Evolution, Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, MA.Arora, R. (2002), Implementing KM a balanced score card approach, Journal of KnowledgeManagement, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 240-9.Bassi, L.J. (1997), Harnessing the power of intellectual capital, Training & Development, Vol.51No. 12, pp. 25-30.Bohn, R. (1994), Measuring and managing technological knowledge, Sloan ManagementReview, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 61-72.Brown, J. and Duguid, P. (2000), Balancing act: how to capture knowledge without killing it,Harvard Business Review, Vol. 78 No. 3, pp. 73-80.Carneiro, A. (2000), How does knowledge management influence innovation andcompetitiveness?, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 4, pp. 287-98.

VINE36,2220Cole-Gomolski, B. (1997), Users loath to share their know-how, Computerworld, Vol. 31 No.46,p. 6.Cole-Gomolski, B. (1998), Vendors cram knowledge-ware market, Computerworld, Vol. 31No. 5,pp. 55-6.Curren, M.T., Folkes, V.S. and Steckel, J.H. (1992), Explanations for successful andunsuccessfulmarketing decisions: the decision makers perspective, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56 No. 2,


14/15

pp. 18-31.Bollinger, S. and Smith, D. (2001), Managing organisational knowledge as a strategic asset,

Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 8-18.Beijerseuit, R.P. (2000), Knowledge management in small and medium-sized companies:knowledge management for entrepreneurs, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 4No. 2, pp. 162-79.Benbasat, I. (1987), Analysis of research methodologies, in McFarlane, F. (Ed.), The

InformationSystems Research Challenge, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, p. Press.Damasio, A.R. (1994), Descartes Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain,Grosset/Putnam, New York, NY.Damasio, A.R. (1999), The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness, Harcourt-Brace, New York, NY.Davenport, T.H. and Volpel, S. (2001), The rise of knowledge towards attention management,

Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 212-22.Drucker, P. (1993), Post-Capitalist Society, Harper Collins, New York, NY.Edvinsson, L. (1997), Developing intellectual capital at Skandia, Long Range Planning, Vol.30No. 3, pp. 366-73.Grant, J.H. and Gnyawali, D.R. (1996), Strategic process improvement through organisationallearning, Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 28-33.Grover, V. and Davenport, T.H. (2001), General perspectives on knowledge management:fostering a research agenda, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 18 No. 1,pp. 5-21.Hibbard, J. and Carrillo, K.M. (1998), Knowledge revolution, Information Week, Vol. 5 No. 663,pp. 49-54.Klein, G. (1998), Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.KPMG Consulting (1998) Knowledge Management Research Report 1998, available at:www.kpmg.interact.nl/publication/kmsurvey.shtml (accessed 16 January 2004).KPMG (1999), Power of knowledge a business guide to knowledge management, KPMGManagement Consulting, available at: www.kpmg.com (accessed 23 May 2003).KPMG Consulting (2000) Knowledge Management Research Report 2000, available at:www.kpmg.interact.nl/publication/kmsurvey.shtml (accessed 12 November 2003).Maglitta, J. (1995), Smarten up!, Computerworld, Vol. 29 No. 23, p. 84.Manville, B. and Foote, N. (1996), Harvest your workers knowledge, available at:www.datamation.com/PlugIn/Issues/1996/July/07know1.html (accessed 23 May 2003).

Martensson, M. (2000), A critical review of knowledge management as a management tool, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 204-16.Mayo, A. (1998), Memory bankers, People Management, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 34-8.Merriam, S. (1988), Case study research in education: a qualitative approach, Jossey-Bass,San Francisco, CA.

Knowledgemanagementimplementation221Moffett, S., McAdam, R. and Parkinson, S. (2002), Developing a model for technology andcultural factors in knowledge management: a factor analysis, Knowledge and ProcessManagement, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 237-55.Nonaka, I. (1991), The knowledge-creating company, Harvard Business Review,

November-December, pp. 96-104.Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995), The Knowledge Creating Company How JapaneseCompanies Create the Dynamics of Innovation, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Quinn, J.B. (1992a), Intelligent Enterprise: A Knowledge and Service Based Paradigm forIndustry,Free Press, New York, NY.Quinn, J.B. (1992b), The intelligent enterprise: a new paradigm, The Academy of ManagementExecutives, Vol. 6, pp. 448-64.


15/15

Reich, R. (1991), The Work of Nations: Preparing Ourselves for the 21st Century, VintageBooks,New York, NY.Remenyi, D., Williams, B., Arthur, M. and Ethne, S. (1998), Doing Research in Business andManagement. An introduction to Process and Method, Sage, London.Roth, A.V. (1996), Achieving strategic agility through economies of knowledge, Strategy &Leadership, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 30-7.

Stewart, T.A. (1994), Your companys most valuable asset: intellectual capital, Fortune, Vol.3,pp. 68-74.Sullivan, P. (1999), Profiting from intellectual capital, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol.3No. 2, pp. 132-43.

Teece, D.J. (1998), Capturing value from knowledge assets, California Management Review,Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 55-79.

Teece, D.J., Pisano, G.P. and Shuen, A. (1997), Dynamic capabilities and strategicmanagement,Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 509-33.

Toffler, A. (1990), Powershift: Knowledge, Wealth and Violence at the Edge of the 21st Century,Bantam Books, New York, NY.Wiig, K.M. (1994), Knowledge Management: The Central Management Focus forIntelligent-Acting Organizations, Schema Press, Arlington, TX.Wiig, K.M. (1997), Knowledge management: where did it come from and where will it go?,

Journal of Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 1-14.Wong, K.Y. and Aspinwall, E. (2005), An empirical study of the important factors forknowledge-management adoption in the SME sector, Journal of Knowledge Management,Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 64-82.

Yin, R. (1994), Case Study Research, Design and Methods, 2nd ed., Sage, London.About the authorsAhmed Belaid Kridan is a Lecturer at El-Fateh University, Faculty of Economic and PoliticalScience, Tripoli, Libya. E-mail: [email protected]

JackGoulding is a SeniorLecturer at theUniversity of Salford,UK, andDirector of OrganisationalDevelopment.Gouldings teaching and research interests embrace organisational learning,strategicmanagement, and IT strategy development. E-mail: [email protected].

VINE36,2222

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

a case study on knowledge

Documents